Wednesday, 26 June 2013

An Angry Letter to Danny Alexander

Danny Alexander posted an article today in Lib Dem voice and this is the comment which i left:

Dear Mr Alexander,
Your article infuriates me a lot. Yes, Labour made a mess and while I don’t think Labour would do any better I don’t think this excuses your first sentence. Your number one priority should be to make this country a better place. Why does almost every policy the Government comes up with have to be about political point scoring against Labour? You mention Labour twice in the first paragraph. Being in Government involves a serious job of making things better. This political point scoring whereby every decision is made as a response to what Labour did or what Labour would do is really macho nonsense and I wish you and your colleagues would stop it. People want to know what the Lib Dems will do, not what others would do.

Balancing the books on the back of the most vulnerable is exactly what you have tried to do and the vulnerable are almost broken in the process. The books aren’t balanced yet either. Do you know that Food Banks are starting up every week and that the suicide rates among disabled is rising? Do you know that there are thousands of children living in B and B’s and often with drug dealers and criminals? Do you know that there are children who can’t afford to eat at home? Do you know that there are parents who go to loan sharks to borrow money for essentials?

You see, I have reason to complain and be angry. My mother works for the public sector. My father had a serious sudden illness recently and the NHS didn’t come up to scratch. Talk of keeping people out of hospital and helping them in their homes means that families bear the worry and burden of medical conditions which they aren’t qualified to do.

I worry about my future because I don’t think that you and Nick and the Tories are going to leave much for ordinary people like me. In your last paragraph you say that you don’t want to burden future generations. Given the large number of NEETS with no hope what do you have to say?

Maelo Manning
aged 13
SHARE:

Thursday, 20 June 2013

Nick Isn't The Villain BUT



Nick Clegg isn't the villain, Charles Saatchi is.  The whole fiasco stemming from Nick's appearance on LBC today somehow is casting Nick as the villain of domestic violence.  There is a tendency in this country to always deviate from the issue at hand and place blame on an intervening person. During the Saville scandal the victims and the BBC were criticized for  making false accusations. Suddenly, the scale of victim abuse by Saville became a side-show to what was going at the BBC. 

BUT, I do think Nick was foolish today by not condemning domestic violence straight off.  I have put my head in my hands today a few times over this whole fiasco. Nick  referred to 'one photograph' to seemingly prove a point that there wasn't enough evidence. Isn't one instance enough? This is where I think Nick really does need to get back to basics and show people that this party stands for equality and justice. Instead it seems as if the Lib Dem leadership does not seem to take female issues seriously. 

Why wasn't Lord Rennard investigated a long time ago? Mike Hancock? Caron Lindsay has said that Nick Clegg ought to have been briefed and to this I add why wasn't Clegg himself politically astute enough to anticipate a question on Nigella?  

What world do our politicians live in and that includes the female politicians today who have been making political hay. Yvette Cooper and Harriet Harman have jumped on the bandwagon.  The worst comment was by MP Sarah Wollaston she wrote, "So just don't call Clegg if your partner likes to grab you by the throat to emphasize a point." Nick Clegg isn't an enforcement agency for domestic violence, you should call the police not Nick Clegg. Why wasn't this much anger shown towards those who commit domestic violence? 

All said and done, as a young female Lib Dem I really hope that the party wakes up from its patriarchy now, not tomorrow or the day after. 
SHARE:

Sunday, 16 June 2013

Absent Fathers

Absent fathers are often attacked and stigmatized but fathers who are living in the house do not always participate in family life. Absent fathers are used by the right wing as evidence of so called delinquent behavior among the working class. From my observation absent fathers in the home is a middle class and rich class problem. Many children are growing up without the influence of a paternal role model who is interested and beneficial to their lives. I have some answers about the middle class absent father syndrome. Fathers  in this bracket do participate in family life because they are content with the way things are. They They do not bother to enhance their children's lives because they do not see the need for paternal influence. There is no concept of fathering like their is for mothering. Some middle class fathers are very content to leave parenting to their partner or wife because it is seen as a 'feminine' role. These Fathers have disposable income and instead of emotionally connecting with their child they compensate for the lack of parenting by indulging in gadgets, clothes and toys for their children. David Lammy had written something similar in the Guardian
SHARE:
Blogger Template Created by pipdig