More money for schools and social care

As one who has lobbied for more cash for local schools and social care, I was pleased to see both in the Conservative Manifesto.

The document confirms the government will press ahead with fairer funding, giving larger increases for schools with the smallest per pupil sums today. It also offers an additional 4000 million pounds over the next Parliament to the schools budget, so the gap can be narrowed without cutting the budgets of the better funded.

It also proposes more money for social care, paid for in part from removing the winter fuel allowance from better off pensioners.

Both increases will be welcome in West Berkshire and Wokingham Council areas, as the budgets are currently tight.

Published and promoted by Fraser Mc Farland on behalf of John Redwood, both at 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG40 1XU

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. alan jutson
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    More money for social care ?

    Yes perhaps, but millions excluded from claiming it, because the value of their house excludes them.

    Millions are perhaps so called property rich, but still cash poor.

    Sorry John but I am angry, very, very angry after hearing this absolute Social Care betrayal in your Party’s manifesto.

    • Cheshire Girl
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

      It will be interesting to hear what their definition of ‘better off’ is. Also, I expect that money from the WFA to be absolutely ring fenced to go towards paying to improve social care, and not into the general pot, to be frittered away.

      We can live in hope.

    • sjb
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

      Local authorities currently fund the “asset rich, cash poor” that need social care at home; £200+ week is not uncommon.

      The proposals are unclear whether:
      (a) hourly rates will still be negotiated between local authorities and care providers. If not, and the person has to negotiate directly with care providers, then the hourly rates they face will be considerably higher than now. Also, some care providers charge double for weekend & bank holiday calls.
      (b) interest charges? If so on what basis?
      (c) if a third party has to make the arrangements (e.g. because person lacks capacity) what charges (if any) will apply? Will these attract interest?

    • Chris
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

      Agree wholeheartedly, AJ. I feel however that someone else is writing/guiding the manifesto, and that Theresa May is not the strong person that she is portrayed as, but rather someone who has been heavily influenced by another individual with his own agenda.

  2. Yossarion
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    What are the figures for dementia across the rest of the World, are we higher or lower than the average?.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    The best way to get more money into education (or health) is to encourage more people to provide for themselves with vouchers from government or tax breaks that can be used (and topped up) at any school the parents choose. Freedom of choice, competition, lower taxes and letting people spend their own money how they choose.

    Alas we have the state monopoly enthusiast, socialist lightish, Chairman May. Better than Corbyn but not by that much. James Delingpole was exactly right about T May on This Week last night. Hopefully her socialism can be kept in check post the election (or perhaps – hopefully – she is just joking and is not really another interventionist, price and income controls, Heathite, economic illiterate who has leaned nothing from history).

  4. Jerry
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    “It also proposes more money for social care, paid for in part from removing the winter fuel allowance from better off pensioners.”

    Yes, the poor but proud will now get cold or worse, whilst the rich will have (the value of) their homes stolen by HMG even though all taxes etc were paid.

    Just so that the top 1% don’t need to pay a pittance more, relative to their wealth, more tax – enough to turn rightful thinking people socialist.

    #anyonebutMay or so Mrs May seem to want, she has lost my vote.

    • Jerry
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

      It gets worse, I see that “Leveson 2” will be scrapped, sorry but this has to be asked, pay back for certain media companies supporting the Tories?

      • Jerry
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

        So the Tories want to stop people voting it seems, many people have no photo ID, have no need for it – so is this policy also a back-door to the previously dumped National ID card scheme?

        • Edward2
          Posted May 19, 2017 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

          Citizen Card is one of several ID cards available at low cost which accepted by many authoritied
          Assuming you don’t have a driving license nor a passport nor a student card or any other form of photo ID.
          It is important to confirm identity if our election process is to remain fair and honest.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; I suggest that you read up on what the ERS are saying about this. Proving ones ID will not stop voter intimidation, how will it help proxy votes or will they be stopped for those with legitimate reason to appoint a proxy, how will it stop abuse of the postal vote or will they be stopped for those with legitimate reason to apply for a postal vote.

