Huge Universal Credit Cut

amber-rudd-april18.jpg

A wicked benefit cut hitting 15,000 families a year will be eliminated in a screeching U-turn just three weeks before it was expected to take force, and Tory welfare chief Amber Rudd will announce she is axing an extension of the ‘two-child limit’ that was set to kick in on February 1.

The policy prevents parents from claiming Tax Credits or Universal Credit for more than two children, a reduction of up to £2,780 per child, but currently, it pertains to children born following the cut took force in April 2017.

From February it was due to apply retrospectively, punishing children born before the cut was dreamed up, and the Work and Pensions Secretary will announce that the extension is not valid and will be dismissed, but critics crashed Amber Rudd’s speech as too little too late.

JS60809467.jpg

And Labour shadow work and Pensions Secretary Margaret Greenwood stated this partial U-turn did not go far enough.

Labour has long asked for the Government to drop the two-child limit in its entirety, and Universal Credit just isn’t working, it’s driving countless families into hardship, rent arrears and towards food banks.

The Government must end the roll out quickly before more people are thrust into financial difficulty, and the latest Tory U-turn doesn’t go anywhere near far enough when women are made to declare a third child that’s born of rape.

The two child cap and rape clause is still set to drive hundreds of thousands of children into poverty and must be dismissed, and this shameful UK government policy has been rebuked by the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty and an abundance of charities and welfare advice experts.

This is prejudice at its core and punishes women and BAME families hardest, which the DWP are well aware of, and the Work and Pensions Secretary announced the judgment simply as a report by the MPs was due to demand an urgent end to the extension before it caused dangerous consequences.

The policy is wrong, destructive and totally incomprehensible, and the move is set to stop about 15,000 new claimants per year being ambushed into that cut, and it’s perceived to be costing the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) £250 million over the next three years.

The Tory minister will tell charities, work coaches and journalists at a speech in London that these parents made choices about the size of their family when the former policy was the only policy in place.

There is also the religious aspect of it as well, particularly when a woman has been raped and feels that she must abort that pregnancy just because she won’t be given any money for that child, and isn’t it true to say that the benefits system in this country were basically designed to save people from poverty, not lock them into it?

And if we look at the next stage of Universal Credit, it’s especially troubling that the chain of food banks are growing in people needing them, leaving three million people to wait at least five weeks for their first payment, and it’s simply not good enough.

The government should move people onto Universal Credit, rather than leaving people to make their own claim, to ensure there’s no hiatus between the old and the new benefits system.

So now it’s been announced that the government are going to dismiss the extension of a two-child limit on Universal Credit for children born before April 2017, but all those children born before that date will be supported by Universal Credit.

More than 70,000 families were hit by the two-child limit in its first year, and Policy in Practice prophesied the full system would plunge 266,000 additional children into destitution by 2022, but despite stiff advice by charities and Labour, Amber Rudd isn’t scrapping the two-child limit itself, I really do hope she sleeps well at night!

How many DWP ministers have this wicked lot gone through? They know they’re hitting the less well off in our society, and Universal discredit was supposed to be cheaper than the former system, well that’s wrong for a start with millions over budget, with delay after delay while the government tinker with a system that was absolutely fine before as millions perish, poverty rises and there are people out on the streets and are destitute.

There are much better ways of making a saving and that would be by blocking the government’s wretched tax havens whilst they punished the poorest families and then expand the level of Inheritance Tax to £1 million for the rich.

We pay our taxes at the highest rate now and wouldn’t we sooner that it went on people and children to give them support than tax cuts for the wealthiest in our society? After all, the poor and even those whose situation is self-inflicted are far more deserving of our money than those in a society whose wealth is a gained stealth, supported by a Tory government.

And it’s astounding how hate-filled people can be towards the poor but think nothing of a fraudulent system that permits the wealthy to grow even richer by sanctioned tax evasion and treating workers so appallingly bad that they’re at the mercy of the state that then punishes them for the wealthy making them poor.

We all want a fairer society but it shouldn’t be about beating those at the bottom of the ladder.

 

Is This Some Kind Of Joke?

2000px-Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png

I frequently question why so many transients are striving to come across the channel, one of the biggest shipping lanes in the whole of the world. Well, it’s because of the government’s Asylum Support and what you’ll get if you come across the channel as an Asylum Seeker.

Because your government, the British government advertises to these Asylum Seekers what they’ll get. So, let’s outline what they’ll get if they’ll an Asylum Seeker in the United Kingdom.

They’ll get somewhere to live, a cash allowance or both. They can choose whether they want a flat, a house, a hostel or bed and breakfast, how delightful is that, I wonder if we can serve them breakfast in bed as well!

Cash Support, they’ll get £37.75 for every person in the household to support them paying for items like food, clothing and toiletries and this is really from the government website.

Their allowance will be placed onto a debit card each week to make it easy to spend what they want to spend, isn’t that nice, and even if they’ve been refused as an Asylum Seeker and they’re a failed Asylum Seeker in the United Kingdom, they’ll be given somewhere to live and £35.39 per person on a payment card.

This is what the government are giving out, and then the government go on to say, that they may get free National Health Care such as to see a doctor or get hospital treatment, they’ll get free prescriptions for medicine, free eye tests and free glasses.

As a British citizen and someone that’s paid in all their lives, do we get free prescriptions? Do we get given a free place to live or somewhere that gives you bed and breakfast? Do we get given £300 Maternity Payment simply because you’re having a baby? I think not.

These are people who are here often illegally and this is what the government promise them, and is it any surprise that they choose to come here to the United Kingdom, and our government and this country is a soft touch, and it’s time our government started standing up for the British Nationals who live in the United Kingdom and our ex-service personnel who are given nothing like this.

In March 2018, close to 50,000 people were in receipt of these kinds of benefits and the government should stop making our country a laughingstock, and the government should start standing up for their own people.

Asylum support
Contents
Overview
What you’ll get
Eligibility
How to claim
Further information
What you’ll get
You can ask for somewhere to live, a cash allowance or both as an asylum seeker.

Housing
You’ll be given somewhere to live if you need it. This could be in a flat, house, hostel or bed and breakfast.

You can’t choose where you live. It’s unlikely you’ll get to live in London or south-east England.

Cash support
You’ll get £37.75 for each person in your household. This will help you pay for things you need like food, clothing and toiletries.

Your allowance will be loaded onto a debit card (ASPEN card) each week. You’ll be able to use the card to get cash from a cash machine.

If you’ve been refused asylum
You’ll be given:

somewhere to live
£35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries
You won’t be given:

the payment card if you don’t take the offer of somewhere to live
any money
Extra money for mothers and young children
You’ll get extra money to buy healthy food if you’re pregnant or a mother of a child under 3. The amount you get will depend on your situation.

Your situation Extra payment per week
Pregnant mother £3
Baby under 1-year-old £5
Child aged 1 to 3 £3
Maternity payment
You can apply for a one-off £300 maternity payment if your baby is due in 8 weeks or less, or if your baby is under 6 weeks old.

If you’ve been refused asylum
You can apply for a one-off £250 maternity payment if your baby is due in 8 weeks or less or if your baby is under 6 weeks old.

Applying for the maternity grant
You apply for the maternity grant in the same way whether you’re still an asylum seeker or you’ve been refused asylum.

You’ll need to request form MAT B1 from your doctor to apply for the payment. You can apply for the maternity payment at the same time you apply for asylum support.

If you get pregnant after you’ve applied for asylum support, you can apply to the support team that dealt with your application for asylum support.

Healthcare
You may get free National Health Service (NHS) healthcare, such as to see a doctor or get hospital treatment.

You’ll also get:

free prescriptions for medicine
free dental care for your teeth
free eyesight tests
help paying for glasses
Education
Your children must attend school if they are aged 5 to 17. All state schools are free and your children may be able to get free school meals.

Most of these people turn up in a boat on a beach illegally with no documentation, yet they’re automatically given a free house to live in with no council tax. £37.75 a week for each person in that house, free healthcare, dental care, medicine and glasses.

opengraph-image.jpg

And what’s even more shocking is that on the government website, it states, that if you’ve been refused asylum, the government will still give them somewhere to live and £35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries, so there’s no surprise they travel through other countries to get to the United Kingdom.

Our government should show them the door, and we should take a leaf out of Australia’s book, turn them around and send them back, we just don’t have the room or the means to help them.

Of course we should feel sad for them, we wouldn’t be human if we didn’t, but with our country in the state that it’s in and with our people in the United Kingdom having to struggle every day we must stop immigration into our country and focus on the people that actually live here right now.

We have pensioner’s who have paid in for over 50 years and get nothing, can’t eat or keep warm and if they have to go into a care facility they have to pay for it, and if they require carers they have to pay for it, yet we give Asylum Seekers money for doing nowt when the government could be giving it to people in the United Kingdom who actually need it, and we should be caring for our elderly, not shoving them to one side or hope that they die quickly so we can give the money they were getting to an Asylum Seeker.

Sadly, our government recognise these people for asylum before their own people in the United Kingdom and we will continue to be invaded whilst our unsustainable benefits system is abused, and then you have people who claimed benefit because they’ve had to battle cancer, and then go back to work and then realise that their benefit is now taxable because they returned back to work.

It’s utterly shocking and sickening what’s going on in the United Kingdom with people in care homes that get nothing, pay their taxes for 60 years and then get nothing to support them and end up with whatever savings they have gone.

