NHS doctors offered £5000 to move to private hospitals. Was poor pay deal planned to encourage this further demise in the NHS? Govt. incompetent and corrupt.,

A negiotiated settlement is agreed (although the funding remains opaque. Other disputes rumble on and some are just starting. Clueless.

Tax allowances remain frozen so we will all pay more tax and living standards will continue to fall. And the Chancellor gives the top 1% a pensions boost with the excuse that it will keep doctors in the NHS – so why is ot open to. all. He did a seperate one for Judges? Someone with a £2 million pension pot gets a £250000 tax cut. Just what they need!

First of all – why bother. Just about everything was leaked in advance anyway! We love in the 21st century where the markets and business operate 24/7/365 – yet it is seen as appropriate for the British Government to issue a budget every spring (apart from the Autumn one which they really fucked up!)

A strange one. Why give people with a £2 million pension pot a £250000 tax cut? Will people really go back to work/ stay on for a few extra quid in this bracket? It obviously does not affect the working person 11p a pint less for beer will not encourage people to return to the pub – that ship has sailed and pubs will continue to shut. The cut in petrol tax is extended – but who will notice that it has not gone up? 30 hours of free childcare for those who can find anywhere able to take their children and pay the extra cost that most charge (and certainly will for 1-3 year olds??!!??. Defence spending up is expected and possibly necessary but procuremnent procedures need to be sorted. The investment zone stuff still needs clarification (talk of 12 new “Canary Wharfs” is obviously bullshite).

So he has pleased the top 1% and will rely on the Mail and Sun and Express and Telegraph to con as many people as possible that he has helped them.

What was more interesting was what he did not say! Nothing about the green economy apart from nuclear; nothing about public services. No outlining of why basic tax payers will have to pay £500 more a year. Nothing about infrastructure.

Anyway I suppose it is unsurprising that the budget was dull. Living standards for most continue to fall faster than ever since records began and given the paucity of talent in their ranks what could we expect.

However I am perturbed by the fact that there seems to be a consensus that raising living standards for the poorest is seen to be counter growth in the economy? Surely the poorest spend money at home and raise the economy more than those who squirrel it away in off shore tax havens. I suppose it is an us and them scenario?

For once I have to applaud the ingenuity of the government. They come up with a policy that is illegal knowing it will not work due to international law. They know labour will oppose it. But thrust of the policy is populist – when it is opposed in Parliament they can spend weeks claoming that Labour believe the opposite of their policy as they opposed it in Parliament. The Mail and Telegraph, Express, etc. echo this view. The people are conned into thinking the problem is therefore created by labour. Genius! The Illegal Refugees Bill is a perfect example. It will never get past the courts – but the political gain will have been made.

The trashing of EU laws we often created and supported could lead to trade bans by the EU – who will then blamed (I am thinking agricultural and food products here). Perhaps something like some American products being banned by the courts – blame leftie lawyers rather than the attempt to subvert food standards and undermine farmers. State that Labour wants to increase food prices rather than the greedy supermarkets who have massively increased profits this year.

The Trade Union Bill to undermine and inhibit strikes is probably against Human Rights Legislation – make it more onerous so it will definitely fail in the courts and then blame Labour for supporting Union Barons and strikes that disrupt peoples lives, thus totally diverting attention fromnm their poor wages and restrictive policies.

Is he really the only Tory MP who will refuse to vote for the illegal migration bill on the grounds that it breaks international law and human rights conventions we helped establish.

The British Public in general want the refugee situation sorted to stop the deaths to migrants and the cost of hotels, etc. BUT not at the cost of breaaking laws and treaties or failing to meet our international obligations. Can someone also point out to Braverman that we have a labour shortage and a demographic situation which will make it worse. Most of the refugees are young fit and healthy.

Reinstates Lineker and says it will produce new guidelines. I wonder who they chose for the committee to decide new guidelines? I understand a need for impartiality, but surely only in news and current affairs departments. It certainly should not apply to free lancers. Will all paid members of the BBC have to state their political allegiances? If the list was biased towards labour (likely given the lack of talent revealed by Tories), would they encourage positive discrimination?

Basically the Government seems to have pushed/manipulated the BBC into supporting its Culture Wars. This one seems to have misfired – very few are suggesting that Lineker shouldbe muzzled – freedom of speech. I have not heard a sensible argument in sipport of the BBC. If he was a bit out of order (in some peoples opinions) with his wording – would he still be in trouble for stating that “This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people …….?” .

Meanwhile Lee 30[ Anderson shows no remorse at the photo od a DEAD YOUNG CHILD on a beach – stating that he should not have been here anyway!