            ID cards solve nothing but put barriers in the way of many lawful and legitimate voters, even more so when the proven cases of voter fraud is very low.

          • Edward2
            Posted May 20, 2017 at 8:41 am | Permalink

            Yoi are now suggesting no ID for a voter is better than having ID
            Thrn you move your original complaint onto two different areas about voter intimidation and postal voting.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; Tell me Eddie, how will photo ID stop proxy, postal or intimidation electoral ballot box crimes?

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

          Dear Jerry–You mean, horrors!, that if no photo thinggie one might have to get one? Donnez nous un break

        • libertarian
          Posted May 20, 2017 at 11:41 am | Permalink


          Whilst I’m no fan of ID cards I’m afraid not for the first time you are not entirely correct when you say people have no need of ID cards. There are a huge number of government services that require ID,if you are at school or still a student then an ID card to get cheaper travel, it is now also normal to provide ID to rent a house, to take an internal flight, to open a bank account, to buy alcohol or get served in a pub if you look under 25.

          Oh and 93% of UK citizens own a mobile phone and you need ID to take out a contract, you need a credit or debit card to buy online ( ID needed to get one) etc etc

          • Jerry
            Posted May 20, 2017 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

            @libertarian; Please actually read what I said, stop replying to what you think or hoped I had said!

            There is a mile of difference between having to provide just ID and having to provide photo ID. It is actually very easy to exist without having photo ID, nor do you need photo ID to buy and use a PAYG mobile phone. Also needing ID when opening a bank accounts is a fairly recent (within the last 20 years) requirement, thus millions of people have bank/debit card accounts that pre-date that requirement, many probably still have credit card accounts to.

  5. A.Sedgwick
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    Administratively and politically inept and a rerun of project fear e.g. why not remove winter fuel allowance and increase pension credit, similarly 75+ free BBC tax but then that should go in total and so much for walking away from a bad deal into the greater world trade opportunities. Anyone for breakfast?

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

      Dear A–Bacon Roll with an Espresso Doppio for choice, thx

  6. Lifelogic
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    From the Telegraph today:-

    Theresa May has set out her vision of conservatism to challenge “the cult of selfish individualism” and not to allow free markets to operate “untrammelled”. She said conservatives must move on from the “caricature” of Thatcherite conservatism.

    Back to her misguided Heathism I assume. I suppose she wants a dire virtual state monopoly in education, the NHS & perhaps even social care and rented housing. It won’t work dear, it never has, it is not working now. How do you get to sixty, join the Tories and yet not even see this? Thatcher did not go nearly far enough in cutting the state back to a sensible size and made huge mistake on the EU and the ERM.

    It is the State Sector that is untrammelled in these areas, and this is a disaster, particularly for health & education. Time to grow up dear.

  7. fedupsoutherner
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    what exactly defines ‘better off pensioners’?

    Are those who have private pensions going to be targeted regardless of how little the amount is or is there going to be a cut off point and how much is this going to cost to implement? I am becoming more frustrated by the Conservative policies by the day.

  8. Denis Cooper
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    I’ve just seen Tim Farron on TV claiming that the Tory government would turf a surviving husband or wife out of the family home on the death of their spouse who had been suffering from dementia and so had needed prolonged and expensive social care.

    He must know that this would not be the government’s intention and is very unlikely to happen – it’s difficult to see Parliament passing the necessary legislation without provision for payment of the social care costs to be deferred until after the second death – but that’s irrelevant to the likes of Farron, and especially to the twitterati, and I would advise that Tory spokesmen should rebut this as soon as possible.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

      He is a politician, worse still a Libdim one with religious beliefs too, what did you expect, honesty, truth, logic and morality?

    • Know-dice
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

      DC sounds like another can of Tory worms…

      The husband/wife would be fully entitled to all of his/her/wife’s/husband’s estate so what legal shenanigans is being proposed to hive off the Government’s share prior to death of either party?

    • a-tracy
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

      There should be some recourse for deflamation against the likes of Farron for scaremongering like that.

      • ksb
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:44 pm | Permalink


        There is: Don’t vote libdem 🙂

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

        I liked “deflamation”

        • a-tracy
          Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:30 am | Permalink

          😄 it’s a special word reserved for liberals that like to fib.