GettyImages-92875014-1920x1080.jpg

And then we have ex-soldiers sleeping rough on the streets, what we knew of the United Kingdom went a long time ago, and what fine politicians we have, I think not.

What about our homeless, what are they given, particularly when the people from the United Kingdom have paid their taxes all their lives, paid their National Insurance Contributions, no surprise there’s a sense of apprehension that’s being felt throughout the United Kingdom.

The United Kingdom is like a game show, touch the coast of England and win a house and free money, and it does make you question why the government are advertising this offer because genuine Asylum Seekers wouldn’t worry about how much they would get or where they would live as long as they had safety from persecution.

But it appears that those in our country who fought and defended our once glorious country from hostiles now let some hostiles into our country, and instead of our government paying for Britain first, they’re funding the entire world.

And don’t forget Personal Independence Payment (PIP) they probably give these people money, awarded on their traumatic experiences and without any medical evidence.

We, the people in the United Kingdom understand that some of these people are desperate, escaping war and destruction in their home countries, and we should feel sad for them, but we simply don’t have the capacity or the means to support them, and it might not look like we don’t have any compassion for them, of course we do, but you can’t get blood out of a stone.

Our government spend all our money to keep transients in the United Kingdom while the UK State Pension is the lowest in the EU, but nothing will change because the ruling classes know that us Brits will stand for anything no matter how unjustly they’re treated.

3070289_wide-2446146da5a541fac14ed96ad0eb1d8a47909f1d.jpg

77a8506517b0bc3c95fb269f3073ee0c.jpg

When immigrants came over to England at the turn of the century there were soup kitchens, there was no Social Security back then, they had to work or perish, and many did, many people also died, largely because of disease. But circumstances have altered and we don’t have as many markets that they can set up a stall with, so the government set them up with a benefit that will accommodate them. Yet our WASPI pensioners work all their life and get robbed and get shafted by the government, it’s outrageous.

And if you were born in the United Kingdom, raised here, worked well into your 70’s to get your own home, pay all your taxes, never claim benefits other than your State Pension, when you’re 91 and can’t look after yourself, you get no help and have to sell your home to pay for your care.

And this is actually beginning to pee people off with families working arduously and having to struggle to pay for a mortgage for 25 years, pay all their taxes all their lives, pay into a pension which means they forgo some niceties and these immigrants come here and get everything given to them for free.

The Home Office ensures Asylum Seekers are not left penniless by giving suitable provision under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (the 1999 Act). Support is normally given in the form of free, furnished accommodation with no utility bills or Council Tax to pay and a weekly cash allowance to meet the Asylum Seeker’s other basic living requirements.

Free access to healthcare and schooling is also provided.

The level of the cash allowance is evaluated each year to ensure that it’s adequate, using an assessment methodology that was developed in 2014 in light of the findings and guidance given by the High Court in the case of R (Refugee Action) v SSHD.

The Court found that the judgment of the Home Secretary to fix the rate of benefit (Asylum Support) given to Asylum Seekers, without any appreciation for inflation for the second year running, was unreasonable.

The single adult rate was only £36 per week. The Court has believed that the S of S failed to make the fair inquiries needed to decide whether the amount payable was adequate to satisfy the basic living requirements of Asylum Seekers, and unfairly left out of account a number of basic necessities, including babies’ nappies, and the demand for some kind of social interaction to allow Asylum Seekers to live a dignified life.

The judgment was been revoked, and the Home Secretary was ordered to review the rate of benefit needed to satisfy basic living needs, and then they offered Asylum Seekers free driving lessons and tests in an attempt to help them find work, which doesn’t make much sense because most Asylum Seekers aren’t permitted to work while they’re application for asylum is being considered, except in certain cases.

This is a joke because most people have paid into this country, but still, have to struggle and go without, and Asylum Seekers are quids in while older people on pensions have bills to pay and can’t afford to heat their homes, but migrants close by can go to the dentist, get hearing aids and glasses.

Maybe all the Homeless People in the United Kingdom should apply for asylum. They’re displaced, they don’t always have money for food and can’t leave the UK so they must meet the guidelines.

This is not fair on our ex-servicemen with PTSD and other mental health problems that are sick and dying on our streets, and who in government makes these judgments? And then we get told that pensioners are putting pressure on the system while all these migrants claim benefits without paying in any contributions at all.

This government is a joke, showering migrants with free housing and free health care whilst those earning a pittance pay for it, whilst disabled people and people with children can’t afford child care and are living on scraps, but we did vote these degenerates in.

But there is only one thing to do, we should quit whining, buy a yellow jacket and protest about this abuse. We’re soaking up the planets waifs and strays with lefty do-gooders facilitating it.

Shameless Tory Chris Grayling

The Tory Transport Secretary has brazenly condemned railway workers for today’s eye-watering increase in train fares, as rail fares increased to 3.2 per cent in what Jeremy Corbyn called a disgrace to passengers, despite punctuality at a 13-year low.

But Chris Grayling condemned rail operators three times in an interview, and he insisted the biggest factor behind the fare increases was pay pressure from the unions, as he told BBC Breakfast that he wished fares didn’t go up as well.

He also said that in reality, we peg fares to the level of inflation, a higher rate of inflation than he wished, but his question to Labour would be how can you take financial contributions from trade unions who have threatened a national strike if we move the rate of inflation on which the whole industry operates?

He continued that they want pay rises that are much higher than Shadow Transport Secretary Andy McDonald was talking about, and that they threaten strike action across the country to get those pay rises.

Shadow Transport Secretary Andy McDonald exploded Mr Grayling’s appalling record on industrial relations, and he questioned why the right-wing Tory wasn’t also attempting to curb pay increases for fat cat bosses at rail firms.

Mr McDonald stated that this was a feeble endeavour to split-shift the blame for Tory fares policies onto the staff who operate the railway, and in the Tory’s eyes, those representing the poor and the workers are the enemy, with those plutocrats who cream off vast taxpayers wealth, and then give a large part of it to the Tory party who are heroes.

But of course, this is Chris Grayling, the man with the Midas touch, and everything he touches turns to trash and declined to let the Mayor take over the declining rail overground services in London. Still, don’t be too harsh on the man, he’s the role model for middle-aged white men of limited intelligence all over the world, he’s also breathing proof that shit floats.

Something else that the failing Mr Grayling didn’t mention, this government are financially bailing out the rail companies whilst this debate goes on, therefore the government is responsible for extending this argument. Perhaps they hope that the strikers will be starved into submission, similar to the miner’s strike, but not quite so deadly.

So much for not taking sides in industrial disputes by the government, and the privatised rail services are given fortunes for failure to deliver, a little like Chris Grayling and the entire Tory government itself, but then that’s exactly like the typical Tories because it’s the private companies that are costing us, not the workers, and we have greedy chiefs.

This is the 21st century, but we’re pretending like it’s the 19th century and there are those that would like to see unions abolished, but without them, we’d be wandering about in rags, just like our ancestors did, and Chris Grayling is simply another example of Theresa May’s poor judgement, and he’s not fit to serve tea on any train.

Of course, it’s never their fault is it? The Tories are masters at redirecting the guilt onto everyone else but them. Remember who it was that privatised the Rail, Water, BT, Buses, Electricity and Gas, well, that worked out well, didn’t it?

I still don’t have any words for the Tory’s like Margaret Thatcher and others still buzzing in my ears, telling us how the competition was going to make everything so much better and affordable, plus the train service was going to be much more efficient when it was privatised.

The fact is that these public sector services were sold off at a fraction of their proper value to private companies who have over the years created a cartel who have systematically increased prices and fleeced customers. The moral of the story is, don’t believe a thing that comes from Tory politicians lips because loose lips sink ships!

Let’s face it, the brazen Tories blame the working classes, the unemployed, the old, the young, the penniless, the disabled and students for being alive. Why don’t the Tories go and do a little stint for free, doing voluntary work, instead of giving themselves a huge salary whilst their minions die on minimum wage?

But it’s the same shit, different Tory!

Messages Say Everything About Brexit Britain

180403000435-jeremy-corbyn-full-169.jpg

Jeremy Corbyn has condemned Tories for plunging” Brexit Britain into chaos, and his red-hot New Year message shows much can change in 12 months, and the Labour leader’s 2018 and 2019 messages are alike in various ways.

In both, he promises to stand up for the majority and strengthen the nation against a vested elite, but there’s one huge distinction, last time he didn’t mention Brexit once, and then it was front and centre of his speech, an echo of how much it’s come to govern politics in the United Kingdom.

And even though there was a more detailed, perhaps more substantial variation to his resonance in his 2018 message, Jeremy Corbyn was still drifting on a better than anticipated performance in the general election.

His message was full of purpose, declaring the establishment had been weakened and that a Labour government was closer than ever before, but with Theresa May attempting to cling on almost until 2022, and surviving a no-confidence vote, those phrases were missing from his address.

Instead, the tone is more one of desperation at the standoff that’s gripped the nation over Brexit in the last 12 months, continuing: “We cannot go on like this.”

Well, of course, we can’t go on like this and it’s about time Jeremy Corbyn stopped sitting on the fence and started thinking in the interest of the country, and if Jeremy is deemed to be our saviour, then we don’t have much of a choice…

However, you can see that all of this has taken its toll on Jeremy Corbyn, he’s looking tired and wilted, or is that his gimmick to look like he’s part of the poorer community, and if he does finally get in, the good suits will go on and eventually he’ll have a shave.

