Protecting Britain's Pensioners From Labour Cuts

Labour want to cut Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance for over 65s in Rochester and Strood, wrecking their chances of living independently.

Nationally 2.4 million elderly people need support to cope with a physical or mental disability.

These people rely on disability benefits - a third of them through the Disability Living Allowance for over 65s, and two thirds of them through the Attendance Allowance.

Labour want to cut these benefits, wrecking their chances of living independently and having the freedom to tailor their care to their needs.

Those over 65 who claim Disability Living Allowance currently get an average of £75 every week, and those who receive Attendance Allowance get an average of £60. This compares to an average pensioner's income of around £250 a week.

This means that some of the most vulnerable pensioners in Rochester and Strood and around the country could lose around a quarter of their income - amounting to a loss of around £8 billion a year.

Speaking out against the cuts Mark Reckless said:

"I can't see how it makes sense to cut these benefits which are focussed on helping people carry on living in their own homes, often with family members caring for them, as this has to be much less expensive than supporting people in residential care homes."

These cuts are unwise, unfair, and unkind. Our pensioners deserve better.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

Sign our petition against the care cuts
Email/Write to your MP to ask them to oppose these cuts
Add your name to this petiton to the Prime Minister

ADVERT

The Rochester Coffee Co. 45 varieties of tea, freshly ground coffee, freshly made Panini and so much more. 146 High Street, Rochester, Kent. ME1 1ER (Opposite Eastgate House)
Tel: 01634 540032

Protecting Britain's Pensioners From Labour Cuts

Southeastern Delays

This week I have been late to work three times and have had to either pay for a taxi or got soaked walking from Rochester to Chatham stations. From the looks of other passengers, many have suffered similar frustrations.

Commuters deserve a proper explanation and apology from Southeastern Trains, because the differing explanations we have had to date are wearing thin. Is it just that Southeastern can't cope with the rain?

It is particularly disappointing to have these problems now when Southeastern, almost uniquely in the country, and they still can't get their story straight as to why this is, are about to put up their season ticket prices.

At least there is one ray of light for my fellow commuters trying to get from Rochester to London Bridge or Cannon Street for 9 o'clock. After 13th December we will no longer need to catch the 8.06 to Chatham to get (or this week, mainly miss) the 8.10 back up to Cannon Street. That is because the service will make an 8.11 stop at Rochester.

This is the result of a long campaign which I have led and will save many commuters considerable time and hassle. Unfortunately, while almost all the evening peak trains will make the Rochester stop, not all the morning ones will, so I will keep up this campaign until Rochester commuters for the Cannon Street and Victoria trains leaving between 7a.m and 8a.m. can benefit too.

Southeastern Delays

David Cameron Reacts To The Queen's Speech

Cameron says the Prime Minister is more pre-occupied with self-survival than legislating on the measures the country needs.

Pointing out that it was the shortest Queen's Speech since 1997, Cameron said Labour have "run out of money, run out of time, run out of ideas".

Cameron said that the background to this Speech was a country facing "the most difficult circumstances for a generation", notably an economic crisis "with the longest recession since the war and the worst public finances in living memory".

But, instead of the real Queen's Speech the country needed he said what we got was "a Queen's Speech which is just a Labour press release on Palace parchment".

Cameron said that there should be an election "instead of wasting the country's time and inflicting further damage". "What is the point of this Government?", he asked.

Read the full speech here

Get Change For A Fiver - Make A Donation Here

David Cameron Reacts To The Queen's Speech

Why Can't We Take Independent Legal Advice?

Last night at Council - actually this morning as the meeting went on until nearly 1a.m.! - I requested that we take independent legal advice to clarify whether Medway Council has acted lawfullly in deciding to close St John's Infant school.

My concern is that officers replaced one of the school organisation principles, which our policy framework requires Cabinet to follow, with a different aim and falsely stated to Cabinet that it was one of the school organisation principles.

This is what I said to Council:

"Last Friday we learned from the Medway Messenger that St John's campaigners were considering a legal challenge to the closure of their school.

Given that, I think the wording of this motion is unfortunate, since it implies we accept that this is a matter for Cabinet. I don't agree, because it is us as a Council who set the policy framework, and that requires Cabinet to apply the school organisation principles.

However, it seems that our officers were not happy with one of those school organisation principles, since it only allowed the gradual amalgamation of infant and junior schools.

Instead, they developed a different policy, one which could be used to justify the closure of any infant school, and falsely told Cabinet that it was one of the school organisation principles. They used that policy to try and close St Peter's. They are using it now to try and close St John's. And I fear they may use it to try and close St Nick's.

Given the legal risks, I have to say I am surprised that our monitoring officer has taken such a relaxed attitude to this. It certainly contrasts with the position she took with respect to my ward colleague earlier in this process.

I don't believe that passing this motion will help St John's, and I do not support it. What might help St John's would be for this Council to take independent legal advice on whether it is lawful for officers to ignore a principle in the policy framework and advise Cabinet to follow a different policy instead.