    • sjb
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

      Like you I hope Parliament would protect the surviving spouse from having to sell-up. However, there have been instances in the past where a daughter (<60), having provided years of live-in care for a parent, became homeless when the property had to be sold after her parent entered residential care. The council only have to 'take into account' her circs when exercising their discretion: see para 7.011, Charging for Residential Accommodation Guide (CRAG) 2011.

      About two years ago, an elderly gentlemen (70+) informed me that when his wife could no longer be cared for at home the council insisted he had to sell their house to fund her care home fees. He did so; but para 7.003 suggests the property should have been disregarded.

  9. margaret
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    It depends what is meant by better off pensioners. Many pensioners are already working hours to make ends meet .

  10. Bananarist
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    The Deputy Labour Party Leader John MacDonnell is unsuitably outraged on TV today about the Winter Fuel Allowance. Why he is suddenly fighting for the rich is one mystery. But the greater enigma is why he is suddenly a Global Warming Denier. You could have grown bananas this winter in his constituency of Hayes and Harlington.

    • Jerry
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

      @Bananarist; Pensioners can be asset rich but cash poor, and with the housing shortage as it is, especially one and two bed properties (those that are being built are often reserved for first time buyers) it is not always possible for pensioners to downsize to release capital.

      • Bananarist
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

        There are many kinds of deals where money can be provided to someone occupying a property they do not or cannot leave for some reason or other. I wish I had the terrible problem of being asset rich but cash poor instead of merely being poor across the board.

        • Jerry
          Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

          @Bananarist; [Re property equity release scheme] Non of which actually give the true market value…trying to be polite about them!

  11. Hope
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:14 am | Permalink

    JR, once again please be honest about the dishonest manifesto claims. Tax highest under May since 1969 when Wilson was in govt and wanted to cap everything, per Guido Fawkes. 300 tax rises over the last seven years. Low tax claims utterly false. Social care- we pay twice in our community charge and are expected to sale our house to pay for our own care, Your manifesto now defers payment from the sale of our house until after we die. This is the same position now if the house is jointly owned! Cut immigration to tens of thousands when there was record numbers, based on estimates, Nader May. No serious attempt was made to achieve the target. Sheer dishonesty. Why should we in the mworld dole continually be fleeced for the third world and Eastern Europe immigration? Even to the point we pay for their care homes through community charge, twice, and then forced to sale our homes! To provide business cheap Labour while our taxes are being hiked to pay for it.

    Reply Income tax thresholds much higher, standard rate well down

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply NI upper earnings limit up. NI lower earnings threshold barely moved!

      • Hope
        Posted May 20, 2017 at 11:03 am | Permalink

        JR, this was a Lib dem policy! Cameron agreed After much argument, realized it was a vote winner and claimed it for your party. Again , untruthful to clam your party was responsible.

        reply. a COnservative policy as well

  12. Roy Grainger
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    There is not “More money for social care” overall, just more wealthy pensioners being forced to pay more for their own social care so the government can spend our taxes on social care for less wealthy pensioner. Overall total spending on social care across all pensioners won’t change.

    • Bob
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

      @Roy Grainger

      If the elderly are now being forced to pay for their own social care, will we see a drop in VAT, fuel duty, IHT, CGT or income tax rates?

  13. Richard Butler
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    The balance of manufacturers reporting improved export sales rose to 26 per cent, up from 16 per cent at the end of 2016, according to the survey by the British Chambers of Commerce

  14. agricola
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    Better off pensioners will be those who negotiated fixed annuities in the 70s/80s before government decided they were a cash cow. The fuel allowance of £200 t0£300 PA will not pay for one week in a care home. You need to start thinking outside the box to solve this growing problem. I am pleased for the schools of West Berkshire if their burden gets eased, but they still only get about half what it costs for a good education in a public day school.

  15. miami.mode
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    …….from removing the winter fuel allowance from better off pensioners……..

    Is that better off than the average earned income, the benefit cap, the minimum wage, the living wage, or perhaps the current pension which is around £8000 p.a., which compared to the foregoing is almost a pittance.

