Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
howard mcsweeney1 wrote:I wonder what excuse Charlie will come up with for voting away free school meals for the poorest except those in Northern Ireland. He had a free vote as an Independent.
Usual half truths Howard? Here's the facts.
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-labour-arent-telling-the-full-story-about-free-school-mealsButton and Reginald Barrington like this
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,681
Usual politics methinks Cap'n - just as you and yours do, cherry picking the stats etc that bolster your case
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
From the Parliamentary debate on the subject
Nadhim Zahawi The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education
I have a lot to say. Forgive me—I will try to address some of the issues that hon. Members have brought up in the debate. I will make some headway and see where we are on time.
Based on those principles, the proposal we have consulted on is to introduce an earnings threshold for free school meals and the early years pupil premium of £7,400. That is equivalent, depending on a family’s exact circumstances, to an income of £18,000-£24,000, once benefits are taken into account. We will publish our response to the consultation shortly. I will briefly set out our thinking on the proposals in more detail.
Let me just set out the thinking, and then I will address some of the issues that colleagues raised.
First, to ensure our proposals do not result in any child losing out on a hot meal from one day to the next as a result of these changes, we propose to offer generous protections. We propose to protect the status of every child currently eligible for free school meals at the point at which the threshold is introduced, and every child who gains eligibility under the new arrangements during the roll-out of universal credit until the end of the roll-out. Following that period, we will protect all pupils who were protected and are still of school age until the end of their phase of education—for example, primary or secondary school.
Those protections will apply to those on universal credit and the legacy benefits that qualify a family for free school meals. We are not proposing to make any changes for those eligible for free school meals because they are in receipt of asylum support or pensions credits. Those households will therefore remain entitled to free school meals for a long as they retain those benefits.
Once roll-out of universal credit is complete, we will move to an earnings-based system, similar to the one introduced in Scotland. Any household earning below that earnings threshold and claiming universal credit will be entitled to claim free school meals for their children. We estimate that, as a result of the threshold, by 2022 about 50,000 more—not fewer—children will benefit from a free school meal, compared with the previous benefits system. That means we will be targeting our support more effectively towards low-income families and the most disadvantaged children.
It is only right that we set a threshold and do not allow every family on universal credit to be eligible. Let me explain why. As my hon. Friend Michelle Donelan said, some families can earn more than £40,000 a year and still receive a small amount of universal credit. I think that is a good thing, because it ensures that they are incentivised to continue to work. Although it is right that those families receive some universal credit, free school meals should continue, in my and many people’s opinion, to be targeted at the most disadvantaged families and those on much lower incomes.
Let me share this with hon. Members. If we do not set new criteria, the effect would be that about half of all school-age children would be eligible for free school meals. As my hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar said, the additional cost would be £600 million for free school meals, or £6.2 billion if we include the pupil premium, which follows that. In contrast, about 14% of children are eligible for free school meals today. That would not be a good deal for the taxpayer, in my opinion, and nor would it be targeting public funding at those in the most need. We have to remember that we want to target money at the frontline of teaching in our schools.
The one issue I want to address, because it was picked up by many colleagues, is the cliff edge. First, universal credit removes the major cliff edges in the legacy system, such as 16 hours, so we are moving to a system that is better overall in that respect.
Secondly, the protections we outlined during the roll-out period will ensure that no child loses out on eligibility until after the end of universal credit roll-out. If their parents move over the income threshold, they will continue to be eligible. In the longer term, however, we need to set a threshold to ensure our support is targeted at those who need it most.
Let me pick up the point about the Labour manifesto, which Mike Kane mentioned. The Labour manifesto contained a commitment to free school meals for primary school pupils and said that it will be paid for by a VAT rise on private schools. That is illegal until we leave the European Union. Universal free school meals, which the hon. Gentleman is suggesting now, requires a much bigger number—up to £6.2 billion—so I would like to hear from Labour where that massive increase will come from. It must come from massive tax rises. I think I shall end there, Mr Hollobone.
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,573
I think most people recognise Charlie in his own way works, may not be my cup of tea, but the bigger question is when is your party Bob going to let him off the hook.
More and more people are saying he was joining a group to challenge some tory policies and top boys/girls decided to pull him back into line.
The danger is if top boys/girls leave it to close to general election they could hand the seat to labour which is what they are hoping.
So trumped up charges or not they need to get to the end
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,982
My understanding children up to Seven years of age get free meals .
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,982
Brian you don't have to be a Tory to be heartless.Im Tory but I always help the under dog if their needs are sincere.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,982
By the way my pension when I reach the big 80 In June will go up twenty five pence a week .
