The Scottish referendum was an important debate for the people in Scotland to have as it affected the future of Scotland and the UK as a whole. It got the whole country involved – which isn’t always the case with politics. However I don’t think I was alone in feeling like I had heard enough of the seemingly endless campaigning.
People always talk about what women voters want, and the referendum was no different, but it sometimes seems like while the politicians talk about what we are interested in they haven’t really bothered to ask us.
Politicians don’t do enough to find out what we really want, they might be doing things that I’m not aware of but it seems as if they don’t know what ordinary life is like for people; taking the kids to school, getting yourself to work, doing the shopping. These are the everyday things that dominate most peoples’ lives.
One small example was getting my son to school, this can be expensive for parents and time consuming. Education is very important, we all agree on that, and politicians are always talking about the cost of living, so why not have free bus passes for all children so that they can get to school? A policy like that would be worth so much more to families than warm words about the cost of living.
It’s a similar story with the NHS, the staff are fantastic and do a brilliant job with the limited resources they have but the experience I had from taking a member of my family to hospital recently was that there simply wasn’t enough staff present. Patients buzzing for more than 10 minutes at times asking for help, and so on.
These are the things that we want politicians to focus on, the things that matter to us every single day: school, health and paying the bills. While they say they get I’m not sure they actually do and this is because they are too detached from everyday life. The debates that take place at the Lib Dem party conference will talk about lots of these things, but I’m yet to be convinced that they will actually get it.
That’s why I’m going to be at this year’s party conference in Glasgow. I’m not a party member, just somebody who wants to know what the parties will do to help people like me. I won’t just be listening; I’ll be taking part in a fringe event discussing what mums like me really want. I hope you’ll be able to join me.
‘Marion is participating in Asda’s Mumdex panel on a voluntary basis. All views expressed are her own. For more information, visithttp://your.asda.com/mumdex-blogs/page/3’
‘The Independent View‘ is a slot on Lib Dem Voice which allows those from beyond the party to contribute to debates we believe are of interest to LDV’s readers. Please email [email protected] if you are interested in contributing.
* Marion Hutcheson will be on the panel with Jenny Willott, Ros Gordon and Steve Richards (chair) at the Asda Mumdex and Women Liberal Democrats fringe on Tuesday 7th October , Crowne Plaza, Barra, Glasgow, 8am – 9am
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
I appear to be banned from Belfast Pride
GCSE in Natural History to go ahead after all
Six council by-elections, spread over two days
Carers remain forgotten in government's welfare overhaul
Getting things done - Saggar Street - an update #dundeewestend
Zachary Adam Barker
Nonconformistradical
Nick Baird
Jonathan Calder
21 Comments
Henry Ford was an unpleasant man, but wiser than history records: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”
Ask for more than faster horses. Understand that compromise requires two sides to give way.
More young Henry Ford: “We don’t know whether Napoleon did or did not try to get across there and I don’t care. I don’t know much about history, and I wouldn’t give a nickel for all the history in the world. It means nothing to me. History is more or less bunk. It’s tradition. We don’t want tradition. We want to live in the present and the only history that is worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today.”
Opinions change. The Henry Ford (no bunk) Museum can be found at: http://www.thehenryford.org/museum/index.aspx
Old Henry Ford: “I am collecting the history of our people as written into things their hands made and used…. When we are through, we shall have reproduced American life as lived, and that, I think, is the best way of preserving at least a part of our history and tradition…”
I don’t understand this.
“Politicians don’t do enough to find out what we really want, they might be doing things that I’m not aware of but it seems as if they don’t know what ordinary life is like for people; taking the kids to school, getting yourself to work, doing the shopping. These are the everyday things that dominate most peoples’ lives.”
Some MPs, MEPs and Lords may lead lives sheltered by inherited wealth but for each MP we have we have about 40 councillors. Our councillors have to live like everyone else: take the kids/grandkids to school, get themselves to work, do the shopping. So all the politicians who have no idea what ordinary life is like for people are massively outweighed by the politicians who lead an ordinary life every day.
Richard – Indeed. After reading this I was rather left with a nagging feeling that Ms Hutcheson’s view of, ‘ordinary life,’ seemed to basically mean, ‘her life.’