    Or perhaps it is the Gordon Brown approach which is to try and get everybody on the government’s payroll through claimed-for benefits so that they continue to vote for them. That worked out well didn’t it!

  16. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    This has missed the chance to address the inequities created by those boroughs which receive over funding because immigrants speak poor English. The four hundred million should be given to the mainstream budget not used to continue over funding inner city London boroughs.


  17. JoolsB
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    John, Most of what May spoke of yesterday – schools, NHS, housing, social care are devolved so she was only speaking about England when introducing the death tax and yet she did not say the word ENGLAND once but she did say the word Britain many times?

    To add to the insult, although a great proportion of what any UK Government does nowadays only affects England, there is still no Conservative manifesto for England despite there being one for Scotland and Wales.

    How much longer do you think the three anti-English parties are going to get away with this deliberate omittance of the word England and deliberate conflation of the UK/England?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

      And nevertheless the media ask Nicola Sturgeon for her views on proposals which will not apply to Scotland unless the Scottish Parliament chooses to copy them … so I find myself telling the TV that she should mind her own bloody business, which stops at the border for any devolved matter.

    • a-tracy
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:36 am | Permalink

      What extras do we English get for paying all our own bills? Oh I know we get insulted at every opportunity. Like the Plaid advert shown for some reason on Gogglebox last night stressing that the Welsh needed to defend themselves against the English! What the ….

  18. BobE
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 11:49 am | Permalink

    So do we rapidly do equity release to reduce our home values down to 100k. Then spend the inheritance?

    • Lifelogic
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

      Or sell to children and it rent back? There doesn’t seem to be much in the way of long term care insurance and yet only about 1 in 4 need long term care I understand.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

        Sell it to children. Gift them the proceeds do not pay rent and hope to live for seven years.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:48 pm | Permalink

          Dear Shoulders–And if you fall out with children?–Unfortunately it happens and of course cannot retain rights

          • Narrow Shoulders
            Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

            Dear Leslie – I suggest that is a risk worth taking

            @lifelogic below – there are anti avoidance measures as you suggest but HMRC really does not have the resources to discover this type of misdemeanour so it is worth the risk.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted May 19, 2017 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

          That probably does not work, as There are all sorts of anti avoidance rules such as gifts with reservation. But the new rules certainly encourage the elderly to spend the capital .

          Yet more govenment incentives to be feckless!

          • Bob
            Posted May 20, 2017 at 12:31 pm | Permalink


            “Yet more government incentives to be feckless!”

            It does appear to be the case and I would like to hear Mr Redwood’s opinion on this.

            Wouldn’t it be better to reduce the billions of wasteful expenditure by the govt, such as foreign aid and quangos and allow honest hard working families to keep what they’ve worked for after already paying huge amounts in taxes & duties to the Treasury?


  19. Atlas
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 11:54 am | Permalink


    I’m less than impressed by the removal of Winter Fuel allowance from nearly all pensioners. The phrase ‘better-off’ which you use in not defined – so what is it exactly please?

    Since Pensioners vote and are more inclined to be Brexit supporting, it seems odd that May wishes to get them to return to UKIP. There are many millions of pensioners and the total sums involved are small in comparison with the frittered-away Overseas budget, so I find it hard to credit that May has fallen into the elephant trap of taking their vote for granted. This trap has ruined the Labour Party who took its supporters for granted. So is May trying to snatch defeat from the Jaws of victory??

    All the pensioners I’ve spoken too have cooled on May as a result of this move – this is ominous.

    • Jerry
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

      @Atlas; Indeed, and so what if ‘rich’ pensioners get the winter fuel allowance, chances are these pensioners will use the money on some retail therapy thus the money becomes “helicopter money” in effect, boosting the economy more widely.

      “All the pensioners I’ve spoken too have cooled on May as a result of this move – this is ominous.”

      Not just the grey vote, the greying vote too.