Theresa-May-REUTERS-17.10.18-e1545304915553.jpg

And Theresa May’s claws must be broken and bloodied by now as she still clings on for dear life, as she examines her appearance in the mirror, well, there’s no love lost there, she must still despise herself, and dislike the person that she’s become, and the job that she’s doing.

But of course when she first became prime minister it was all fresh and she felt whole, but now she’s little more than a hollowed out eggshell, virtually unrecognisable to even herself.

brexit.jpg

Brexit has destroyed her from within, she knew it was a lousy mistake, she’s always known it, and everything she touches has now turned to dust around her, she isn’t even making the best of a bad job, she’s doing a bad job badly, but she moves on only because it’s less embarrassing than not carrying on, with stubbornness disguised as a misplaced sense of duty.

And her attitude didn’t change when she wandered into the Commons for prime ministers questions. Theresa May simply glanced at her cabinet, sitting with their heads down on the front bench, trying to dodge catching her eye, not a real friend in sight, simply varying degrees of the enemy.

And there were ministers who had so little respect for her that they even took to having their own private cabinet meetings without her, people who would gladly knife her in a heartbeat if they could only agree on her replacement.

Perhaps we should take four unknowns that have a more fresh viewpoint on things, rather than taking MPs who are so repetitious in their ideas that went out with the ark.

We need new blood, people that live in the 21st century and don’t fall asleep on the benches, and not only that we need to take people from various walks of life, not MPs, but everyday people that live in the real world, and we need to get their opinions, much like a census, every six months to see what’s required and what the government can do about it, not willing to do about it, but what to do about it.

Because at the moment our country is in a poor state and it’s terrifying and tragic that more than two years on we have nothing to show aside from countless indignities to foreign powers that we’ll need in the future, and if we do finally come to some agreement with Brexit, then good luck getting medicine and flights abroad, it’s going to be great, I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

And PMQ is entertainment for the slow of thought, bet they all thought it was a Christmas cracker… At the end of the day it’s just a national humiliation, and whether we carry out Brexit or change our minds, we’ll be a laughing stock across Europe.

The question we should all be asking ourselves is whether the United Kingdom is still governable? We have become a divided country and its irrationalities have triumphed over reason. We now need a capable leader, the best leader possible because at the moment we’re in the hands of a pretentious leader without depth that doesn’t know whether she’s coming or going, and can’t see the wood for the trees.

And Theresa May is at pain to demonstrate how grim things have become, but she’s now made her mark and has turned the United Kingdom into a hellhole, and worse than that she continues to use taxpayers money to work against the taxpayer’s interest.

Austerity is now the thudding drumbeat behind every ministerial failure, and austerity has done more than tear up the public realm, while it’s forced private suffering on millions of families.

The age of austerity has been the era of the food bank, zero-hour contracts, and the privately rented slums. Of course, austerity wasn’t Theresa May’s brainchild, it was Osborne’s, she simply inherited it, but Theresa May clung onto austerity after she made Hammond her new chancellor in July 2016.

The dilemma with capability is that you can only feign it for so long, and then your rep is shot for good. That, in a nutshell, is the Tories, and austerity was a political tactic that David Cameron and Osborne passed off as a long-term economic plan, it was no such thing.

And there have been hundreds of thousands of austerity-related deaths and the UK life expectancy is actually declining for the first time in 50-60 years and Brexit is going to be especially harrowing for millions in the United Kingdom.

Theresa May is currently at the wrong place, the EU won’t move and will adhere to its position and we will end up leaving without a deal, and how much further will the Tory party be willing to concede?

So, where are our world leaders? Theresa May is one but in name only. World leaders should be leading their countries, striving towards improving the economy, working to care for the most vulnerable in society but most of all, working for the many and not just a few.

Jeremy Corbyn followers remind me of the ’70s with the Bay City Rollers and Donny Osmond posters that the youngsters had up on their walls. Jeremy often looks utterly incompetent but has sparked a cult-like loyalty amongst his supporters who are totally oblivious to the fact that he’s probably the worst Labour leader since the war.

But then perhaps he offers an alternative to people who have had enough of the way this country has been heading for the last 30 years and they like having the option. The trouble is there is no opposition in the United Kingdom, and if you watch the Brexit debates all you see is some Labour people pretending to be against Brexit, they’re so transparent.

Brexit is a mess, and it never really had much of a possibility judging the way the process has been relentlessly undermined by influential media groups, and if Brexiters had planned and had a cloudless and practical sense of what leaving would really involve, then it might not have been a nightmare.

And after years of being disgruntled about the EU, you might have thought they would have had some concept of how to progress if they got their wish. I know in the last two years my toes have curled so much and so much has passed you could call them Alladin.

Loads of people have said that a second referendum would be foolish or should be out of the question. To be fair, I can’t see what a difference it would make, the only distinction might be that those who did vote out and now get the machinations of such a vote might now decide to stay in.

Most people rely on the media to give them the news, and that’s why it’s so easy to falsify the news. I’m not saying that everyone is ignorant, but what I am saying is that not everyone is educated enough to appreciate what the MPs are telling them. I’m a Journalist and even I have to look up material from time to time, so what chance have these people got?

So, even though some of these people voted out, did they actually know what voting out meant for them, of course, they didn’t, but over two years down the line, now they know what they voted for and some of them aren’t very happy.

So, hell yeah, I’d go with a second referendum because these people need an informed choice, even if it means getting a translator in to decipher what the hell the government are going on about, and the Tories failed to acknowledge their incompetence a long time ago, and they should be making way for a more competent person, but the people voted them in.

And those that voted them in have now got the leaders they deserve, after all, who else apart from Theresa May would want to be a politician in this current hysterical atmosphere? And leaders from the past, of whatever electorate they were from, people like Churchill, Attlee, Macmillan and Gaitskell didn’t have to battle the everyday missiles launched at them through the press and voters who picked on the latest grouse to yell so blatantly.

It’s all really shocking, and in Spain, the British are so ashamed that no one mentions Brexit in friendly company, and when the Spanish question the British how it’s going, they do it in tones you would reserve for an enquiry about a sick relative.

climatechange.jpg

But once upon a time all that we heard about was Climate Change and now all we hear about is Brexit, so now we’ve renegotiated Climate Change for Brexit, and it’s all pretty funny with this carry-on about who voted “in” and who voted “out”, particularly when once Climate Change was the most important and alarming problem that confronted the planet.

But Brexit will certainly do that until the disaster entrepreneurs get their fangs in and commence fracking, mining and forging their way through every rule in the book, and soon, there won’t be an environment to fret about, but if you truly believe we have more possibility of environmental stability and action on Climate Change outside the EU, well think again.

It now appears that Theresa May’s face looms on every front page of the news which seems to help create an impression of “no alternative” but the UK is screwed with Theresa May who is a trembling mess and would rather hide under the bed, and I can’t see any white knight appearing any time soon, with Jeremy Corbyn being the political equivalent of a chocolate fireguard.

Of course, you can’t navigate upstream, and Jeremy Corbyn isn’t that bad, but I’m sure people want much better, and there are countless people who believe he’s incompetent and less likely to develop a sound political policy than a squirrel.

But he’s done a great job of getting people involved in the party, and he represents a change from the New Labour figures who came before him.

He really appears to care about his beliefs more than power and personal enrichment, and he’s an exceptional campaigner.

And so I’m conflicted over Jeremy Corbyn, and I like that he’s prepared to put forth more socialist policies without atoning for it, and he’s an outstanding backbencher, less so a party leader, and whether you like him or not, it’s not hard to see why people are drawn to him.

One In Four Military Homes Empty

5333.jpg

These houses could be perfectly sound family homes, but no one is living in them. They’re former Ministry of Defence houses, meant for military families, but they’re abandoned and many are slipping into dilapidation.

Some of these houses have been for more than a decade, and local people residing near them in Cambridgeshire are mad about it because they could be made to look very nice and they could be a very nice family home.

It’s a disgrace, but in 1996 the MoD sold off their houses to a private company, but it agreed to rent them back, even when empty, and the MoD is paying rent on them to keep them empty, and it’s utterly insane.

11, 342 military homes currently lie abandoned, costing the taxpayer more than 25 million a year in rent, and this is across the country, Cambridgeshire, West London and Kent, but the military said that they need to keep some houses empty for when armed forces families relocate to different places.

But the Ministry of Defence said that they’re working to bring down the vacancy rate through sub-letting and disposing of property they no longer need, but under the contract, the MoD must restore these homes to hand them back, but in numerous cases it will cost thousands of pounds, if these houses are ever to be lived in again.

What they should be doing with them is giving them to ex-servicemen and women personnel that are living on the streets because wouldn’t it be better to give them to someone who desperately needs them, rather than leaving them empty?

But of course, when the MoD is paying rent but not having to pay for maintenance costs, it’s far more practical to keep them empty, but it’s morally perverse when ex-servicemen have given everything and fight and yet can’t be given a safe haven.

Everything that this government does is about profit, clearly, someone in the MoD got rewarded for making such a poor deal, but ex-servicemen and women should be housed in these empty houses, after all, they all served their country well.

These houses shouldn’t be given to anyone aside from ex-servicemen and women, they’ve served, and the government owe them at least a roof over their heads, it’s as simple as that, and they really don’t need to be homeless when they’re empty houses that the MoD are still paying for out of taxpayers money when the government could be supporting those that need it and are struggling financially after their service has ended.

