Leters to rhe Press 2007.

LETTERS TO THE PRESS - 2007

Click to select. Back to: Home page . Main menu.

December 2007 Eddie Teare. Patients accompanied travel cost.
Septermber 2007 - Pension supplement and winter fuel allowance.
July 2007 - Eddie Teare. Pensioners need less food tan prisoners.
February - 2007. Water fluoridation.
February 2007 - Green issues.

February 2007 (For IOM Pensioners Association) - Fuel costs.
January 2007 - Pensioners and inflation statistics.

December 2007 Eddie Teare. Patients accompanied travel cost.

So Eddie (Scrooge) Teare seems to have done it again - targeting the frail and weak by denying fares for carers to accompany patients travelling across for treatment. This follows the debacle of "pensioners needing less to eat than prisoners".

Four years ago, I was myself in the position of needing treatment across, Despite the excellent help rfrom the airline staff and taxi drivers, there was nothing like the care and support of a loved one at such a time of vulnerability and stress, pparticularly for the first journey. Even at the best of times, airports and hospitals can be two of the most stressful environments we have to cope with. The cost of such a fare to a pensioner can be more than a week's income, though only peanuts to a goverrnment used to squandering millions on consultants.

As for the "Variable Rate Winter Bonus". This has obviously been made so complex as to discourage anyone from applying for it. A whole newspaper page of small print! This is a supreme example of a governnment policy to "spare no expense to save a penny". Words totally fail to express my disgust. I wonder how much was paid to the consultants who dreamed it up. Or could it have been the personal creation of Mr. Teare?

I still do not see what right our government has to block the payment of the winter fuel allowance from pensioners that have earned it in the UK, and who do not qualify for the Manx pension supplement. A full explanation would be most welcome.

As a final thought, how wonderful it would be if we could elect a government to be honest, compassionate, free from sleaze and spin, and to recognise the benefit to all of closing the gap between rich and poor. I expect we must dream on.

Septermber 2007 - Pension supplement and winter fuel allowance.

The report (Examiner ,4 September) on the government's refusal to extend payment of the pension supplement, makes no mention of the "double whammy" suffered by pensioners from the UK in losing the winter fuel allowance as well. This payment was introdced by Gordon Brown, following the imposition of VAT on domestic fuel by the former Tory chancellor, Kenneth Clarke. It was awarded to all pensioner households, and not means tested.

Juan Watterson may say thst we want to" have our cake and eat it". I say we are going really hungry by having both of these options snatched away. No heating allowance and no supplement. Wherever he gets the idea of the supplement "attracting pension tourism" is a complete mystery. Just look at the price of houses, our excessive fuel costs, and basic food products like bread and milk kept artificially high by restricting imports. Take the cost of travel to and from the Island. And how many people really want to suffer a month of travel chaos every summer within the Island, as it is taken over by hoards of motorbikes?

All we want is a pension for everyone that keeps up with the true cost of living.

Eddie Teare may say that income tax is lower here. But those most in need of the supplement receive income below the tax threshold and therefore do not benefit. Should the supplement be means tested?

Regarding the "paying in and getting out" argument: It is my understanding that the surplus of funds that made payment of the supplement possible, came from the UK, and therefore from the contributions of the very people to whom it is now denied.

Returning to the winter fuel allowance, may I ask Mr. Teare for a satisfactory explanation of why this has been taken from us on coming to the Island. To echo Richard Corkill's answer: "It is a matter for the UK government"" will not do. If Mr. Teare has any concern for pensioners, he will meet his UK counterpart and negotiate for it on our behalf. Britons emigrating to subtropical locations like Spain still receive it. With our fuel costs, and winters of increasing severity, we certainlly need it here.

May I close with the thought, "Could the government perhaps shed a Teare for pensioners?"

July 2007 - Eddie Teare. Pensioners need less food tan prisoners.

I was both appalled and disgusted to read of Eddie Teare's remark that pensioners need fewer calories of food than younger people. (Independent July 13). This is the kind of scrooge-like remark that will stay in the minds of pensioners, and come home to roost at the next general election. We all know what happened following the "drain on the state" comment.

The DHSS is a department having control over the lives of the most vulnerable in society; the sick, the disabled and the elderly. At its head should be someone with compassion, a quality not often found in politicians. Remarks such as that made by Mr.Teare come over, not only as uncharitable, but also unchristian, thus making a total mockery of the prayers held prior to Tynwald sittings.

The last few years. have seen enormous rises in the cost of domestic fuel, rates and water, with very little pension increases. Pensioners from the UK are cheated out of their heating allowance, and at the same time refused the Manx pension supplement. Along with the UK, we have the lowest pension in western Europe, compared with average earnings. Government inflation figures are distorted, to ensure that pensions tied to them lose their value in real purchasing power. Tax capping for the wealthy is even further stretching the gap between rich and poor. In short - nothing seems fair.

I wonder - if Tynwald were really sincere in their prayers - would we get fair and equitable legislation for ALL our people?

February - 2007. Water fluoridation.

You ask for views on water fluoridation.