    • miami.mode
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

      Atlas. Couldn’t agree with you more.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

      @Atlas. Indeed. So many people are now beginning to turn away from the conservative party. If it isn’t her blatant views on fox hunting then it’s taking away allowances from pensioners. I think Paul Nutall had better hold on because at this rate people could switch so easily to UKIP even if it is only a protest vote. Does Mrs May really want to win this election? I was listening to the Jeremy Vine radio talk show the other day and apparently they interviewed Corbyn. I couldn’t believe that so many staunch Tory voters were actually thinking of voting Labour. Is the writing on the wall?

      • Jerry
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

        @fedupsoutherner; Most disaffected Tory voters will simply not now vote, in protest, whilst others will switch their votes back to Labour, the dream that was sold by Thatcher having become a mirage under Mrs May.

        “Is the writing on the wall?”

        I suspect it is, and indeed it should be after that applauding manifesto – the only people switching their vote to the Conservatives will be disaffected UKIPers!

    • Ken Moore
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

      Mays actions are not about money in my view…she just views core Conservative supporters as being beyond the pale as they largely do not endorse her politically correct views.
      Like Cameron she despises them and never misses an opportunity to rub her supporters noses in all the PC nonsense she spews out . At least many members have had the good sense to leave the party.

      The Conservative party is now dead as it has ditched it’s core beliefs . It used to stand for :-

      – Personal responsibility
      – Rewarding hard work and endeavour
      – Small state and low taxes

  20. MickN
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

    I am deeply saddened by the fact that in my lifetime there will never be another Conservative government in my country. Mrs May will no doubt get her landslide despite taking core conservative voters for granted. She would do well to mark the words of Blairs advisors when they told him not to worry about labour’s core supporters as they had no where else to go. That worked out well didn’t it.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

      Agree. Isn’t it depressing?

    • MickN
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

      Judging by some of the other comments on here I wish you luck. You will have to try to sound enthusiastic for your manifesto in the same way that Cameron reckoned he had got a good deal on Brexit. It is not going down well among the core supporters.

  21. Shieldsman
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

    Winter fuel allowance, I was not ashamed to take it, it only partially offset Government imposed green levies paid to Wind Farm/Solar panel builders and owners.
    We have Caroline Lucas (a technical idiot) crowing that renewables are coming down in price. Not true, incentives for onshore wind may be reducing, but the cost of the reduced fossil fuel generation is going up (thank you George Osborne).
    Price regulation will not work when attempts to implement the Climate Change Act (it cannot succeed) skew the price of electricity.
    If this Conservative Government wants to get real, it should repeal the CCA and reorganise Energy distribution without all the green levies and taxes pushing up the costs and profits..

  22. a-tracy
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    The Conservatives are going to have to be very careful who they call better off pensioners. If it is as the Labour party are intimating those living on more than the pension credit threshold so £8286.20 for a single person household and £12,649 pa for a couple I don’t call those figures better off.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

      Dear a-tracy–And you believe the Labour Party? For a start how would they know?? I reckon Mrs May doesn’t know yet

      • a-tracy
        Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:51 am | Permalink

        We’re in a lot of the mess we’re in today because of a Labour government that promised cradle to grave care for our National Insurance contributions that were going to pay for everything forever.

        Labour are setting up new Ponzi schemes with their tuition fee about turn, don’t forget it was them that introduced it and doubled it first so hardly clean hands in the affair, this was all to create a graduate tax for the most able ENGLISH graduates 🎓 of 9% of their earnings for 30 years but some are actually set to pay it off within 10 years and that wasn’t in the plan so the fees had to be trebled then interest of 6% (a blatant excessive fine for doing well) added to ensure students pay their 9% for the full 30 years. So just how are they selling this to those 18-30 year olds who will be the only cohorts paying 9% extra tax? And getting away with it, where’s our BBC reporters? Where they were hiding when the Labour government in 1999 raised the age of female pensioners on the instructions of the EU equality legislators? Another Corbyn falsehood it was Labour who caused the problems for Waspi, a BBC who didn’t do their job informing these women well nearly 20 years ago to prepare even though we pay them to keep us informed, the only broadcasters we do pay, and now Tom Watson is trying to gain political ground in this – it amazes me that the Conservatives let them getting away with this!