These houses could help people’s mental health and further create awe-inspiring communities, so they should just give them to the ex-servicemen and women who are living out on the streets, it’s not rocket science, is it?

There appears to be a dimmer switch on where the government and the MoD are concerned. There must be someone somewhere scratching their heads going, “Well, what can we do with these houses?” Aside from making a profit on them, of course.

Well, when the lightbulb has fallen on that someone’s head, perhaps they’ll figure it out and go, “Oh yeah, what a good idea, we can give them to the ex-servicemen and women that are living out on the streets, let’s make their lives a little better.”

“Duh, why didn’t I think of that before?.”

But this is so ludicrous, the MoD know there’s a significant amount of ex-servicemen and women who are displaced, many of whom are sleeping on the streets, and that they should be in these houses, it’s just common sense, but the government don’t make a profit out of common sense, and someone is definitely profiting from this blatant misuse of taxpayers money.

I would guess the person who signed off on this deal got himself a nice little directorship with the company who got the contract, but then they’re always sorting themselves out with projects for the boys, and I can’t understand this waste, and shame on them all whoever is involved in this, making ex-soldiers homeless to live on the streets, how do these people sleep at night because I know it makes my blood boil.

There was a time when the forces respected and looked after their own, you never heard of ex-squaddies living on the streets then. We had military hospitals which took care of the troops and families, but the government in their supreme enlightenment sold off army quarters, closed military hospitals and cut forces to next to nothing.

Sadly, it’s all very disturbing and a sign of the times, we are no longer a caring society, and if the MoD is paying rent on these houses, isn’t it the duty of the landlords to keep them in a livable state? So, where is all the taxpayer’s money going to?

This is dreadful management, they could at least rent them out on a 6 monthly basis to those in need, but then that would require someone pulling their finger out of their arse, but then the MoD are well renowned for its culture of waste.

Perhaps if Theresa May spent as much time and money on all these houses, no one would have to be homeless, of course, she would need to make a better job of it than she has of Brexit, so it’s time for her to pull her finger out, or maybe it’s time she pulled out altogether?

Of course, there are some ex-servicemen that were homeless that are now in charitable accommodation, but it doesn’t seem fair with some being asked to leave military accommodation after they’ve been medically discharged with no help at all.

As as a result some of these men have breakdowns, they lose everything even their marriage, some even attempt to commit suicide, and those that do get help now, well it’s no thanks to the military who do nothing to support them, but how dumb do you have to be to sell something to someone so you can rent it back?

But that’s how the MOD’s proposal to privatise military housing ended in disaster. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) sold all of its military housing in St Eval to a company named Annington Homes, but this was part of a much broader nationwide deal, in which Annington paid the MoD £1.67 billion for 57,400 homes that housed military servicemen and their families.

In one swoop, Annington became the largest residential property owner in England and Wales.

For the MoD, the deal solved a mounting problem, tens of thousands of military houses across the country were falling apart, and the department didn’t have the funds to repair them. By selling the houses, the MoD hoped to make some quick money, while freeing up money for renovation.

Following the sale, the MoD would then rent back the houses at a reduced rate.

The St Eval homes were in a poor state, and like much of the military homes that Annington acquired, these prefab units had been built throughout the housing deficit that followed the second world war and was originally expected to stand for no more than a decade.

They had practically no insulation, and in numerous sectors of the country, these units were afflicted with “concrete cancer”, after damp eroded away their steel structures, and some were in danger of collapsing.

Having sold off some of the prefab houses in St Eval, Annington Homes discovered that if it flattened the rest of the crumbling concrete boxes and rebuilt new houses in their place, the local authority would insist the company supply 40 per cent affordable housing, considerably diminishing its profit margin. So it came up with an inventive solution.

Once the units on the former base were empty, Annington sent in teams of builders who would carry out the same operation, over and over. First, they would knock down the walls, securing them with temporary steel supports known as acrow props.

Next, with the old roof secured in mid-air, the builders remade the walls with bricks. Once they were secure, the builders put the roof back in place and went on to the next house.

The process took years to complete, but by preserving the roofs, Annington dodged the cost of having to provide low-cost housing. So, then you had a 1950’s roof with a brand new house underneath, new kitchens, new floors, new ceilings, it was really clever and an excellent bit of civil engineering.

But this episode in St Eval was not the only element of the 1996 deal in which Annington ran rings around the state, and the full extent of the fallout from the deal, for the MoD, residents and taxpayers is only now being understood.

And when Kevan Jones was minister for veterans under Gordon Brown, he called in representatives from the company, in order to try and make sense of the arrangements. He tried to get them out of it, but it was impossible, and it was an especially poor deal for the taxpayer, and it was incredible that the government endorsed the deal.

The deal endorsed by the MoD had become a millstone. Now, the houses that Annington purchased for £1.67 billion are worth £6.7 billion, and under the terms of the deal, the MoD rents back thousands of houses for members of the armed forces and their families, and approximately two years ago the rental bill for 39,014 houses around the country was £167 million, and of those houses for which the MoD was paying millions in rent, 7,680 were empty.

But there’s worse to come. The original deal gave the MoD a 58 per cent discount on renting the houses for the first 25 years, it further allows a rent review every 25 years. The first rent review will take place in 2021 and there’s nothing to prevent Annington imposing full market value after that period.

If that happens, the MoD’s bill for accommodation for its servicemen and women will skyrocket and Britain’s armed forces will be met with tremendous existential questions.

The UK’s armed forces have always been an unusual employer, they require soldiers to move frequently, usually from one side of the country to the other, and subsidised housing is not only a fundamental part of the “offer” to soldiers, living in close proximity is further crucial for sustaining morale and monitoring soldiers who have recently returned from lengthy tours of duty.

And the possibility of the rent rise is referred to internally as “the cliff edge”, and it will deeply affect every aspect of the army’s operations, but there were numerous privatisations in the 80s and 90s, where national assets were snapped up by the private sector, and the sale of Britain’s military housing was merely one of those deals.

The result is that today, thousands of former army houses are controlled by a company run from one of the smartest streets in London, and owned by a private equity fund based in Guernsey.

In turn, the private equity fund manages billions of pounds for some of the biggest investors in the world, they have made a bundle out of Annington, the taxpayer, in the meantime, has lost billions.

4000.jpg

The man behind the Annington deal was Guy Hands. Today, Guy Hands is one of Britain’s wealthiest men, but back in the mid-1990s, he was merely starting to make a name for himself.

He grew up near Sevenoaks in Kent, establishing himself as a deal-maker from an early age, making money by peddling trinkets, artworks and encyclopaedias, and while other kids played with toy soldiers or learned to play the piano, he spoke to his great-uncle about the stock market and traded cigarette cards, stamps and coins.

Guy Hands arrived at Oxford University to study PPE in 1978 but ended up spending most of his time on business rather than studying. He purchased a derelict house that required complete restoration, he purchased a launderette, which he converted into an art gallery, and he also became close friends with the future foreign secretary, William Hague.

He left Oxford with a third-class degree.

In 1982, he started working as a bond trader at the US bank Goldman Sachs in London and before long he was one of the stars of the trading team, but over time, Guy Hands became frustrated with what he saw as the bank’s conservative approach to investment and started to look for opportunities elsewhere.

In 1994, the London office of the Japanese bank Nomura tempted Guy Hands away, promising him free rein to invest in any asset he wanted.

Guy Hands arrived for his first day at his new job, as head of Nomura’s securitisation and structured finance teams. He wandered in, he was in one of those glass offices everyone could see into, he said he wanted to meet everybody in the team.

The first member of the crew who went in to face Guy Hands was fired on the spot, and it was a cull that continued for months, and by excluding anyone who didn’t come up to his criteria, Guy Hands encircled himself with an equally hard-headed team, he used a blend of authority and intimidation and encouragement.

The new team was called the Principal Finance Group (PFG) because it was investing Nomura’s own money or principal, and Guy Hands, who is dyslexic, misspelt “principal” at first, sparking jokes over how principled PFG would be.

Guy Hands and his new team wasted no time. In their first major deal, they targeted the British Rail trains that were being sold off as part of the privatisation of the railways. Putting its proposal together, PFG used the clinical level of research that would become its trademark.

The trains were divided into three groups, each controlled and managed by a separate rolling stock operating company, and the crucial part of the proposal was to establish how much each of these companies was worth.

According to the financier, over a two-week period, one of Nomura’s researchers rang or visited every single train manufacturer in the world, and he quickly figured out that Angel Trains, one of the three rolling stock operating companies, was severely undervalued.

Its trains were being sold with a calculated use of seven years, when in fact they would almost certainly be used for significantly longer because there was an inadequate manufacturing capacity worldwide to replace the trains, and rather than valuing the deal on a seven-year projection, PFG valued it on a longer lifetime.

PFG could easily outbid rivals, while still being confident that they could make money on the deal, surprise, surprise, they succeeded, and some of those trains are still operating today.

In January 1996, a little more than a year after Guy Hands had arrived at Nomura, PFG paid £696 million for Angel Trains, but it was only after the sale that the key element of the deal became apparent. After purchasing Angel Trains, the Nomura consortium securitised the debt through a bond issue of £690 million.

This meant that inside weeks of purchasing the trains, PFG had sold the rights to the Angel Trains income for £690 million but retained ownership of the asset, and in December 1997, less than two years after they had purchased Angel, Nomura sold it on, and RBS bought the business for £395 million. PFG had made nearly £400 million in less than two years.