Such compulsory mass medication is a total violation of human rights, and belongs only with mad dictators like Hitler, or in the novels of Orwell or Huxley. It has no place whatever in a modern democratic society. Who knows where it may end? Nicotine in the water to discourage smokers? Sex hormones for population control? Selective poisons to kill off the aged and save pensions? No, we don't want it and must do everything we can to stop it!

Any benefit to teeth is best obtained by its local application in toothpaste, not by totally uncontrolled dosage to the whole body, with the possibility of cancer.

The real remedies for healthy teeth, are regular cleaning, avoiding sticky sweets and drinks, and above all, sufficint national health dentists, so that none have to go without dental care because they can't afford it.

The only people to benefit from fluoridation would be those making and supplying the equipent and chemicals. The rest of us don't want it!

February 2007 - Green issues.

Following the article by Adrian Darbyshire on global warming (Examiner, February 20), Readers were ask to send their own views about "reducing the carbon footprint". Although I have avidly scanned these columns, I have not found a single reply. Are we are totally bereft of ideas, or has our newly found "freedom to flourish" prematurely faded and withered?

However, we may need to get things into perspective. We are told to "save the planet" by unplugging small battery chargers when not in use. Now, these devices consume so little power when off load, that the saving over many hours could be totally swamped by just a few seconds of thoughtlessly revving a motorcycle engine. Are we going to tell our visiting bikers to "save the planet" by not revving their engines at traffic lights?

How long will it be perhaps before we are told not to take exercise, as it makes us breathe out more carbon dioxide? Or, guess what gas makes the bubbles in lemonade, is there any truth in the rumour that the sale of all fizzy drinks is to be banned from April 1st?

More seriously though, a real contribution can be made by increasing the efficiency of today's motor vehicles, which even after a century of development, have changed very little in their basic design. They still waste energy by heating up the brakes, which could be used again in an electric or "hybrid" car .

Such a vehicle need not be expensive, since most of its gears and mechanical couplings would be eliminated. It would have just an electic motor built into each wheel, and powered by a single battery, kept charged by a comparatively small engine driven generator.

The motors would also act as brakes, recharging the battery as they did so. Conventional brakes would be needed only for emergency stops and parking. Driving would be easy, with just one pedal and a stearing wheel. The generator could double as the engine's starter-motor. The simplicity arises from the same machine acting as both motor and generator, and able to cope with varying speeds and loads without gears.

I hope this shows that "green" does not have to be expensive. Some years ago, I wrote a more detailed description of such a car, which at present can be found at: www.justiceforpensioners.com/energy.html. I will be pleased to discuss this and other energy saving ideas with anyone interested.

February 2007 (For IOM Pensioners Association) - Fuel costs.

After many years of fuel costs rising at three times the rate of pensions, and the swingeing increases in the last year or so, Mr. Teare seems to regret the award of a paltry £100 to a limited number of pensioners, following a tiny 1.5 percent fall in fuel costs. Should we award him the middle name of "Scrooge"?

While our government pours millions into subsidising a wealthy film industry, online gambling, motor bike racing, and pop concerts, many of our pensioners have to make the choice between "heating or eating". Is this a permanent feature of our "strong economy" and "sharing in a prosperous and caring society"? Ah yes, I had forgotten about "freedom to flourish". Or was it "perish"?

I understand that we manage to export electricity by cable to the mainland where it is much cheaper than here. Can someone explain the economics of this. Why can't our own customers also have it at that rate? Or is it something to do with a monopoly and a captive market? Perhaps like Manx beef? Or travel to and from the Island?

And now we are linked by cable, why can we not choose our suppliers like the whole of Britain, and benefit from lower prices?. And what about gas? This could benefit the whole island, including business, leading to a genuine reduction in inflation.

January 2007 - Pensioners and inflation statistics.

How I hate to say: "I told you so".

At long last, it is now officialy recognised by the UK's Office for National Statistics that inflation is higher for those on low incomes. During a BBC news programme it emerged that actual inflation for a pensioner, with a high proportion of spending on fuel and coucil tax,is around 8 percent. I have been trying to tell our government this for years.

I also note with sadness the death of another Island hypothermia victim. (Examiner, January 16). How many more will there be before the government acts?

Despite Mr. Gelling's assertion last year that "Pensions are ahead of prices", we all know that with savagely escalating costs for fuel, rates and water,the reverse is very much the case.

It is no use offering a paltry sum only to those on income support. There are many with incomes just over that level, or who have managed to save a little "for a rainy day", but enough to disqualify them from benefit. It needs only simple arithmetic to show that many of us, though "getting by nicely" now, may in a year or two be reduced to poverty by this continual eating away of our pensions.

With so much lack of action in the past, may I now appeal to the new members of the House of Keys, the Liberal Vannin Party, and the Positive Action Group, to give a much needed kick start to a better deal.

I need hardly mention here the "double whammy" suffered by pensioners from the UK, who lose both the UK heating allowance and the IOM pension supplement. Ending this discrimination would be a very good start. We are always being told what a sound economy we have, so don't tell me we can't afford it.

It is sad to reflect how both the UK and IOM governments have chosen to neglect the elderly as the most vulnerable mambers of society. Where democracy fails, trade unionists can strike, and war protesters can demonstrate, but pensioners have a more limited armoury. Hopefully, we can still rely on the help from sympathetic news editors to state our case.