  23. Jon p
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

    This being election time i hardly believe a word..some of your commentators write that Mrs may has taken a lurch to the left with her speeches and manifesto but i fear the truth is very much the opposite- when all of this is over we’ll see that she’ll be very much to the right. In fact so much to the right that she will be able to go virtually unchallenged. But where all of this is going to lead us to i have no idea – suffice to say it will be very bad for democracy itself as the little people through the opposition parties will have absolutely no say in any future policy decisions.. nor will anyone else for that matter.. we’ll have government by dictat

    That brexit itself is a worry- of much more cause for concern is the likely further balkanisation in economic terms of the UK itself.. the eventual vote for independence in Scotland will certainly follow with the probable unification of ireland which taken all together will threaten the very viability and cohesion of England itself. And to think that all of this is happenening right now on this present governments watch and also because the labour party under Corbyn put up such a dismal performance at the time of the brexit vote.. the people were lied to by the tory right wing head bangers and were gullible enough to believe it all- “taking back control”- and 350 million a week extra for the NHS- well we’ll see soon enough. Its true what the chinese say that only the educated and the better informed should have a vote. So then God help us all

  24. Roy Grainger
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    Not only more money for those but also a manifesto commitment to pay the EU a divorce settlement – but you told us no money at all was owing John ?

    Just anecdotally this manifesto has gone down very badly indeed with older staunch Tory voters I know, several of them say they will now abstain. Let’s hope Mrs May has not tried to be too clever trying to lure Labour voters.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

      Tell them not to abstain tell them to write ‘none of the above’ on their ballot.

      Spoiled papers are counted, non voters are ignored

      • sm
        Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

        The number of spoiled votes are counted but they do not contribute to the result in any way, it is simply for legal purposes!

        • Narrow Shoulders
          Posted May 20, 2017 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

          @sm true but the number is noted – 12% of the French spoiled their papers.

          UKIP got 4 million votes at the last election because voters wanted to be heard, if there is no party that attracts Roy’s friends their voice can still be heard with a spoiled paper.

          Voter’s intention uncertain rule 47 (1) (d)

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:57 pm | Permalink

      Dear Roy–No money owing LEGALLY–Politically another story

  25. Glenn Vaughan
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 3:14 pm | Permalink


    How will the pensioner pop stars with knighthoods manage financially without their winter fuel allowance?

  26. Martyn G
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    As an immediate first step that the next government could take, it could pass a simple rule so that pensioners (such as me) who do not need or want the winter allowance can say so. It is ridiculous that it shotgunned across all pensioners, from billionaires to the poorest. Mine goes to charity each year but I would, if I could, say ‘no thanks’ and rest easy. As for bus passes, people take those up whether or not they could afford to pay the fare, simply because it is there and so ‘why wouldn’t one take it?’ – usually because ‘I’ve been paying huge amounts of tax for decades past and this is one way I can get something back from the system. On the other hand, make ’em both taxable (possibly difficult re bus pass) and let HMRC do the sums….

    • Anonymous
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

      Martyn G – And that socialists can contribute more tax voluntarily if they truly believe in socialism.

      Why is that not in the Tory manifesto – even socialists should support that one !

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

      Dear Martyn–Agree totally that universal bus passes about as insane as you can get–Occasionally I meet old buddies in the City for lunch and two of these live in Mayfair have shedloads of money but love to show off their bus passes all as a big joke. Maybe I’d do the same if I had to cross London, I dunno, but that’s different from it’s being a good idea.

      • Linda
        Posted May 20, 2017 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

        Try at the age of 82 struggling with groceries and needing a bus to get to doctors ,dentists etc. I wish I had the chance to meet friends in the city.No I have to rush back to care for a 92 yeat old partner who has also got hospital appointments to attend and is profoundly deaf.
        No I do not get carers allowance or get a top up from pension credit as our pensions are lumped together and just over the limit.
        I pay for my dentist and glasses.
        One thing a bonus is the fuel allowance helps keep us warm.
        So depressing Thanks Mrs May.