The transaction boosted PFG’s confidence, and Hands’ team was hungry and ambitious, and its members knew that their careers depended on tracking down the next deal, with very young people being given a degree of freedom and responsibility which they would never have ordinarily have got, being given the chance to make something out of it and everybody did, everybody worked like crazy.

One of PFG’s biggest assets was the handful of maths postgraduates who created the complex financial models that Nomura required for its private equity deals, and one Saturday afternoon in the office when the “cyber room”, as the mathematicians were known, were complaining that Nomura’s computers were not robust enough for their needs.

From his home in Sevenoaks, Guy Hands ordered his team to fix the problem that day, so they went by taxi to Tottenham Court Road and purchased four of the biggest computers that they could get at the time. They did a deal with the guy from the computer shop, and he threw in four copies of the Age of Empires.

PFG were always on the lookout for any poorly run, undervalued businesses that it could quickly fix up and sell on. Guy Hands once described his ideal target as being “the worst business we can find in the most challenged sector”, and when the MoD announced that it was planning to offload thousands of run-down homes all over England and Wales, it seemed like the perfect opportunity.

So, Guy Hands moved quickly, and after the Angel Trains deal, he could now be confident that if he bought the military housing, he would be able to almost simultaneously borrow hundreds of millions to cover the purchase price.

He could then meet the expenses of borrowing by renting back the housing to the MoD, and according to his team’s predictions, the underlying value of the properties would slowly appreciate, and once the rights to the rental income were sold, the debt would be off Nomura’s balance sheet, and they could move on to the next deal.

But what they did was absolutely standard, it’s what private equity does, but at the time it was seen as groundbreaking.

PFG approached the project as though it was going into battle. They were the barbarians at the gate and individuals were distributed to every different element of the deal and thousands of man-hours were spent assessing the value of the houses.

Debating about buying 57,000 houses in variable conditions, and how they were going to factor in the combination of what was going to happen to the property market in terms of valuations. How they were going to restore them, and how they were going to sell the ones they needed to sell.

They looked at those components, and then broke them down separately, and then worked out what the value of each of those components was, totalled it all up and then stuck their finger in the air and said: “We’ll bid this much.”

NatWest bank, which handled the sale of the housing for the MoD, predicted a total selling price of £1 billion. In an independent valuation, the estate agent Savills had put a price tag of £1.5 billion on the estate. Astonishingly, according to a speech Guy Hands gave at a property conference in London, the MoD had originally estimated the sites were worth only £400 million.

In the first rung of bidding, at the start of 1996, there were approximately 60 prospective buyers. In the second round, the list was shaved down to 19. According to Guy Hands, Warren Buffett and Lehman Brothers were two of Nomura’s chief contenders.

Everyone connected to the deal remembers that Guy Hands played the game theory on the bid all of the time. He was continually on to the vendors, working out where he stood, what they wanted and what he needed to do.

The disparity between PFG and the civil servants who handled the deal couldn’t have been starker, while Guy Hand’s team toiled relentlessly, usually through the night, making elaborate designs on state of the art computers, the Ministry of Defence’s documents on the sale of the military housing exposed a rather different approach.

Internal memos had a chatty tone, and errors were edited by hand, and when the former chief of defence staff Lord Bramall’s name was misspelt, a superfluous letter was carefully crossed out.

“This bidder appears to have taken leave of its senses,” says one letter. “D is the clear winner and A a non-starter.” Notes were added in the margins. “I’m sure that [illegible] will want to discuss with you after his meeting – it’ll probably have to be on the carphone as you go to the constituency,” runs one note from an official to the then defence secretary Michael Portillo.

And when it became clear that ex-soldier and soldier’s groups disliked the prospect of a Japanese bank benefiting from British military homes, Nomura enlisted Sir Thomas Macpherson, a second world war hero with three Military Crosses, as chairman.

The former air vice marshal Alexander Hunter was brought in as deputy chairman, and Nomura further agreed to set up the Annington Trust, a charitable foundation which gave grants to help develop creches and youth clubs for service families.

The trust was given a start-up capital of £430,000 or 0.026 per cent of what Nomura would ultimately pay for the 57,400 MoD properties.

By August 1996, the shortlist was down to four bidders, and according to a letter circulated to senior Ministry of Defence officials setting out these four remaining bids, Nomura was a “clear winner” at that point.

One group, understood to be the Nomura consortium, “in particular mentioned that they are working on how to present their consortium with as British a face as possible”, and in a scribble in the margins to Portillo, one of his aides said, “it all looks pretty clear-cut”.

By September, the deal was completed, and Nomura agreed to pay £1.67 billion for the houses.

According to a spokesperson from Annington, the terms of the contract were established by the MoD and the company had no “ability to influence or negotiate the terms of the agreements”.

The MoD would get some money back on some of the houses sold off over the first 15 years, and the Ministry of Defence viewed the sale a success. In a letter to John Major, who was then prime minister, a senior official noted: “The final negotiations have been intensive, but fairly conducted.” Another minister was reported as “delighted that the sale had been concluded”.

No one at Nomura ever seemed in any doubt that it would win. Nomura’s lawyers had set up the Annington Homes shell company at the close of July 1996, when the MoD was still weighing up how to handle the sale, with Guy Hands becoming a director of the company in August, and Annington Homes completed the acquisition of the homes on 5 November 1996. The barbarians were now inside the walls.

Guy Hands now acknowledged that the early months of 1997 were a mess, and at the time of the Annington deal, the MoD knew that it was going to lessen the number of servicemen and women over the coming decades, and the agreement said that when military accommodation was no longer needed for rental by the armed forces, Annington could do whatever it wanted with the properties.

In the first year after the deal was endorsed, the MoD released 2,000 of the 57,400 houses. Annington refurbished these homes with the intention of selling them on to wealthy clients, but to their dismay, they discovered that they couldn’t shift the houses.

Four Annington Homes chief executives resigned in just over 18 months, and ultimately, James Hopkins, an ex-army man, was brought in as chief executive to save the flailing company, which had amassed enormous debts to purchase the MoD housing in the first place.

James Hopkins came up with a different approach, and rather than wasting more on restoring the homes and attempting to target the luxury market, Annington would concentrate on first-time buyers and public sector workers.

They would offer the homes with 5% of the purchase price paid by the company as a deposit to the mortgage provider. They would make the lack of renovation a selling point, telling purchasers they were buying a blank canvas.

The homes would be sold off at a fixed price, on a first-come, first served basis, and soon people were queueing up to purchase Annington Homes.

1993.jpg

In the summer of 1999, prospective buyers in Huntingdon camped out for 17 days to purchase homes on the former RAF estate. The following April, families camped for over a week to purchase married quarters in South Wigston, on the outskirts of Leicester, and in February 2001, they camped in Devizes in Wiltshire. James Hopkins plan was working well.

But not everyone was delighted by Annington’s new “pile ’em high” sales tactics, and by 2002, CPO Bob Beeching and his wife had been living in their Portsmouth house for 10 years. Making a home for their four children, the duo had painted the house with buttercup-painted walls and new carpets.

But when Annington announced that the house would be sold because the MoD no longer wanted the site, Bob Beeching secured a mortgage and asked if he could buy the house. Annington turned him down. Under the terms of its contract with the MoD, the houses had to be restored to their original state before being sold.

The Beechings were informed that they would have to queue in a field for three weeks and that they would not be able to ensure that they got any house on that particular road and that they would have to restore the house to precisely how it was when they first got it, ripping out all the carpets and painting it all magnolia again.

The service families were a proper community, all the children knew each other and had been friends for years. So, they simply asked Annington if they could purchase the homes that they lived in, rather than take pot luck because it wouldn’t have made any difference to anyone and they would have got precisely the same amount of money.

Annington said no, and it was really frustrating and upsetting for everyone, and Annington stated that it was the MoD that had insisted that everyone should have the opportunity to purchase any house, which meant that everyone had to leave their homes before they were sold.

In its early years, Annington promoted the belief that house sales would be targeted at serving the current members of the armed forces, taking out adverts in forces’ publications, but house prices swiftly climbed out of the range of services salaries.

As Annington’s website pointed out, in clinical language, the sales to armed forces personnel are “reducing steadily due to changes in the accessibility of the United Kingdom residential property market,” and over the past two decades, Annington has sold off around 20,000 houses that the MoD has stopped using, but the company is developing a new approach with Annington moving towards the private rental sector.

Amongst major property developers, the build-to-rent market was expanding quickly, as demand for rental accommodation proceeded to grow, but Annington had an advantage over its opponents in that it didn’t need to build to rent, it already has tens of thousands of houses available.

Senior executives at Annington now believe that it makes more sense to lease out the houses perpetually, rather than sell them, and in 2014, Howe Barracks, on the eastern outskirts of Canterbury, was closed after being home to the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders regiment for 10 years.

In 2016, Annington put the 147 houses of what was Howe Barracks up for sale. This time, though, rather than selling the homes as it had before, it was selling only short leases of 25 years on the properties.

ccc-830x321.jpg

Canterbury city council saw the properties on Howe Barracks as a way of overcoming its long waiting list for social housing and put in a bid, but Canterbury underestimated the desperation of London councils, desperate to conquer their own waiting lists by accessing affordable housing outside the city.