If our monitoring officer will not take such advice, and this Council loses a judicial review in consequence, I would question whether she should advise us further."

Why Can't We Take Independent Legal Advice?

Tickets For Troops

Mark Reckless is proud to be supporting Tickets for Troops.

David Cameron has helped to launch Tickets for Troops, a new initiative which offers the Armed Forces free tickets to big events including football matches and top music acts.

Thousands of tickets will be made available to all serving military personnel and to veterans who have been discharged through injury since 2001 at the new www.ticketsfortroops.org.uk website.

David explained that Ticket for Troops is "all about people coming together to say to the armed forces: thank you, we respect you and we recognise the sacrifice you are making for us."

The Conservative leader first announced his ambition for this scheme in July 2009, and Tickets for Troops has since been set up as an independent not-for-profit company with huge support from the sports and entertainment worlds.

Tickets have been donated for top football and cricket matches, boxing contests, snooker, horse-racing events, theatre, and both classic and rock music concerts around the country.

Speaking at the launch, where he was joined by Lance Corporal Johnson Beharry VC, Gary Lineker and Joss Stone, David said:

"I'm proud of the part the Conservative Party has played in getting this off the ground and want to thank everyone for generously lending their time and support to this great cause."

Tickets For Troops

Campaign To Stop The Estuary Airport

Mark Reckless, along with Medway Council, Kent County Council, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) have started a campaign to get this £40billion scheme blown out of the water due to its expense and the massive impact it will have on our area and the environment.

Seven years ago, we successfully fought off a similar scheme at Cliffe, on the Hoo Peninsula, thanks to overwhelming support from the public.

Writing on the petition, Mark commented:

"Boris, your proposal for an estuary airport is pie in the sky and has been disowned by our party. Surely it is now time to stop spending taxpayers' money on "feasibility studies" etc. and recognise that this plan is not going to fly?"

The best way to stop this new unnecessary and expensive proposal is to make your voice heard. Please leave a comment on the Mayor of London's plans for a Thames Estuary airport and register for our petition against the proposals below.

Sign the Stop Estuary Airport petition

Read the Mayor of London's feasability study

View the full press release

See what the insiders really think of the planned airport

Campaign To Stop The Estuary Airport

Petition To Protect The NHS From Spending Cuts

David Cameron has launched a petition on NHS spending and announced the five Conservative priorities for a Department of Public Health.

The petition urges the Government to increase spending on the NHS every year, and to stop precious NHS money being wasted on targets and bureaucracy.

The five priorities are as follows:

1. We will create a patient-led NHS where patients are able to choose between a wide range of public and independent sector providers where and when they receive treatment, and where patients are able take control of their own health records.

2. We want to take day-to-day political interference out of the NHS and put healthcare professionals in charge of delivering patient care, according to the demands of patients and in competition with other providers.

3. We will devolve decision-making to doctors and nurses but they will be more accountable than ever for the results they achieve, but to patients not politicians, because we will measure health outcomes, publish extensive data about what providers achieve and pay those providers by results.

4. Having set the framework for these reforms to the NHS, we will be able to focus government action on improving public health.

5. That action will include reforming long-term care to enable people to stay in their own homes and communities.

David Cameron launched the petition and priorities in a keynote speech at the Royal College of Pathologists. In his speech he set out his vision for the NHS and tackled some misunderstandings of Conservative policy.

"Labour wasted their first term in power by failing to reform. And now, after they had finally assumed the mantle of change in the NHS, they have lost their nerve and failed to go far and fast enough. With the publication of our priorities for the Department of Health today, we are ensuring we do not make the same mistakes", he said.

Mark Reckless welcomed the announcement and added, "I particularly welcome the serious and consistent focus which our Shadow Health Spokesman, Andrew Lansley, has put on public health, an issue which I have raised with Professor Ian Gilmore, President of the Royal College of Physicians, and on which I know many doctors welcome our approach."

Read the full speech here and download the petition here

Petition To Protect The NHS From Spending Cuts

More Questions Re: Climate Camp Policing

Today's Guardian suggests that Kent Police attempted to put pressure on Medway Council to facilitate increased surveillance of climate camp protesters, despite Medway Council's concern that this would "alienate the community".

An FOI request has shown that Sergeant Keith Waymont wrote to us at the Council to complain that council officers were not being sufficiently co-operative with police plans for surveillance. The Guardian reports that he wrote:

"When I put this [Medway Council's alleged non co-operation with surveilance] to my bosses, they were less than impressed, given the importance of this operation as the new power station build is likely to create a considerable number of jobs for Medway."

In my role as a Member of Kent Police Authority I have today written to our Chief Executive to ask that Sergeant Waymont identify the 'bosses' with whom he says that he raised the issue, so that the matter can be investigated.