        • sjb
          Posted May 21, 2017 at 11:15 pm | Permalink

          Your partner is > 65, has a sensory disability (deafness) and needs care. Have you applied for Attendance Allowance (“AA”), Linda?

          It’s a pig of a form, but your surgery should know of someone who can complete it on your partner’s behalf; some charities have outreach workers who will come to your home. The focus is on what care your partner needs, not on what he receives. You can improve your chances by attaching a diary of your partner’s worst day.

          AA is not means-tested. Even the lower rate (£55.65pw) should help you get help with your Council Tax. Generally, an informal carer such as yourself would claim Carer’s Allowance, but claiming it can affect any benefits your partner receives.

      • rose
        Posted May 20, 2017 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

        Dear Leslie,

        I think the universal bus pass is a good idea: it encourages old people to get out and about, thus keeping them fit physically and mentally for longer; it keeps potentially dangerous drivers off the roads – slow reactions, bad sight, heart attacks, etc.; and it cuts down on pollution and congestion. It may also help to keep bus services going which would otherwise be lost. It is therefore a health and safety measure and an environmental one, as well as of benefit to the community, not just an individual benefit.

  27. Chris
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

    The £100,000 criterion for social care is an extraordinary move for a Conservative government to propose. The more this is sinking in, the more anger and horror people are feeling. Make no mistake, Mr Redwood, this is a hugely detrimental step to take by the Tories, and, whatever the election result, will not be forgotten nor forgiven. There is anger too at the way it has been brought in i.e. on the back of the Brexit vote. May has cornered a lot of voters as she represents the only Party (that is in a position to get into government) promising to effect a proper Brexit. They may hold their noses and vote for her, but do not mistake that vote as approval for her social care policy.

    • sm
      Posted May 19, 2017 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

      If society believes that keeping extremely disabled, the totally incurable and the completely demented alive for decades then it has to decide who will pay the immense and increasing bills for their care.

      It seems that most of the posters above firmly believe it should be someone else, or someone else’s children who are expected to carry that load.

      It’s time we all started to get real about the harsh consequences of continually playing god with people’s lives, just because we can.

      • Bob
        Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:10 pm | Permalink


        “It seems that most of the posters above firmly believe it should be someone else…”

        not at all, the govt just need raise the priority of their spending towards UK citizens, rather than foreign government’s citizens.

        They also waste tens of billions on quangos such as the Arts Council which should be entirely self funded and the Environment Agency.
        If the Tories kept their “bonfire of the quangos” promise and cut some of the useless quangos the UK would have sufficient money to cover the services that the taxpayers thought they were paying for in the first place.

  28. Windy Nook
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    About this Scottish Winter Fuel money. I can tell you that when I’m stood astride a hillock taking in the glorious views on the Yorkshire Fells you can times-many get a quick cold updraft of wind.

  29. Roy Grainger
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

    John. The UK fishing industry is very concerned that your manifesto is vague about whether U.K. will take back control of our waters to the full 200 mile limit (as the EU currently has) or only to the pre-EU 12 mile limit. There have already been several rumours May is prepared to concede this in negotiations. What is your understanding ?

    • Bob
      Posted May 20, 2017 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

      Mr Redwood’s silence is deafening.

  30. der Zensor
    Posted May 19, 2017 at 11:58 pm | Permalink

    I read on social media that Mrs May’s Manifesto mentions regulating the internet. I must have edited that bit out when I read the whole; for, it’s news to me.

  31. fedupsoutherner
    Posted May 20, 2017 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    Saw Nicola Sturgeon last night painting a very black picture of the Tory manifesto and how old age pensioners were going to lose their fuel payments. No, not necessarily in Scotland. Sturgeon has the power to keep paying it as it is a devolved issue now but she chose not to say anything about that.

  32. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted May 21, 2017 at 1:13 am | Permalink

    There is no reason why atheistic taxpayers should be forced to finance religious nonsense of whatever kind in ‘faith schools’. Divisive and irrational mumbo-jumbo is not learning. Schools should teach Neo-Darwinism, with Professor Richard Dawkins’ book ‘The Selfish Gene’ as a set book in the core curriculum.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page