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 2,900
I can't see that the Conservatives can restore the whip to Mr Elphicke until the police investigation is concluded; once you have crossed the line of 'we've referred Mr Elphicke to the police and so therefore have withdrawn the party whip from him', there is no way back in the interim.
There is a lesson here surely for any organisation; unless there is a clear danger of the alleged transgression continuing, then the person should remain in post and society's investigation (via the police/regulator) takes precedence over the organisation's one. After all, most (though not all) of our rules are based on innocent until proven guilty.
(Not my real name.)
Reginald Barrington- Location: Dover
- Registered: 17 Dec 2014
- Posts: 3,206
Sue Nicholas wrote:By the way my pension when I reach the big 80 In June will go up twenty five pence a week .
You could buy a lemon for your G&T?
I also hear Charlie drank a G&T once (Not deviating from thread Ed)
Arte et Marte
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,657
Charlie's latest email, I think he has at last realised Buckland Hospital is not delivering the service we all hoped for and were fooled into expecting.
"The building of the new Buckland Hospital was all about bringing more services to Dover. The new £24 million state-of-the-art facility would stop people having to make long journeys out of town to Ashford, Canterbury or Margate.
Therefore, I am extremely disappointed and frustrated about the recent removal of a vital eye treatment service. It’s simply not on – and I’m doing everything I can to bring it back to Buckland.
Age-related macular degeneration (AMD), where older people start to lose their eyesight, was treated at Buckland by injecting medication into the eye through a very fine needle. No-one likes to think of their mum or dad or grandparents having to go through a procedure like this. Particularly when it has to be repeated on a monthly basis.
Yet, until recently, at least Dovorians were able to be treated down the road at Buckland. Now the service has been withdrawn, these older patients with waning eyesight are forced to make long and difficult journeys to Ashford or Canterbury. These patients, often in their 80s or 90s, are desperate to get home to rest after having the injections. Yet for those relying on public transport, it takes hours to get back to Dover. And some older people have to take these journeys alone.
The NHS is there for us all – but particularly for the most vulnerable in society. That’s why the decision to remove this eye treatment from Buckland is an extremely bad one. Particularly as a new cataract theatre is now operating. Plus, there were 3,000 ophthalmology clinics at Buckland last year, so there is clearly high demand. I’m pressing the local Clinical Commissioning Group and our hospital trust to urgently bring the AMD treatment back to Dover.
I will also be asking them why Buckland is not yet offering the anti-coagulant, phlebotomy and specialist elderly care services we were promised. When the hospital opened in 2015, health chiefs said we’d have 60,000 appointments a year. Yet two years on, 29% of the hospital remains unused. There is so much potential for Buckland and I’m determined to see it fully realised.
Of course, we must not forget how far we have come thanks to years of campaigning and hard work. In Deal, our much-loved hospital was left on the brink. Now we are getting more services – and staff numbers are up 17% on last year. At Buckland, twice as many clinics are now operating than when it first opened. What’s more, a new £2.4 million project to provide extra GP services starts next month, working out of ten rooms across Buckland and Deal Hospital. They will be open 8am to 8pm, seven days a week – meaning more people can be treated locally.
We are finally getting a fairer share of healthcare. Yet health chiefs need to see sense, deliver the services we were promised – and bring the eye treatment back to Buckland."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
We were never going to get a full on hospital doing surgery and the like but the services they do have are first class. Charlie is right in that so much of the building is not being used and I would add that I expected more consultations being done there.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,573
Surely if it's with the Police shouldn't this be sorted by now?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
Keith Sansum1 wrote:Surely if it's with the Police shouldn't this be sorted by now?
Perhaps they are far too busy investigating 'hate' crimes and people who have said beastly things to each other on Facebook? (Meanwhile in Telford ........................)
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Saw Charlie and family in Pencester Road earlier probably just left St Paul's Church.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,573
didn't you ask ?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Latest from our Independent MP.
Government funding to tackle homelessness in Dover and Deal is going up 15.1%. Dover District Council's central government grant for homelessness prevention will increase from £150,219 last year to £172,842 in 2018/19. The amount has gone up eight-fold since 2016. The announcement by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government comes after I visited supported accommodation at Fern Court in Dover, run by homelessness charity Porchlight. I met with head of Dover and Ashford services Laura Miles and spoke with residents about the issues they face. Following the meeting I contacted ministers about a range of issues.