On the face of it, the letter is utterly unacceptable. By pressurising Medway Council to set aside our concerns about planned police surveillance because "the new power station build is likely to create a considerable number of jobs for Medway", it implies that the climate camp policing was intended to face down the protestors and help E.On build a new power station.

To the best of my knowledge, this is not true. In some aspects of the operation the police went out of their way to try to demonstrate neutrality, e.g. by not using E.On faciliities to command the operation. However, the unveiling of this letter - thanks to FOI - can only add to concerns regarding the policing of the protest.

I consider that our duty as the Kent Police Authority is not solely to support Kent Police, but to hold them to account on behalf of the public. If we are to do this properly, it implies that on occasion we may have to make measured criticism of the Force.

We have, with the Force, arranged two independent reports into the climate camp policing. I and the Chair and Chief Executive of the Police Authority met with the Climate Camp legal team to seek to understand and take account of their concerns. Rather than just allow the police to deal with climate camp complaints individually, we as an Authority are seeking to determine the overall lessons to be learned from these complaints.

This work has been painstaking and has taken longer than we initially hoped. Our conclusions will feed into HM Inspectorate of Constabulary's national review of the policing of protest. I hope that we will also before too long be able to publish them for the benefit of the Kent public and those who sought to protest peacefully in our county.

In the meantime I would like to put on record my condemnation of the letter as quoted in the Guardian today and congratulate the paper on its investigative reporting.

More Questions Re: Climate Camp Policing

Love Lane Saved From Development

I spoke at a very well attended site meeting last weekend about several new private houses that the Diocese wanted to shoehorn into the Bishop's Kitchen Garden at the back of Bishopscourt in Rochester.

Love Lane residents will be delighted that the Development Control Committee has now turned down the Church's application.

Love Lane is an extraordinarily narrow historic street, charming and rightly romantically named, but not designed with the motor car in mind, let alone construction traffic.

REPEAL OF PRE-DETERMINATION RULE

It sounds dull and technocratic but a really worthwhile reform which a Conservative government would bring in is to abolish the rule against pre-determination.

The rule prevents any councillor who is on, or might later join, the Development Control (i.e. Planning) Committee from saying anything in advance about any issue that may come before the Committee.

This is not only an affront to both democracy and to free speech. I also saw last weekend how it leads to a massive waste of time and money.

The Church has now applied and failed twice to secure planning permission. The developer told residents that both times it had applied on the basis that a council officer once told them that access would have to be through Love Lane rather than through Bishopscourt.

If only, they had been able to speak to the Councillors who would take the decision, then those Councillors could have represented local residents and explained that access through Love Lane would be unacceptable, saving a lot of time, money and bother all round.

Photos very kindly provided by Jack Picknell. Reproduced here with permission. Please visit Jack's website at http://www.jackpicknell.co.uk/

Love Lane Saved From Development

Honesty, Not Fantasy

My apologies for not being able to update you from this year's Conservative Party Conference before now, but such is the interest in this year's event in Manchester and the accompanying high attendance figures that it has been difficult to find either the time or the facilities to get online before now.

For me the highlight of the Conference so far has been George Osborne's speech on Tuesday where he exposed the gaping chasm that now exists between our party and Labour on the burning issue of fiscal responsibility. I use the term fiscal responsibility and Labour in the same sentence advisedly because they have been strangers to one another since Gordon Brown abandoned Conservative spending plans in 1999 and went mad with the nation's credit card.

Calmly and assuredly, George Osborne set out a number of proposals to begin to deal with the worst debt crisis this country has seen since the last time Labour were in office. As a matter of fact, the current debt crisis we have been led into by Labour is actually worse than the one Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979, with borrowing estimated to reach £175 billion this year alone. That is a truly shocking figure and one that will be paid for not just by taxpayers today and tomorrow, but by their children, and even their children's children. This cannot continue.

There is an old saying that every Labour government has always run out of money, and I am sad to say that this has once again proven to be the case. Labour always runs out of our money.

The size of the mountain we must climb in order to get our economy back on a sound footing is huge, but it is a task that we the Conservatives will undertake compassionately and fairly. The main theme running through George's speech was that we are all in this together, and he is right. We are united, not just as a party but as a country. Labour got us into this mess, and now only the Conservatives can get us out. We have done it before, and we'll do it again.

The battle now between the Conservatives and Labour is no longer just about Gordon Brown's false dividing line of 'investment versus cuts', nor indeed is it about fiscal responsibility versus profligate spending. To sum it up bluntly, the battle now is between honesty and fantasy. Honesty from the Conservatives about the measures that need to be taken to ensure we bring our country back from the brink, or Labour fantasy where the people of Great Britain continue to be lied to and treated like fools.

The choice is clear, we simply cannot afford another five years of Labour.

I will set out what this means for the people of Rochester and Strood when I return home, but in the meantime let me assure you of this - neither I nor my party will rest in our fight to bring about a fairer, more equitable society for all. Together we can make Britain Great again!

Honesty, Not Fantasy