The problem is that while people say they want all these things and much else, they don’t want to pay the taxes it would cost to have them.
Marion,
When I was an MP my children walked to the local Junior School and then to the local Comprehensive School. My wife used the excellent local NHS extensively during her treatment for cancer. I think I was and am pretty much in touch with real life! I grew up in a Council flat on a huge Council Estate by the way.
How would you answer your own questions if you were an MP? You want free bus passes for all school children and more NHS staff. How would you fund that? Tax increases or cuts in some other service to spend money on your choices? Exactly which taxes would you increase? If you wouldn’t increase taxes exactly which other services would you cut in order to divert money to your personal choices?
Incidentally, the great majority of children do live within walking distance of their school (I taught in four different schools over 22 years) although obviously that is less so in rural areas. Should we be encouraging children to develop independence and undertake healthy walking to school in preference to their parents ‘doing the school run by car’? Should we be encouraging children to attend local community schools or should we, in the name of choice, be encouraging children to travel long distances to the school of their parents choice? If a parent chooses the latter option should the general taxpayer pick up the cost of that individuals bill for that personal choice?
On every issue there are a number of different points of view that politicians have to consider and a limited pool of money to spend. It is too easy to say politicians don’t listen Take the most basic street level issues (I was a Cllr for many years before I was an MP) -some residents of a street vociferously want traffic calming or Residents Parking or a childrens play area closing down because ‘it attracts litter and noise’ but others on the same street disagree entirely. Whichever group the politician listens to the other group will complain bitterly that THEY were not listened to.
@Matthew Huntbach 1st Oct ’14 – 8:27pm:
“The problem is that while people say they want all these things and much else, they don’t want to pay the taxes it would cost to have them.”
See my first comment up there: “Ask for more than faster horses.”
And you have to be prepared to change stuff.
Phil Beesley
See my first comment up there: “Ask for more than faster horses.”
And you have to be prepared to change stuff.
I have no idea what you mean. Perhaps you can give some concrete examples.
Richard
Some MPs, MEPs and Lords may lead lives sheltered by inherited wealth
Yes, and UKIP wants to give them an even more sheltered and pleasant life by abolishing inheritance tax, one of its key policies it put across in its recent conference.
Paul Holmes
Whichever group the politician listens to the other group will complain bitterly that THEY were not listened to.
Indeed. See also how everyone say we should build more houses to solve the housing problem and politicians are rotten people for not doing that. But with any plan to actually build actual houses in an actual place, there will be vociferous opposition from the locals, who will shout down any councillor who doesn’t oppose it as a bad person who isn’t listening to the locals who want to save their green land and views and so on.
Matthew Huntbach
Matthew, you are wrong when you say –“..any plan to actually build actual houses in an actual place, there will be vociferous opposition from the locals,”.
In the ward I live in and used to represent in Kingston , hundreds of new homes have been built on brownfield sites during the last twenty years. A railway goods yard, a 1940s power station and part of a huge gasworks site (of which there is a bit more to go) have all been redeveloped to provide housing. If you have access to Google Map just take a look at Skerne Road, Kingston upon Thames. As far as I am aware local people welcomed the building of these actual houses and actual flats in this actual place. No vociferous opposition. No councillors shouted down . 🙂
Marion Hutcheson,
You conclude your piece by saying —
“That’s why I’m going to be at this year’s party conference in Glasgow. I’m not a party member, just somebody who wants to know what the parties will do to help people like me. I won’t just be listening; I’ll be taking part in a fringe event discussing what mums like me really want. ”
Can you just inform us if you will receive any payment to be at the conference?
Are you employed by Asda? (or another company working on behalf of Asda?).
When you say your fringe event will be discussing what “mums like me” really want , do you mean ” mums in the pay of Asda”??
When I googled Asda Mumdex I found a number of articles in Marketing Week which seem to indicate that Asda has a marketing strategy which is all about promoting that supermarket in a particular way.
I assume they do this in an effort to maximise their profits rather than because they are involved in a philanthropic exercise to represent “ordinary mums” ???
http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/news/asda-to-reshape-business-around-mums/4000203.article
http://ericavebury.blogspot.co.uk/2014_08_01_archive.html
Marion, if you think politicians know nothing about the NHS try reading Eric Avebury’s blog, link above.
