Naturally Unnatural Issue #6 20th May 2017

Issue #2, 22 nd April Why does rhetoric overwhelm fact dur- ing an election? By Matthew Clifton Labour’s manifesto draft was leaked and much was being made of the poli- cies. But there was a significant amount of speculation surrounding it and much of the media tried to analyse the content. However, this was the draft and the final copy was released this week. Whilst most of the content is largely the same as the draft, there was less about costing within the draft. This led to media rhetoric about fund- ing rather than focusing on the positive policies. Why does the population question how Labour will fund their policies and the Conservatives are largely allowed to run with a blank cheque? Despite the evi- dence that suggests Labour have been fiscally more reliable than the Conserva- tives throughout history. If we take two examples from Conserva- tive policy and Labour policy. Theresa May announced that they would scrap the 1983 Mental Health Act and replace it plus, employ a further 10,000 mental health staff. However, those who are cam- paigners and experts have stated that it is underfunding rather than bad legislation. The Conservatives have failed to provide any idea of how it’ll be costed as well but it was met with widespread positivity from the public. The only form of funding they have mentioned is the an apparent £1.4bn ‘real-term’ rise in funding except this is neither provable nor disprovable. The rise in ‘real-term’ funding is merely conjecture and other NHS policies will have an impact on whether this rise will happen plus current NHS funding means there will be no real term rise by 2018/19. If it does happen, then the Con- servatives are saying “we can afford this” and if that is the case why is there harsh cuts on the health services and austerity being pushed onto the most vulnerable now? Trident is another pointless system that we spend vital resources on, at what point should it be used? The last resort? Ask yourself, what is the last resort? You’ll find that the last resort is often when it is too late, why waste public mon- ey on a pointless system, when it can be put to better use. been along the lines of “taxing the hard- est workers and allowing the lazy to get all the benefits”. This is tired rhetoric that is still being pushed and believed by many, despite overwhelming evidence against the notion. If you earn £80,000 or more, you are in the to 5% of earners. Conservatives have promised very few policies that include repealing the ban on fox hunting. A blood-sport that is played by those who have privilege and money, it is not a countryside sport. Theresa May said she liked fox-hunting, is it any won- You will also find that when the Con- der that a woman who happily declares servative government wanted to commit she likes blood-sport, would be involved to further wars, they find the money to do in a government that has seen measures so and give large tax cuts to big corpora- implemented by her colleagues at the tions. Labour on the other hand have stat- DWP be directly linked to deaths of indi- ed that they would create a national edu- viduals. Is it a surprise in 2014 as Home cation service, ban 30+ class sizes, re- Secretary she lost 114 files linking MPs to move adult learner fees and bring back child sex abuse? student grants. Paid through reversing corporate tax cuts and raising it to 26 per People will happily remember Diane Ab- bott’s mistake on live radio where she got cent. They have also promised that 95% of earners will not receive a tax rise, this a figure mixed up but later corrected her- means that if you earn less than £80,000 a self. But forget the 48,000 students that Theresa May wrongly deported or her year, you will not receive a tax rise. introduction of the Snoopers Charter, that These policies are costed, the latter is self allows unprecedented access to the pub- -funded but received negative response lics web browsing history by police, se- curity services and official agencies. This from many the public. When did it be- come acceptable to push the tax burden doesn’t clarify the extent of who can ac- cess the data. Theresa May’s mistakes onto those who earn the least in society have had a human impact but the public whilst affording the largest corporations would rather forget that because she is massive tax breaks and funding wars ‘strong and stable’. abroad. A lot of public comments have 4

Naturally Unnatural Issue #6 20th May 2017 | Page 4