A bidding battle followed, managed by Annington. Canterbury was quickly outbid by Redbridge council, in east London, 63 miles away, and there were demonstrations at Howe Barracks when locals realised that the houses would go to Redbridge residents.

One far-right group describing themselves as “angry, white and proud” hung St George flags from the perimeter fence, but it really couldn’t compete with Redbridge’s bid, and families from east London began arriving on Howe Barracks.

It’s fair to say this might not have been what they were hoping for when they applied for social housing. Not only were they 63 miles away from Redbridge, but the Howe Barracks site was also not well suited to the demands of the new arrivals.

Redbridge was moving the largest families on its waiting lists, and there were considerably more children than there were when army families filled the houses, so the local schools were under more pressure, and the playgrounds around the estate were all taken out before the families started moving in because they were considered unnecessary and costly.

Fatuhani Ahmed was one of those who had been moved to Kent from Redbridge and was formerly from Mali had settled in east London, near to his family and friends, now found himself totally secluded on the outskirts of Canterbury.

In London they all looked after each other, if she needed, her sister could look after her son, and her auntie was there too, and she was separated from her partner and now her son only sees his father occasionally.

The Howe Barracks case sums up the short-sightedness of the 1996 deal. In short, state entities used state reserves to bid against each other for blocks of homes that were owned by the state merely a generation ago. This sale was, of course, presided over by Annington, who held all the cards, and as the housing crisis proceeded to worsen, this sort of situation was expected to become more and more familiar.

The MoD now realises that the Annington deal was a catastrophic error because the deal had created extreme problems and the armed forces had failed to realise the long-term outcomes.

These people thought they were smart, but it wasn’t thought through correctly, and the implications of it all are still sinking in. First, there’s the long-term capital loss as the price of property in the UK keeps climbing. Second, the MoD’s rental costs increased from £2,575 per house in 1997 to £4,865 in 2016.

Thirdly, according to the contract, the houses had to be returned in a satisfactory state. This means that when the MoD handed back unused homes to Annington, they had to pay for dilapidations to ensure the homes were in an adequate state for Annington to sell them.

And on at least one occasion, the MoD has even had to purchase land straight back from Annington for more housing. From 2001, the MoD had handed over several parcels of land at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, and Annington obtained planning permission to redevelop the land for private housing before the MoD decided that it wanted to buy some of it back.

In 2014, the MoD paid Annington more than £28 million to buy back a site at Brize Norton that included 194 houses. This means the MoD had to pay nearly £145,000 per house for homes sold off for an aggregate of £28,000 in the initial 1996 agreement.

It isn’t only Guy Hands and PFG that did well out of the deal, his investors, too, made huge earnings, but he made a small miscalculation at the outset. They had done something in 1996 and 1997, which made sense at the time, but in hindsight, it was not the greatest decision.

They had studied Annington’s rental payments at a cost of 7.54 per cent through to 2021. Guy Hands had locked in the mortgage on the Annington homes at a really high rate, he was then stuck making the higher payments for years.

This stabilised the deal, and Guy Hands knew that the rental would cover the debt costs, and took the deal off Nomura’s balance sheet.

This had another outcome, the high borrowing expenses meant that all the hundreds of millions given in rent by the MoD in the last two decades had washed straight offshore, endlessly servicing debt. Annington’s investors were the biggest victors in the deal, having made the largest profits.

And because all the rental income floods offshore, Annington has never made an operating profit in the United Kingdom. Despite getting £168 million in rent from the MoD, Annington didn’t spend a penny of corporation tax.

There is no hint of any wrongdoing by Guy Hands team in the acquisition of the army housing. They were just far more efficient than their adversaries and outdid a government department that wasn’t equipped to keep up with their financial finesse.

And in 1996 Annington won a competitive auction to acquire 57,400 homes from the Ministry of Defence. These houses were leased back to the MoD on a 200-year lease at a massively reduced rate, equivalent to a 58 per cent reduction compared to open market value for the first 25 years.

This reduction had saved the MoD a collective sum of about £3.7 billion in open-market values over the duration of the contract date, but for the MoD, nevertheless, the idiom “for the first 25 years” is a reminder of what may be the most disturbing outcome of the deal.

And if in time, Annington increases the rent on the military house to markets rates, the MoD will find itself in a precarious position. It was a pretty bad judgment call in the first place, with a really short-term gain, and that’s the real problem because there’s a 25-year initial lease period, which is up in 2021, and then the lease will have to be renegotiated, and they’ve got the monopoly.

The army is struggling to find a solution to this emerging housing problem, and in a recent study of 8,322 people by the Army Families Federation (AFF), 30 per cent of respondents stated they would definitely leave the army if access to service family accommodation was decreased, and an additional 46 per cent said that they would consider leaving.

The AFF noted that this accommodation creates a “support network that’s almost impossible to replicate, and that the advantages of this design, such as security, compassion and practical support, are not yet properly understood or quantified.

And if anyone at Annington had a shred of respectability, they would see that this is an abuse, and everytime some headway was made, it was simply putting more money back into Annington’s pocket, the entire thing was a disgrace.

NOMURA_RED_2400px.png

In 2012, Guy Hands moved Annington out of Nomura and into Terra Firma, the private equity vehicle he now manages. Investors in Terra Firma include hedge funds, private family trusts and sovereign wealth funds. Thanks to regular income from the MoD, Annington’s value increases every year.

Yet despite the continuing success of the Annington deal, over the past decade, Guy Hands has made plenty of failures, losing hundreds of millions of pounds from his investments in the music group EMI and the troubled care home group Four Seasons.

But back in St Eval, residents such as Phil Hartley, a 36-year-old taxi driver, continue to be puzzled by the deal, and if the houses had to be sold off by the MoD in the first place, Phil Hartley doesn’t understand why they could not have been sold directly to families.

Cornwall has been suffering a housing disaster for years, with holiday homes pricing out local residents, and purchasing one of the St Eval houses at the cost Annington paid, Phil Hartley says, would have been transformational for his family.

Instead, Annington took its share before selling many of the homes on to buy-to-let investors, who likewise take their slice, but according to a spokesperson for Annington, the company took a commercial decision to completely renovate the homes, in the process creating a good stock of affordably priced housing for sale in the local community, and that the houses were usually marketed to first-time buyers.

Phil Hartley knows he will never be able to afford a house in the area and currently rents one of the houses that was jacked and bricked, and it makes him furious to think that the MoD auctioned off the homes to investors rather than families, and this is utterly ludicrous when there are so many homeless people out there.

Those men and women in the forces have been institutionalised, they only know one way of existing and when they come out, many find it extremely difficult to live in the real world, and many of them are suffering from PTSD with a huge skills gap and difficulties adjusting back into society.

Yes, it was their decision to enter the army and fight for their Queen and country, but those people who believe that it’s their own fault does nothing to sort out the underlying problems and only results in self-righteous smugness.

And if homelessness is endemic amongst ex-military personnel, it’s not their own fault, it’s an obviously systemic mess, and we could say anything we do is our own fault, and some have said that they should have planned for their future, I’m sure they were thinking about that when they were struggling to keep themselves alive and being exposed to repeated emotional trauma, and then the government waves goodbye to them and turfs them out with a salute.

And when they leave the forces, their structure, routine and discipline have been taken away, all the rules have changed and a number of ex-servicemen and women flounder because they’ve become used to military life, the routine, the structure, and that’s where it all falls apart, and the MoD don’t know how to look after the men and women that have served their country.

The real scandal is that deal made in 1996, and whoever thought of it was a fool. They sold off all the houses to Annington Homes, and it was a swift fix for a huge cash injection, and you don’t need a degree in economics to know that doesn’t make any sense financially in the long term, with £25 million of taxpayers money, someone clearly got a nice backhander when signing the contract.

This government runs on a level of ineptitude far greater than we can really comprehend because it’s taxpayers money that the MoD is spending on abandoned homes, and the private company must be laughing all the way to the bank, and this is going on while we have record levels of homelessness, way to go Tory voters and the government.

JS70997310.jpg

But this is what the world is coming to, we have ex-military who are homeless due to PTSD and other mental health infirmities, not to mention those physically scarred by war, and yet we have all these houses that could be refurbished, giving a person an occupation, teaching them new skills to make a home for themselves.

Some of these homes could even be divided into flats, doubling the size, and I’m sure most people would rather their tax money went on housing them than simply wasting it, and the MoD should be pulling their finger out.

Sleeping Rough For Christmas

thousands-face-christmas-without-a-roof-over-their-head-charity-136431779382902601-181214012047.jpg

Loads of former British Soldiers are sleeping rough, there’s no relief for them and nowhere for them to go, and nothing that they can do about it.

Steven Rowe is an ex British soldier and he’ll be sleeping rough this Christmas. It appears these men can take a bullet for the Queen, they can die for their country, and now there are so many ex-forces guys on the streets that are going through the same thing.

What the government have done, they’ve forgotten about these people, their own. Steven served in the army in Hong Kong and Northern Ireland, and more must be done to support these ex-servicemen living out on the streets.

The government are more concerned about this Europe business and this Brexit business than they are their own people, and there they are sleeping in tents and boxes, and then there’s Steven who’s sleeping in a box. He’s begged for help, but nobody appears to be giving him any help, they would rather he slept out on the streets than give him any help whatsoever.

They trained all these servicemen well, they can withstand most things, but what they can’t endure is the uncertainty, and they can’t survive rejection, and they can’t endure the isolation.