Seems to me he might know a bit more than you.
As ever Paul Holmes & Matthew Huntbach are spot on. This is because they have been councillors (a species of politician) and have knocked on thousands of doors discussing the very same questions relating to the same issues of which they are accused of being unaware.
JohnTilley
In the ward I live in and used to represent in Kingston , hundreds of new homes have been built on brownfield sites during the last twenty years
…
As far as I am aware local people welcomed the building of these actual houses and actual flats in this actual place.
Well, ok, maybe not EVERY new development plan gets the sort of opposition I’m talking about, but in my experience that is the usual reaction. During the 12 years I was a councillor in Lewisham so many of the odd little bits of land in the borough were getting filled in, and almost always when that was proposed, there’d be local opposition from people who thought the removal of a few scrappy sycamore trees and brambles and the like was an outrageous attack on their environment. And, I’m not entirely lacking in sympathy for them, because I think it is pleasant (and actually there’s scientific research to prove it) to have that greenery around you. I don’t ever recall a case where local people actually welcomed new build. Note, in almost all the cases we dealt with, advice from the Planning Officers was that we had to approve the proposals as there were no legal grounds to reject them – if we had rejected them, the developer’s would appeal, win their case, and the Borough would lose a big sum in legal fees. Most local people didn’t get that point, and so accused us of being dirty rotten politicians who weren’t listening to them when we gave approval.
Now consider building on actual greenfield sites in the places where people want to live, like Mid-Sussex for instance. There’s a lot of agricultural land round there which is now just bought up by wealthy people to keep their horses on, or just to leave empty. Do you think the locals would be happy for it all to be turned into housing estates? And there ARE big plans right now to do just that. Well, Clegg’s support for such things probably has thrown away any chance that one day we might fight back round there which was once good LibDem territory.
Matthew Huntbach
I am a big fan of the singing of the Copper Family. I first came across them when I borrowed a record from my local library in the late 1960s. I now have a CD entitled The Imagined Village where the Coppers join with others like Billy Bragg and Benjamin Zephaniah.
The first track on the CD is “‘Ouses ‘Ouses ‘Ouses”
If you are not familiar with it I recommend you track it down. I think you might like it, a lot.
JohnTilley
Well, I didn’t know Bob personally, but of course I’m familiar with the Copper family.
Marion Hutcheson asks why not have free bus passes for kids, and why not spend more on the NHS, and you’ll find a dunnamany people (John Tilley has got me all Sussex now) who’ll tell you that it’s obvious more money should be spent on so many other things, and that politicians are bad and out of touch people because they won’t do it.
And in the new today, David Cameron proposing big tax cuts, and this being put forward as an election-winning stand. Sorry Marion, there’s the answer to your question. When politicians propose tax policies that mean cuts in the sort of services you want to see, that’s regarded as a good and popular thing. Politicians don’t provide free bus passes and don’t put more money into the NHS because they DO listen to the people, and the people say by the way they vote that they want tax cuts, and those tac cuts have to be paid for by service cuts.
UKIP are proposing even bigger tax cuts, especially for the rich, and yet people are still flocking to them and saying it’s because they are on the side of the ordinary person. The people who have taken control of the Liberal Democrats and their imagery at the top also seem to think this tax-cutting is a vote winner and so we must claim it is what we wanted as well (see here). And Ed Miliband’s timid little proposal to take a little bit of the huge wealth sloshing around due to house price inflation in order to put a bit more into the NHS has been shouted down from within his own party. It has been dismissed as a “tax on London” and something that would lose them votes in London (despite the way it would be of enormous benefit to so many Londoners by helping bring house prices down).
That is, we have the politics we have because people are all talk, but when it comes to actually voting, they vote for what we have now, and if you propose something different and are honest about costs, you have thrown away your chances of winning. This was shown most starkly of all in the 2011 referendum when people voted to oppose even the small change to current politics that AV would have given us, and voted “No” by two-to-one when the “No” side said the best thing about our current system was the way it locked us into Labour and Tory, Tory and Labour governments for ever and ever, and it was better to have an extreme right-wing Conservative government with just a third of the votes than to give other parties the chance of a breakthrough. By two-to-one, Marion, that is what the British people voted to say they wanted. They have it. We have the sort of government that the British people voted by two-to-one to say they wanted: one distorted in favour of the party of the rich.
