Wednesday, 18 October 2017

From The Liberty Wall – National Liberal Trade Unionists – Why Nurses Deserve To Get A Pay Rise

ATIONAL LIBERAL Trade Unionists – NLTU – may be familiar with NHS psychiatrist, Dr. Max Pemberton who writes for the Daily Mail. Indeed, one of his articles – http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-national-liberal-trade-unionists-debate-5-%e2%80%93-is-it-racist-to-want-nhs-nurses-to-speak-english – formed the basis of the most recent NLTU Debate in late June.

Our attention has just been drawn to another of his articles (which calls for a wage increase for nurses) this time written towards the end of July, which we’ve reproduced below.
It appeared shortly after the BBC released figures relating to its top earning actors and presenters. As this Guardian report notes – https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jul/19/evans-lineker-bbc-top-earners-only-two-women-among-best-paid-stars

Chris Evans and Gary Lineker earned £2.2m and £1.75m respectively. In contrast, nurses earn on average between £22,000 to £28,000 a year.
The NLTU wholeheartly agrees with Dr. Pemberton’s view that if ‘there was any public servant who deserved a pay increase, it’s nurses.’ Indeed, we’d go further and say that all medical staff should automatically have a wage increase that – at the very least – keeps up with the rate of inflation.
As usual, we’d appreciate your feedback once this article appears on the NLTU Facebook page here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/277840098977231/

.


Why Nurses Deserve To Get A Pay Rise

Staff demonstrating in support of the National Health Service. National Liberal Trade Unionists support their campaign for higher wages.

‘WHAT would you do with £2 million?’ asked the nurse at the sink.

‘I know – imagine it,’ came the reply from another nurse, rolling her eyes.
A patient joined in: ‘Don’t tell me you’d give up working in  this place!’  They all laughed.
I’ve heard these sorts of conversations before, usually when there’s a Lotto roll-over.  Not this time.
For a few days this week, on the ward where I work, the main topic of conversation was what the BBC pays top staff.  Much of it was daydreaming about what they would do if, instead of the £22,000 to £28,000 that the average nurse is paid, they earned a few million, like Chris Evans or Gary Lineker.
But the nurses weren’t bitter, which made the whole thing more poignant.  I suppose if it was money that motivated them, they’d packed in nursing years ago.
But it’s a warped world where someone like Casualty actor Derek Thompson is paid 15 times more to pretend to be a nurse and pretend to save lives than an actual nurse who saves actual lives.
While nurses might not go into nursing for the money, financial reward is how our society indicates the value we place on a profession’s contribution.  And more fool all of us for not valuing the contribution nurses make.  For it won’t be Claudia Winkleman of John Humphrys who’ll be staying beyond their shift to resuscitate you when you have a cardiac arrest, or who will be there when your child breaks their arm and needs painkillers and a kind, calming word.
Nursing is often a thankless task, and I have nothing but overwhelming admiration for the job nurses do and the gentle dedication with which they do it.
It seems strange that the argument is that nursing is a vocation – a job they do because they love it – yet the same logic isn’t applied to the BBC ‘talent’.  There are plenty other excellent actors and presenters who’d do those BBC jobs for less.
If there was any public servant who deserved a pay increase, it’s nurses.  But many nurses feel the only way to make a decent living is to move into management.  And without them the NHS will collapse.
• FOR MORE information on the National Liberal Trade Unionists – NLTU – check out https://www.facebook.com/groups/277840098977231/
• READ ISSUE 1 of Liberal Worker - the voice of National Liberal Trade Unionists.  To get hold of your FREE pdf copy simply request it by e-mailing natliberal@aol.com Also look out for more information about issue 2 in due course.
• CHECK OUT previous NLTU debates here:
National Liberal Trade Unionists Debate 1 – How Can we Achieve Our Main Aims? http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-national-liberal-trade-unionists-debate-1-how-can-we-achieve-our-main-aims
National Liberal Trade Unionists Debate 2 – What Should Be Re-Nationalised? http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-national-liberal-trade-unionists-debate-2-%e2%80%93-what-should-be-re-nationalised
National Liberal Trade Unionists Debate 3 – Bob Crow: What Is His Legacy? http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-national-liberal-trade-unionists-%e2%80%93-bob-crow-what-is-his-legacy
National Liberal Trade Unionists Debate 4 – How Should Trade Unionists View The EU? http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-national-liberal-trade-unionists-debate-4-%e2%80%93-how-should-trade-unionists-view-the-eu
From The Liberty Wall – National Liberal Trade Unionists Debate 5 – Is It Racist To Want NHS Nurses To Speak English? http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-national-liberal-trade-unionists-debate-5-%e2%80%93-is-it-racist-to-want-nhs-nurses-to-speak-english
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Resist Cuts To Healthcare & Education In Ulster – Sign The Petition Today!

Both schools and hospitals are under threat from cuts imposed by the Tory government. The current lack of movement at Stormont will ensure that nobody is politically able to oppose this new round of budget cuts.

THE NATIONAL LIBERAL PARTY (NLP) is asking all Ulster-based readers to sign an on-line petition.


