The failure of the Government to protect thousands of vulnerable families on low incomes has finally hit the front pages of the most right wing newspapers in our nation. Even though these journals have set out the information in a manner that implies that we are spending beyond our means, one does not need to look far into the information to understand that the problem is caused by the way in which our society has become structured following 10 years of austerity and 8 years of a Government that has squeezed the poorer parts of society so that the wealthy parts can grow and flourish. The deep irony of this is that the causes of the financial crisis in 2008 were due to the way in which the powerful and wealthy in the Western World sought to extract as much as they could from people who aspired to buy homes, despite their financial history and lack of meaningful resources. The data from the Office for National Statistics shows that the poorest 10% of our nation have 1/3 the amount of disposable income needed to meet their expenditure. By comparison the richest 10% have 20 times the disposable income of the poorest and their expenditure is half that level. What is just as shocking is that the richest 10% have nearly twice the disposable income of the second richest 10%. And the second poorest 10% have nearly three times the disposable income of the poorest. Because the disposable income is the income after taxation, it would not be hard for a Government committed to meeting these inequalities to increase the taxation on the wealthiest 10% and remove taxation altogether for the poorest 10% and increase the benefits available to help these people. Of course any Government that sought to reduce this sort of inequality would have to do so knowing that some of their wealthy funders may withdraw their support for them.

The conflict with the Labour Party currently being expressed by three Jewish newspapers seems to be a poorly thought through approach, unless they are preparing the ground for a religious split within the party or a greater result for the Conservative Party at what feels like an impending General Election. It is of course clear that anti-semitism exists within the Labour Party as local party members and ex-members would quickly testify. However the three papers seem to be acting as though the Labour Party has refused to deal with these issues which does not appear to be the case. That the precise wording of anti Semitism examples has been modified by the Party in its guidance to members may appear to be a failure by some people, but having sat on many boards that decide on policies, it is always worrying when groups simply accept every word in an imported policy and move on to the next matter on the agenda without any real consideration of the meaning. So far there has been no indications that the changes have devalued the issue of anti-semitism, beyond the refusal to accept every word and paragraph in its entirety. The fact that Labour has worked through the policy and made some changes should be seen as a positive, not a negative.  It is vital that anti Semitism, Islamaphobia and prejudice against any other form of religion including Christianity is regularly considered by all political parties and any other organisations. However once such religious groups begin to claim that certain organisations and parties are aligned or misaligned with their belief systems as the articles appear to suggest, there is a risk of the religion becoming politically biased which is very dangerous territory for them to enter as we can see from the USA.

The disturbing response by the Home Secretary regarding the trial of two men in the USA and potential death penalty came at the same time as a right wing think tank published a proposal for the restoration of a law, last enacted at the end of World War 2. Treason has all sorts of challenges inherent within its definition. The think tank document opens with the phrase “Betraying one’s country by helping its enemies” which opens up all sorts of issues including a bizarre tweet by an ex UKIP and now Conservative MEP that Treason will apply to “Those in future actively working undemocratically against U.K. through extreme EU loyalty”. At a time of war, then our enemies are perhaps easy-ish to define. However even then the playing of football in no mans land can be treated very negatively. As we prepare to celebrate the end of World War 1 our decision to leave the EU will for some of us, seem a betrayal of a much broader approach to cooperation between nations.