You have to meet the criteria to get a bed but what are the criteria? The government didn’t say that to these men when they swore an Oath of Allegiance, that they’ll fight for their Queen and country, that they’ll die for their country, the government didn’t say that, and now they’ll not support them, instead they’d rather let them sleep rough on the street in tents and cardboard boxes.

They only want a bed and somewhere warm to be, particularly over Christmas, but a homeless veteran’s death on the street has sparked outrage about the handling of former soldier’s battling homelessness in the brutally cold winter months.

Ex-squaddie Darren Greenfield, who fell on hard times after leaving the Army, died on the streets of Edinburgh only days before Christmas last year. Darren Greenfield was a recognisable face to countless locals and tourists in the Scottish capital, as he usually spent his time around Edinburgh Waverley station.

His death was a totally sad loss after Darren Greenfield was admitted to hospital and then passed away soon after, but numerous ex-servicemen struggle to adjust to nonmilitary life after they come out of the army, and there should be so much more out there to support them.

It’s a sign of the times when an ex-serviceman is left to die on our streets, especially when they have defeated death on the battlefield and served their Queen and country, and there will be numerous people who will be so outraged that our heroes are now sleeping rough, but countless more will be enraged that these courageous soldiers are being left to die on our streets, it’s an absolute abuse of human life.

But the homeless dilemma will only get worse as the forces are downsized and more people return from the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, and this is a long-term problem with no simple solution.

Almost all the homeless ex-soldiers have PTSD or some sort of mental health problem, and once they leave the Army, they lose their support structure, and the problem of homeless ex-soldiers has never been higher with 13,000 a minimum, it could be higher than that.

The Government have let these people down.

These men and women were prepared to fight and lay down their lives for this country and the only help open to them is from charities, and our government needs to do more for them.

Ex-servicemen and women should have priority status in applying for government-sponsored affordable housing schemes, and service leavers should retain this status for a period of discharge, and these are utterly heartbreaking accounts, and once again, it highlights the insufficiencies of how our government handle ex-service personnel when they leave the armed forces.

We should be at a point in time where every person in the country has a roof over their head, especially the brave people who fight for their country and being a soldier might be a career choice but these men and women in the armed forces and the emergency services put their mortal bodies on the front line, and they’re frequently moved around from city to city, country to country, so putting down roots like the rest of us, that can be done with a normal job is impossible.

Plus, you have to reflect that most of these men and women in the armed forces have PTSD and many of these people have to live with terrifying experiences that were endured by our command, and our government owe them for that alone.

The pact between society and our armed forces should be respectively advantageous, they’re supposed to have our backs and we should have theirs, but there’s a lot of people out there that think that it’s a career choice and consequently they shouldn’t be entitled to anything more when they come out as a civilian.

So, for those who think that being in the army is a career choice, yes, you’re right, it’s a career choice to be serving their Queen and country, to be putting their life on the line, but then I speculate that what these superficial people in society believe is what they learned in the media, and I suspect that what they do for a living is an honourless, unchallenging, zombie type occupation that provides nothing of consequence, but hey, it was your career choice!

If our army was fighting against Adolph Hitler then I bet these people would sympathise, and yes, I’m not sure why our army is out there in Afghanistan and Iraq, we’re just propping up nefarious dictators and a hype of propaganda, but nonetheless our soldiers are out there fighting and putting their life on the line, maybe not for Britain, but they’re defending someone’s life and in my book that’s praiseworthy and very brave.

Somebody once said that these army chaps aren’t all heroes, but they fought and put their life on the line, so they’re all heroes…

MPs At War

0_SM-cartoon-cabinet-1612.jpg

gettyimages-970609754.jpg

Theresa May survived a confidence vote from her MPs but now her Cabinet ministers are filing up to stab her in the back, and they know that she will quit before 2022 and six of them are secretly gathering attack teams to bid for the leadership, and should Theresa May flounder before then, some are so enthusiastic they will be keen to make a move even before her body is cold.

Outside the Cabinet, Theresa May has to fend off attacks from ex-Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg and two former Brexit Ministers David Davis and Dominic Raab, and inside the Cabinet, the people who have a responsibility to defend her are grinding their knives.

sajid-javid-700x45_660.jpg

Sajid Javid was already canvassing support for a leadership bid before the confidence vote, and he provokes Theresa May by continually attempting to interrupt her in Cabinet meetings.

But when it comes down to it they’re all an atrocious pack of back-stabbing despicable prey, gathering like a bunch of vultures, waiting for Theresa May to falter, and ultimately, she will, there’s no uncertainty about that, and Theresa May will boot the bucket down the road until the bucket finally goes over the cliff followed by the United Kingdom in a Lemming-like death dive.

And shortly they’ll all be ordering a set of kitchen knives for each other, talk about backstabbing each other, and right now what Parliament requires is a present-day Guy Fawkes because the establishment has become corrupt to the core and most of the house comprises members whose principal purposes are to feather their own nests.

This country needs help as Theresa May’s grasp on power appears to look somewhat uncertain, and for all her tenacity, she’s not a miracle worker, and the impossible demands of Brexiters will eventually seal her fate, and her appearance was as difficult to interpret as ever.

Theresa May portrayed so little of her emotions as she emerged from Downing Street, you simply wouldn’t have known if she was resigning or declaring unity in our time, but perhaps she didn’t really know herself.

Yet even in what may be her closing days in office, Theresa May still has her uniquely stultifying ability to drain a moment of its drama with Ministers sometimes protesting that she chairs cabinet meetings, rather than leading them and that her own viewpoints remain curiously obscure.

But there was a feeling of precisely that indifference when she came to parliament, with ministers plummeting like houseflies, she didn’t even attempt to pretend this was the deal anybody had wanted, rather, she wanted the nation to know that she had done her best in these difficult times, even if some believed it wasn’t good enough.

The overall aim was of a post woman trudging through a snowstorm, simply attempting to achieve what the people had ordered, as if her own feelings hardly mattered, and maybe, in a way, they don’t, and years ago, when Theresa May first started being seriously considered as a prospective leader, Europe was the one subject on which even her closest political collaborators couldn’t be sure where she stood.

The best they could offer was that she didn’t appear extremely inspired, and perhaps deep down she never thought Brexit could ever work, and perhaps if she’d believed harder in the fairies everything would have worked out, but whatever she feels deep down, it’s not the May way to simulate any sentiment, any more than it is to motivate.

Theresa May prevails by grinding people down, wearing them out, pointing out the lack of a better option, and it’s how she became leader in the first place, it’s how she has survived despite her party’s apprehensions, and seemingly how she will now attempt to stave off the attempted leadership challenge now underway.

This time she can barely get away with acting as nothing has altered, but the word is that nothing will be changing, a deal is a deal, and her best bet is to convince her party that anything is better than the prospect of inadvertently placing Jacob Rees-Mogg in Downing Street, before somehow attempting to sell her unloved deal to the country on the grounds that at least this way everyone will know where they are and Brexit will be over.

As she insisted the British people simply want her to get on with it and that most people don’t care how this thing ends, as long as it does end. Yet that end now looks a very long way off really, and there’s something almost immorally hypocritical about continuing to pretend at this time of elevated national jeopardy.

And if negotiations have really reached a standstill, then stopping the clock on article 50 and throwing the ball back to the people in a second referendum arguably seems the best way forth, but let’s not assume that the outcome of a second referendum would undoubtedly be any more welcome than the last one.

And that the defeated side would be any more reconciled to defeat, or that we wouldn’t waste the next 10 years bickering about who lied and plagiarised, and before we get to any of that, the last act of the Tory psychodrama must first play itself out.

146900634658497-9-1-1200x450.jpg

Theresa May is not only running out of road on Brexit, relationships with the DUP, which won’t back her deal, have plunged into the deep freeze amid mutterings of private promises betrayed, and she can’t rely on their votes now to push through whatever tattered remnants of her domestic policy are left.

And desperation to keep the Brexit show on the road is now bending the seat of government out of shape, with reports of policy and spending decisions being twisted to keep nervous ministers on board, but if her premiership has been severely lacking in creativity at times, by taking the referendum result so literally Theresa May at least has to present a moment of dreadful clarity about the consequences.

Tory Brexiters demanded the impossible, well, now they have it, a deal that’s impracticable to get through parliament, difficult to sell to leave voters so cynically led to expect something better, and if nothing else, history will surely remember Theresa May more kindly than either the architects of leave or her forerunner, David Cameron, whose catastrophic lapse of judgement landed us in this mess.

They broke it, but she owned it, which explains the odd note of pity that sneaks in when her name crops up in conversation beyond Westminster, so it may now be for someone else to glue the pieces back together.

Zero-Hour Contract

maxresdefault.jpg

Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd came under fire after encouraging struggling families to take unstable work after she suggested that people should take a zero-hour contract to circumvent getting a benefit sanction.

PA-28741815.jpg

Even though she acknowledged she had concerns about some aspects of the benefits system, and she said she’s ready to slow down the rollout of Universal Credit again to make sure it’s effective, she stood by the policy as an MP warned people would be sanctioned under Universal Credit if they don’t take a zero-hour job.

And when the MP was seriously saying people should take zero-contracts she said yes because if people are offered work, they should take it, and then when asked again if people should take work even if it’s unstable she said yes.

The MP told the Commons Work and Pensions Committee that the purpose of taking employment is not only about having money coming in, it was also about having confidence of being able to improve people’s own status and being able to have the security of having work coming in, and being able to make sure that you can then get to a higher level, although I’m not sure how people will do that on a zero contract because it has no security, which doesn’t give people confidence at all.