The petition calls upon the leaders of the four of the five main parties – Arlene Foster (Democratic Unionist Party), Michelle O’Neill (Sinn Féin Northern Leader), Robin Swann (Ulster Unionist Party) and Naomi Long (Alliance Party) – to ‘unite, fight’ and ‘resist cuts to health and education’.


The petition is organised by the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP). Whilst the NLP has serious differences of opinion to the SDLP, we are ardent supporters of social justice. As the petition relates to the ‘bread and butter’ issue of health and education, we are happy to support it.

The petition notes that:

‘Health and Social Care Trusts across Northern Ireland have been tasked by the Department of Health to make £70m worth of cuts in the 2017/18 financial year.

Primary and Nursery schools are being forced to make cuts of £56 per pupil – meaning tens of thousands of pounds less for each school.

Our public services are on the brink of a severe financial crisis and those who will suffer most are the sick, the elderly and our children. That is unacceptable.

All political parties should commit to sitting around the same table to negotiate a resolution to health, education, budgetary and equality issues that will see the restoration of power sharing institutions capable of delivering on the potential and the promise of the Good Friday Agreement.

We, the undersigned, refuse to stand by as political paralysis threatens the lives of those around us. We call on the leaders of all the main political parties to unite, fight and resist the cuts being applied to public services. We call on the leaders of the political parties to commit to reaching a resolution in the best interests of everyone living here.’

Over 1600 people have signed already. Join them today! The petition can be found here: https://www.change.org/p/arlene-foster-unite-fight-resist-cuts-to-health-and-education/nftexp/ex5/control/212260656?recruiter=212260656&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_content=ex5%3Acontrol

.

• MEMBERS and supporters of the National Liberal Party who are either sponsoring or supporting an on-line petition are ask to get in touch with the appropriate details. E-mail us at natliberal@aol.com

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

From The Liberty Wall – Nations without States Debate (3) – An English Parliament For The English People?

NATIONS WITHOUT STATES – NwS – exists to highlight the plight of peoples who aspire to nationhood. These might be based on peoples or tribes based within a state or even across borders that may or may not have been independently organised in the past. They might have a linguistic or historical separateness from their neighbours or fellow citizens. All will aspire to recognition, autonomy or independence.

To date, NwS has rightly looked at groups like the Flemish, Kurds, Sikhs and Tamils. However, what about the English? Don’t they deserve some form of Self-Determination? After all, Scotland, Ulster and Wales all have their own separate forms of government – why not England?

This question was recently highlighted in an article – http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/834711/frank-field-english-parliament-constitutional-reform-brexit - in The Express by Frank Field, the Labour MP for Birkenhead.

We’ve reproduced the article (below) and feel that it lends itself to a new NwS debate. In particular, Self-Determinsits should consider the following questions:

• What form of Self-Determination should England strive for – autonomy, independence or something else?

• What ‘internal’ structure should England adopt? Should it effectively revert back to the seven traditional kingdoms (East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Mercia, Northumbria, Sussex and Wessex) of the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy? If so, what powers would these ‘kingdoms’ hold?

• What do Self-Determinists make of Frank Field’s call for the House of Lords to be abolished and replaced by a ‘Common Senate’ which’ll consist of ‘the professions, arts and culture, industry, including both employers and trade unions’?

Self-Determinists are encouraged to post their thoughts in the comments section once they see this article appear on the NwS Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/groups/184919468292372/
It goes without saying that there are no official links between Nations without States, Frank Field MP, the Labour Party or The Express

.

Let us rule our England with an English parliament, says Frank Field MP

Establishing an English parliament was the inevitable outcome once the Bliar government began to give way to Scottish nationalism.

But just as it took much political heaving to get through the first devolution bill, the passage to establish an English parliament will be further hindered by Brexit fallout.

Politicians are scared of the constitutional changes that were set afoot by Scottish devolution.

They should give up worrying. Brexit will drive reform on the constitutional front, just as it will do through much of public life.
Once the Blair government began the process of devolution, particularly to Scotland, but also to Wales and Northern Ireland, we faced what was called the “West Lothian Question”.

The then MP for West Lothian, the late Tam Dalyell, posed the question thus: should MPs from Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland be able to vote on matters which affect only England? Politicians have since sought to answer Tam’s question but with little success.

What has not been posed is a new question, but here it is: Isn’t the answer to the West Lothian question to establish an English parliament? The only rational conversation I had with Gordon Brown was when he questioned if I genuinely believed in an English parliament. I replied that I did.

“But how do you get over the size?” Gordon enquired. “England is so dominant that it makes devolution for England impossible.”
It is the size of England that makes devolution more, not less, important. But England’s size does put a price on success.

England, yet again, needs to be generous in establishing the new constitutional order.

There’s no problem with establishing an English parliament. The House of Commons as we know it today would be abolished. In its place would be the election of MPs to an English parliament that would sit in the House of Commons.

The English Parliament would therefore be on a par with parliaments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. A second move would be to abolish the House of Lords. We have a bigger second chamber than China, although our population of 65 million is dwarfed by China’s 1.3 billion.