We need to do more to tackle homelessness. People must get the right help so they can eventually support themselves. The residents I spoke to at Porchlight told me they were desperate to have a home of their own. Yet there are long waiting lists for hostels like this and not enough homes generally. That's why I am fully backing the district council leader's plans to build 51 properties for homeless people. It's great to see the Government investing in the services we need to help people here in Dover and Deal. Porchlight runs two hostels in Dover and Deal along with six shared flats and three shared houses. Drug and alcohol agencies also deliver support and train on-site staff. Tenants can stay for up to two years.
The extra government funding comes in the form of a flexible homelessness support grant. This replaces the existing temporary accommodation management fees which could only be used for expensive intervention when a household was already homeless. Dover District Council recently announced plans to build 51 modular properties to tackle homelessness. They will be used for families who would otherwise be placed for months in bed and breakfast accommodation, with each household costing local taxpayers around £10,000 per household a year.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
due to the lack of cheap rentable propertys in the dover/deal area.
howard mcsweeney1 likes this
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Callous Charlie gives not a fig for our much loved wildlife.
Britain needs a Brexit Infrastructure Bill to ensure the country has firm plans to upgrade transport connections to ports after leaving the European Union, the Dover MP Charlie Elphicke told a conference yesterday.
He said the UK needs to “get on and build without endless inquiries” because transport infrastructure to ports is needed “in the national interest”. The consequence of not having a plan could, he warned, be very serious.
The MP also called for the private sector to step in and build a Kent lorry park. “If the Department for Transport cannot build (a lorry park) they should allow the private sector to build it at a fraction of the cost to the taxpayer. We also need the Lower Thames Crossing, but we needed the crossing 10 years ago.”
He also remarked that it takes too long to build roads in this country, with too many people “worrying endlessly about bats and newts”.
Charlie Elphicke had earlier told the ‘Future of UK ports post Brexit’ event that ports, such as Dover, need to ensure borders are as frictionless as possible so as not to delay the movement of freight.
The conference also heard from the Chartered Institute for Logistics & Transport’s ports chair Sue Terpilowski. She called for greater investment in “last mile infrastructure” around UK ports and said transferring freight from road to rail must become a higher priority in a post Brexit world.
Legal firm Burges Salmon’s partner Elizabeth Dunn described ports as “the economic backbone of this country” and said ports need to do more to promote the case for investment in transport infrastructure such as lorry parks.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,657
Latest email............"Campaigning for stronger borders
On September 15th last year, Ahmed Hassan planted a bomb on a London Underground train. His homemade device exploded at Parsons Green station, injuring 30 people. The next day the 18-year-old was at the Port of Dover, waiting to board a ferry to France. Thanks to the excellent work of Kent Police, he was stopped before he could flee the country.
Last week he was jailed for life. Our brave officers played a key role in ensuring that Hassan has been brought to justice.
Yet serious questions must be asked about how he was able to get into the UK and allowed to stay on our shores. The court heard that Hassan followed the journey taken by so many migrants across Europe to the Calais Jungle. He admitted to being from a wealthy part of Iraq – but was advised by others at the camp to make up a story in order to gain entry to the UK. He told the court this sort of deception was widespread.
Hassan eventually broke into Britain in the back of a lorry. Then, astonishingly, he was granted asylum despite telling officials he had been trained by ISIS. Two years later he was planting his bomb on a tube train.
This underlines yet again the evils of the Calais Jungle. At its worst, 10,000 people were living in squalor. Ruthless traffickers lurked around every corner and caused chaos for tourists and truckers on a daily basis. This is why it was so vital we got the camp dismantled – and why it must never return.
It is also why I have long campaigned for stronger borders. We need to ensure we have investment – particularly at the Dover frontline – in technology, data sharing and skilled officers to stop dangerous individuals at the border.
Here in Dover and Deal, we know people will go to incredible lengths to get into our country. But probably the most abhorrent method of all is through immigration marriage fraud. I’ve been helping two local women whose husbands left them shortly after coming to the UK on spouse visas.
Kim Sow believes her husband was already married to two women – while Carol Sahni found out her husband returned to India to marry someone else within months of arriving. Across Britain thousands of people like Kim and Carol are being shamelessly exploited by people who want to sneak into our country. We need to throw the book at them and put a stop to it.
In all these cases there was a failure to do the proper checks before people were allowed into Britain. The truth is, for too long we were seen as a soft touch. We’ve been working hard to put that right. Dismantling the Calais Jungle has made a huge difference, with the number of attempts to break into Britain plummeting. Yet with reports of numbers in Calais rising in recent months, we must remain vigilant.
With Brexit just around the corner too, investing in our borders and taking back control has never been more vital."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,681
To be fair forcing the rest of the EU to abide by their obligations under Shengen would equally have prevented his entry to the UK.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi