Should I vote Conservative

This is from the House of Commons library.

"People meeting certain criteria would be able to defer payments on their care. This is “essentially a loan given by the local authority secured on the value of the person’s property”, according to the House of Commons Library.
Councils can charge a fee for this, as well as interest on the loan during a person's lifetime.The council’s loan can be repaid in three ways: the full amount of this loan is paid back by the person or on their behalf, from the sale of the property, or from the value of the person’s estate after their death."

A death tax, in fact, just like they said Ed Miliband's was.

fullfact.org/event/2017/May/18

Lovely to read the thoughtful posts from both Eloethan and Iam and very sad to read the link Jen gave us about the plummet that children's human rights have taken in our oh so rich country.

The words may sound like the left to journalists, but May is right, this is not in spite of them being Conservative but because of it. This small bribe is so like the sale of Council houses by Thatcher and where are we now with housing? Who is it who suffers from high rents, and a lack of social housing; it is the generation of the children of Thatchers people. I can see just the same happening with this.

We may survive this and have some sort of Care if we need it and even hand something on to our children but where will the Care system be when they need it - it will be destroyed because, just as Thatcher didn't want the state to be involved in housing May does not want the state to be involved in Social Care and she will end up having abolished it for our children and grandchildren.

Trump may be doing bad things in trying to destroy Obama Care but they managed to hold him back so those poor people will not be left without any care. There do not seem to be enough to hold back May; people will vote for her because she has made it look like she is doing us a favour.

For all those people who asked how Labour and Libdem were going to fund their promises;

"In fact there was a shocking absence of any real costings in the manifesto. Aides simply said crunchy detail would be answered in the usual way in ‘Budgets’ and autumn statements. The blithe, bordering on arrogant, assumption was that the party would back in power soon enough and we could get all our answers then."

Paul Waugh, from Huffpost, who was allowed to ask a question today.

May has junked Cameron's promise to eliminate child poverty, so it's going to get even worse for children.

From Huffpost.

The ‘President May’ strategy was fully on show as the PM took the stage. The Cabinet were in front of her, not alongside her, reduced to spectators as much as the rest of us. Tory handlers were so reluctant to allow any contact between the media and the Cabinet that there was even a ‘buffer zone’ of several rows of Tory activists placed between us. After the event was over, ministers were whisked away before any microphones could be shoved in their faces.

May’s speech was crammed full of ‘May too-ism’, repeating “the Government I lead” again and again, as well as other me-myself-I lines like “every vote for me and my team”, “join me on this journey”, “come with me as I lead Britain” “stand with me as I deliver for Britain”.

In the questions afterwards, she was asked several times if this manifesto – with its stress on state intervention and limits to markets – was a rejection of Thatcherism. Her line “There is no ‘Mayism’, there is good solid Conservatism” gave a nice soundbite for the TV news, but no one believed her. The very word ‘Conservative’ has been reduced to the small print (literally on leaflets and her battlebus), while her own political vision has been put in banner headlines.

And the manifesto itself makes plain she is trying to place her tanks firmly on the centre ground, or her version of it. One of the most fascinating sections of the 84-page document is this sentence: “Rather than pursue an agenda based on the supposed centre ground defined and established by elites in Westminster, we will govern in the interests of the mainstream of the British public”.

I haven't read the manifesto and have only heard snippets of news (busy day) My understanding and I may be wrong, is that the plan to have people pay care costs based on their savings and the value of their house, until £100,000 is left applies even if the person needing care has a partner/husband/wife living in the home to which the £100,000 will apply.

I can't see this as a trebling of the "allowance" somehow.

On the issue of family caring for elderly relatives, over many years in family work, my experience was that most people do their very best to care for their elderly relatives. We are living longer, with more complex health conditions with the result some of us will need either residential or nursing care at some stage of our lives.

Eloethan's comments are spot on.

Additionally, like durhamjen, I was distressed by the speed and level at which Britain has fallen from 11 to 156 when considering children's human rights. Ive commented previously about our family experience in social work, teaching, housing and nursing about the impact of this governments policies on our most vulnerable children.
It's no secret I'm not Jeremy's biggest fan but its no contest - do not vote Conservative. I heard Jeremy Corbyn in the Jeremy Vine show today and thought he was persuasive, likable in the way he was during the various Hustings, less defensive and certainly less irritable than he sometimes seems. I do hope that the Conservative manifesto is given similarly careful analysis as the Labour/LibDem manifesto's have been.

Unbelievable.

Corbyn isn't going to stand down, he has much more important things - for him- to do. He has to form a new party under the guise of the Labour Party, starting a new party formed by communism wouldn't work so he will work stealthy, a case of - come into my palour said the spider to the fly.

(unless it's in 10 years time or so when Corbyn's feeling his age a bit...)

Doubt that very much!

There's a tweet on DJ's link to Nick Robinson's twitter a/c saying there's a rumour JC will step aside for Starmer. Anyone seen more on that?

" more than two-thirds of paediatricians surveyed said poverty and low income contribute ‘very much’ to the ill health of children they work with
housing problems or homelessness were a concern for two-thirds of respondents.
more than 60% said food insecurity contributed to the ill health amongst children they treat 3
40% had difficulty discharging a child in the last 6 months because of concerns about housing or food insecurity
more than 50% of respondents said that financial stress and worry contribute ‘very much’ to the ill health of children they work with "

A report about children's human rights. The UK has fallen to number 156 from number 11 in the space of a year.

Rest of the report here.

kittysjones.wordpress.com/2017/05/18/the-government-has-failed-to-protect-the-human-rights-of-children/

Daren't say what I think, apart from don't vote Tory.

It's a fact that a significant number of means-tested benefits are not claimed because, for a number of reasons - amongst them, literacy problems, a lack of education/understanding, embarrassment, learning disabilities, early stage dementia, etc. - not everybody knows what benefits they may be entitled to or how to claim them. So it is the most vulnerable people that are likely to go without.

To call anyone who is not in receipt of Pension Credit "richest" or "wealthy" is, as others have already stated, completely misleading.

As for the care costs proposals, I need to check exactly what the wording is and what is intended.

Not everyone can look after very elderly parents, especially if they have complex health and personal care needs or if they have very challenging behaviour. Many people are not in the position, with rents and mortgages of their own and children to support, to give up their work in order to look after their parents or relatives. It seems to me that so much is demanded of families these days and whatever decision they make regarding the care of their children and their ageing relatives will be deemed by somebody to be deserving of criticism.

This is surprising from Nick Robinson.

twitter.com/bbcnickrobinson

He's seen the light at last.

Not a single number in her statement, Rigby.

I'm somewhat surprised (not) that they haven't yet said who will lose WFA. Such well thought through costed promises...

Jen, if they take it away from anyone who is not on Pension Credit, they will be taking it away from people who live on £8,286.20 a year and, as quite large numbers do not claim Pension Credit it will be taken from some who live on even less.

Why is it acceptable to take away £200 from a pensioner who has £12000 a year pension, and give an extra £1000 to someone earning between £45000 and £50000?

Why is it acceptable to take away £200 a year from a pensioner who has £12,000 a year pension, but not ask someome earning over £80,000 a year to pay an extra 5p in the pound for every extra pound earned?

And that Maybot asked her first for her question.
Did you notice that it wasn't the Tory manifesto? She started by saying "I would like to present my manifesto", then said there is no Mayism when asked.

Deficit reduction now pushed to 2025. For the next government!!

Another broken promise.

Anybody see Kuenssberg? It was a disgraceful bit of reporting. Someone said that she is the Minister for Tory propaganda. She'll have to go!!

Nothing about how to prevent 40k of unnecessary deaths a year. Air pollution - what air pollution?

Another thing Daphne, don't forget interest on loans! My DD had a student loan and I was horrified when I saw how much she owes now.

You obviously need to vote Labour if you are bothered about your children or grandchildren having to repay fees for the courses that we got grants for.
I feel really sorry for your son, daphne.