In place of the Lords should be a “Common Senate” to which the Northern Irish, Welsh, Scottish and English parliaments would send legislation for scrutiny, just as now with the Commons sending its legislation to the Lords.

The Senate should be elected, but not by giving party whips the chance to stack it full again with their candidates who failed to get elected to the Commons. Elections there will be but the establishment of the Senate will reflect those great organisations – the professions, arts and culture, industry, including both employers and trade unions – which would get to elect one or two senators for a fixed term of 10 years.

Likewise, there would be elections of another group of senators based on geography.

British representation has always had a strong local basis. Again, these senators would be elected on a regional basis and would serve a 10-year term. The 10-year term would limit the power of any whipping system trying to control the business of the Senate.

Only the feeble-minded who managed to squeeze through the new devolved electoral system would be easy meat for the whips.

The legislation from the English parliament, and those from the other three parliaments, would be considered, revision offered, but the Senate would not have powers of outright rejection.

Sovereign constitutional powers would reside in each of the four UK parliaments.

English senators would have to work with other senators on major pieces of business.

The Senate would decide taxation, foreign affairs and defence, with all three shared between the four UK powers. Division of seats would ensure that English senators would succeed only if they had the support of other countries’ senators.

Election to the English parliament would be on a constituency basis, just as now. This constitutional change would not only empower voters but it would reduce the bill.

The Lords cost taxpayers £108million in 2015-2016. Cut to a third of its size its cost would similarly fall. While the cost would fall, the effectiveness would increase.

It would attract people who head their own sections of public life. Likewise, each senator would know that their term was limited, a move that should increase their sense of value and independence.


• CHECK out previous NwS debates here:
Nations without States Debate (1) – Why Do Our Oppressors Hate The Concept Of Self-Determination? http://tinyurl.com/jrj7dtl
Nations without States Debate (2) – How Can Self-Determinists Force Governments To Give Us Our Freedom? http://tinyurl.com/zbhv2ae
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Coming Soon – Issue 3 of Caledonian Voice!

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Liberal Future: Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone Youth Say … Choose Freedom – BreXit Now!

.
AS EVERYONE KNOWS last year voters went to the polls to vote in the EU Referendum.  The question on the ballot paper was very simple.  It asked ‘Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?’

The answer was simple as well – for nearly 17.5 million Britons voted to break the chains of EU enslavement.

But as we’ve noted many times, not everyone was happy about this vote.  The global elite – represented by the likes of multinational corporations and the banks – are deeply unhappy, to say the very least.  Ever since the vote was announced they, and their client politicians, have sought to oppose the popular will of the people and want to overturn democracy.

In Ulster, the main opponents of this democratic vote are Sinn Féin (who for some bizarre reason still claim to be a socialist and Irish republican political party) and the Social Democratic and Labour Party (the SDLP – sometimes known as the ‘Stoops’) and to a lesser degree, the Alliance Party.

The sheer hypocrisy is hanging out of them all – but Sinn Féin (SF) in particular.  They claim that because a majority in Ulster (or the ‘North’ as they call it) voted Remain, this vote should be respected.  However, this is a dramatic volte-face from a party that has never truly respected the wish of the majority of Ulster voters who want to remain part of the UK.  This was especially so when they effectively acted as cheerleaders for the IRA’s imperialist and, in parts, blatantly sectarian war against the nation and people of Ulster.

Also if we to follow Sinn Féin’s argument – about respecting the local vote – to its logical extent, surely all of Co. Antrim, East Belfast and parts of County Down, who voted Leave, should be allowed to quit the EU?

Liberal Future also notes that, until fairly recently, Sinn Féin opposed the EU.  It would be interesting to establish a time-line which examined their change of heart.  Was it in response to intense internal political debate – or could it be linked to various EU grants which just happened to benefit areas where SF have political representation?

To conclude, we’d like point folks in the direction of a previous article – http://nationalliberal.org/ulster-youth-say-brexit-now – we produced concerning SF.  It examined a case whereby they (and the Stoops) went to court in a vain effort to overturn the Brexit vote.  Here we noted:
‘This court case was odd to say the very least. Probably the most curious aspect was the sight of Sinn Féin and the SDLP going into a British court to try to force a country that they don’t really recognise (Ulster) to stay within the European Union! Why anyone – let alone so-called Irish republicans or nationalists – would want to surrender their nationhood to a supranational organisation is beyond us.’
• THIS ARTICLE should be read in conjunction with the following:
.
Liberal Future Says BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-says-%e2%80%a6-brexit-now
.
Liberal Future: English Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/english-youth-says-brexit-now
Liberal Future: Scottish Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/scottish-youth-say-brexit-now
Liberal Future: Ulster Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/ulster-youth-say-brexit-now
Liberal Future: Welsh Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/welsh-youth-say-brexit-now
Liberal Future: Cornish Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/cornish-youth-say-brexit-now
Liberal Future: Guernsey, Manx and Jersey Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-guernsey-manx-and-jersey-youth-say-brexit-now
Liberal Future: Alderney & Sark Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-alderney-sark-youth-say-brexit-now

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Autumn 2017: Liberty & Nation Says Wherever You Live SHOP LOCAL THIS AUTUMN!

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close