Well noted, Bill le Breton and John Tilley.
(sings) “I love the smell of astroturf in the morning…”
Me
And in the news today, David Cameron proposing big tax cuts, and this being put forward as an election-winning stand
And in the news today (one day after I wrote the above), following these proposals being publicised, the Conservative Party has risen in the opinion polls and is now the party that more people say they would support than any other party.
So there you are, Marion. “Why not have free bus passes for all children so that they can get to school?” Because when the Tories proposed £7 billion in tax cuts, most of which would benefit people who are wealthier than average, their share of vote according to how people said they would vote went up. Ed Miliband tried to talk about the necessity of raising more taxes if we are to keep good standard in the NHS, but his party dropped in the opinion polls straight after that.
When you say “These are the things that we want politicians to focus on”, who is “we”? Not the bulk of people in this country if these opinion poll figures are correct. By shifting the Conservatives as a result of what was said at the party conferences the people of this country have said they WANT a deteriorating NHS, and they DON’T want free bus passes or anything else like that.
Please note, when I put it that way I am not agreeing with them. I am simply noting the truth – so long as proposing tax cuts wins you votes and proposing tax rises to improve government services loses you votes, politicians will propose tax cuts and in order to allow for these they will cut government services, and in doing so they ARE listening to the voice of the people as expressed in the democratic mechanisms the people have.
Now, if you think actually the people haven’t thought this through, and when put as I have put it maybe they would accept the taxes necessary to provide the services they say they want, what are you going to do about it? I believe that what is necessary is sufficient members of political parties which are opposed to the power of money to go out and put the opposite case and to argue against the City fat cat funded parties – the Conservative Party, UKIP, and the Orange Book wing of the Liberal Democrats -and to show them up for what they really are: people who use crude populist language which appeals to the naive to trick them into supporting policies which are really about letting the City fat cats live their lives of luxury and enabling them to be even fatter and to have plenty of money left to buy more up so they are even more in control and the rest of us are even less free in our lives.
This lot and the pied pipers who lead the oh-so-trendy ‘politics is all rotten, don’t vote and instead work through pressure groups’ movement are in it together. The more electoral politics and democratic involvement is derided, the more that message “politicians are all bad people, don’t get involved with them” line is pushed, the more it advantages the fat cats because they have the money to pay to get their ideas pushed, while those who oppose them need membership to do it.
This idea that the way to oppose cuts in services is to prance around waving “stop the cuts” banners is pathetic. It is not radical or modern at all. It is the descendants of peasants begging and pleading with their feudal landlords to have mercy on them, but supposing those feudal landlords are imposed there by God and cannot be removed.In the end there are only two pressures that count: the pressure of the ballot box and the pressure of money. If you take away the pressure of the ballot box by allowing mass membership political parties to be wound down, the only pressure groups that are really influential are those funded by the rich to push their sort of politics, all these right-wing think tanks whose members swan effortlessly in and out the top levels of our party as well as the others.
Bill le Breton
I note that the author of this piece has neither replied to any of the comments now answered John Tilley’s important questions to her.
Yes, and I notice that Phil Beesley hasn’t responded to my request for a clarification of his comments. So I rather think that his “See my first comment up there: ‘Ask for more than faster horses.’ And you have to be prepared to change stuff. in response to my point about taxes being necessary to pay for decent services means really “We’ll cut those services, and tough, we’ll call that ‘modernisation’ as that shuts down the argument, since if you try to oppose it, that just shows you are an out-of-touch old fogey”. This is a line we have seen many, many times. It is a favourite one of the the enemies of democracy.
Still no reply, so I guess these people have no reply. I guess that means I am correct in my assessment of Beesley. And Marion Hutcheson has been shown up as the typical naive person manipulated by the into an oh-so-trendy anti-politics position, which in the end benefits only the political right.