And if the job doesn’t actually give you any hours, the complexity of the system makes it especially difficult to convey what you do, and it’s repulsive that Amber Rudd believes it’s acceptable to sanction people if they refuse to take a zero hour contract job.

Sanctions are driving poverty, driving people to food banks and they fall massively on the most defenceless people, and the government should be ending these disciplinary sanction regimes, outlawing zero hour contracts and reconstruct our social security system so that it helps people instead of punishing them.

Job security and zero hour contracts should not be used in the same sentence because it doesn’t benefit the worker, only the employer, and Universal Credit is one sick joke as people are going without money for months on end, when they have worked all their lives and yet get beaten by the government while they’re down.

It’s about time Tory government went onto zero hour contracts, let’s face it, some of them don’t even turn up and when they do, all they do is fall asleep and still get compensated for it, yet they have the temerity to tell us that we should take zero contract jobs.

If a commoner never turned up for work or fell asleep on the job they’d probably get the sack and certainly wouldn’t get paid, yet some of these freeloaders still get compensated for sitting on their arse and falling asleep, yet again, one rule for them and another rule for the working class.

Amber Rudd’s own work history should be scrutinised, particularly with regards to her tax evasion scams and shell companies that swiftly go bankrupt, and her arrogance is as unbelievable as her ineptitude, and despite how many times she makes a mess of things in government she perpetually seems to get another chance, whereas in the real world no one would actually employ her.

Zero hour contracts are for the interest of the employer and nobody really advances on to permanent work no matter how hard they work, and the government should drape their heads in shame, but then, of course, they won’t because they’ll be too busy checking their profit margins and offshore accounts.

Potentially Deadly Norovirus

Norovirus.png

Vegetables sold in British supermarkets are riddled with the deadly norovirus. The UK’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) researchers found that one lettuce in every 20 contained the vomiting virus.

Morrisons-slashes-prices-as-supermarket-price-war-looms.jpg

The virus which is spread by human waste was further discovered in one in every 27 packs of frozen raspberries, but experts cautioned that many more fresh foods may be harbouring the norovirus, which has become Britain’s most common food poisoning virus.

About 3 million people are infected by the virus every year, many of whom are children, and it can be fatal in extremely young and old people, as well as those with impaired immune systems. Each year it claims up to 300 victims.

lettuce-romaine-jericho_LRG.jpg

No one should expect to find a norovirus in their lettuce or raspberry’s which suggests grave carelessness on the part of the suppliers, and when the virus is discovered it’s obvious that administration on food hygiene is not being adhered to and that in consequence, the pathogen is entering the food supply chain, and out of the 568 lettuces, mostly grown in Britain, the norovirus is detected in 30 of them.

BerryWorld-Raspberries-square.jpg

Seven out of 310 batches of fresh raspberries and 10 out of 274 samples of frozen raspberries also tested positive for the virus, and the results of the YouGov Omnibus study will make you want to avoid shaking hands for the rest of your life.

The numbers revealed that significant minorities of people do not always wash their hands after going to the bathroom, with men, in particular, being the biggest offenders.

Not only that, confusing instructions on supermarket frozen vegetable packages could be putting customers in danger of life-threatening bugs, and British supermarkets had to recall 43 sweetcorn-based frozen vegetable products over concerns they could contain the listeria bacteria following an explosion of infections across Europe killed nine people.

listeria-bacteria.jpg

The bugs can cause listeriosis, an illness with flu-like manifestations which can be deadly in the elderly, young children or pregnant women, and health and safety experts have warned that vegetables like green beans, broccoli and sweetcorn should be cooked or microwaved from frozen to destroy the potentially-deadly bacteria.

It should not be defrosted and consumed cold, but despite the problems, not all British supermarkets put clear warnings on their frozen vegetables, and it was analysed that 71 packs of frozen vegetables which could not be eaten raw, including green beans, broccoli florets, baby carrots, petit pois and sweetcorn, from Asda, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Morrison’s, Iceland, Aldi and Lidl, only those sold by Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Aldi carried a specific “do not eat raw” warning.

About half of the packets had directions telling customers they “should” or “must” cook the product from frozen, but the others only contained cooking instructions which suggested it was best to cook the vegetables, but it’s only ever safe to defrost frozen vegetables and consume them raw if the package explicitly says they were ready to eat from defrost without cooking.

The key is how the vegetables are prepared after picking. Some vegetables are blanched before being frozen, to prevent enzyme and bacterial growth, but most are frozen raw.

Vegetables are in danger of being contaminated by airborne particles, waterborne particles and soil based particles because there is an abundance of viruses and bacteria all around us, but we don’t see these, but they are there.

Cooking ensures vegetables are safe to consume, and each package should say what needs to be done to ensure that safety and people should always follow the cooking instructions, and bacteria is a more common problem in frozen vegetables than fresh because it’s more likely to have been imported and handled by a number of suppliers before reaching customers in the United Kingdom.

However, following the listeria outbreak and in order to be as helpful as possible to customers, the words “do not eat raw” was added to bags of vegetables, and it’s essential that food manufacturers give the required information in order that the food can be used and consumed safely, such as giving directions that food should be cooked for a specific period of time.

And if important safety information is not given with some foods then this should lead to its removal or recall from the market and possible enforcement action taken upon the food companies.

Former Soldier On Universal Credit

NINTCHDBPICT000456139273.jpg

An army veteran has blasted the Government’s questionable Universal Credit rules after alleging he was made to live on only £8 a week. Former combat medic Daniel Johnson has been struggling to make ends meet since July after the six-in-one benefit left him with only £32 a month spare.

The 45-year-old, who served with the Royal Army Medical Corps, picks up weekly payments of £155 but says £147 of it is used to cover bills and accommodation.

Daniel, of Leominster, Herefordshire, was forced to start claiming the handout after being injured at work on October 31 last year and lost his home as a consequence.

The Department of Work and Pensions had since declared he is fit to work despite him suffering from severe neck pain and being diagnosed with PTSD.

This week he wore his army clothes to stage a one-man demonstration outside Leominster Job Centre to assert his displeasure at Universal Credit rules and the way military employees are handled after leaving the forces, and it’s shocking that this father of three presently has to survive on £8 a week.

He’s been living like this since June this year and it makes him feel useless, and nobody who has served their queen and country should be treated like this, and Universal Credit is superseding a consultant, a GP and mental health specialists who are saying he is unable to work, and he has an A4 binder full of doctor’s notes stating that he’s not fit to work.

He’s still on extremely large doses of morphine, and no one taking that much morphine would be fit for work let alone his issues with PTSD that he’s been diagnosed with, but how is he supposed to live on £8 a week particularly at this time of year? Especially when he’s reached out for help from the country that he’s served, then to be told, sorry, tough luck!

Grandad of one Daniel had taken on additional work as a lorry driver after the cold weather last year affected his garden maintenance business, but an unstable load from one of the lorries fell on top of him, leaving him with three fractured vertebrae in his neck.

Daniel was further diagnosed with PTSD in 2006 after serving with the army for seven years and remains under the supervision of mental health specialists, and was certified unable to work by the doctors because of the amount of morphine he was on.

During his health assessment that he had in June this year, they asked him questions like, could he stand unaided? Could he sit unaided? And could he make a cup of tea unaided? But he can’t actually do any of these things without being in a lot of pain, but with his military training, he simply attempts to get on with it, and from the examination, he was only entitled to the most basic amount of payment.

The money he gets goes on bills such as gas, electric, water, service charges, TV licence and that would all be before the basics such as food, toiletries and clothing, and then he wastes an hour on the telephone simply attempting to get through to someone at the Department for Work and Pensions, which is why he went down to the job centre to protest.

178552888.jpg.gallery.jpg

Ex-mayor of Hereford and ex-paratrooper, Jim Kenyon, 49, has now taken up Daniel’s case in an effort to support his fellow serviceman.

The problem is that decisions are made in government offices, and it’s people at the front line who take the brunt of it, and Universal Credit has pushed Daniel over the edge.

Jim Kenyon is an army vet himself, so he knows what it’s like for these chaps, and Jim sees Daniel pretty much every day to see how he’s getting on and he hopes that he’s not on Universal Credit for much longer.

In Daniel’s case, Universal Credit is not a handout, this man has paid his National Insurance while serving in the army and qualifies for help now, and if this is how Universal Credit treat an ex-serviceman of 7 years, then Joe Public doesn’t stand a chance for any quality of life, and this is totally unacceptable for all in need.

This is an utter disgrace when every week we see programmes about immigration and people coming to England and being housed, being given homes because they have so many kids, they are being given lavish benefits, yet asking for and getting more. Yet these people have paid no National Insurance contributions and have never worked in this country, and our government is keen to look after these people rather than looking after their own people first.

178552888.jpg.gallery

Lots of people fail the assessment because Atos and the like get rewarded to do so, making a business out of people’s despair and suicidal tendencies are shocking and cruel. Appealing takes months of continuous energy which the sick and disabled do not have in them, and the policy fails the very people it was set up to help, so what’s next, will he be asked if he’s able to breath unaided?

Most of these men were sent to war on a lie, treated like crap and then once they’re out they’re still treated appallingly, it’s shocking, and this is how the Tory government treats those who serve their country, the Tories don’t have a measure of shame between the lot of them.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started