Letters to the Press

LETTERS TO THE PRESS

Back to: -------- Home page . ------ Main menu.

I feel that I must write here in support of Penny Ceighton (Age concern) and Mick Hewer (Unite), regarding the recent huge increase in fuel costs. (Independent 8th August).

It is a well known fact that people have died from hypothermia because they could not afford to keep warm. It is also a fact that the cost of domestic fuel, along with water and local authority rates, has forged well ahead of the recognised rate of inflation, leading to a mathematical certainty that, if this continues, the whole of a small income will soon be consumed by these costs alone.

The recent fuel cost rises, and those predicted, have now brought this day perilously close, and without serious government intervention, there is no doubt that many of us will soon be faced with extreme poverty.

A recent Daily Mail article highlighted the UK pension as the worst in Europe. Here in the Isle of Man, pensioners are also denied the the winter fuel allowance, making us even worse off, unless we are lucky enough to receive the Manx supplement. Add to this the increased cost of living here, and we are definitely right at the bottom.

Now in some respects, we are better off here than in the UK. Our domestic rates and water charges have not yet reached those of the UK, and our income tax is fairer for those on both low and high incomes. The recent extension of personal tax credits also helps those trapped in the void between income support and tax threshold. But with the latest fuel and food inflation, these become only marginal benefits, and not nearly enough.

If people are to survive, some drastic increase in pensions and the minimum wage will be needed. Is it time time to re-examine extension of the Manx pension supplement? Some levelling out by tax - making the wealthy pay more? Or abolishing local authority rates and replacing with income tax?

Perhaps we need to look at the way we award "cost of living" increases. Instead of a percentage of ones income, should these be at a flat rate on all incomes, reflecting the actual increase in personal living costs? This might in a a small way lead to some closing of the present obscene gap between rich and poor.

Following the number of anti-fluoride letters (including mine) in these columns, readers can remain in no doubt concerning the dangers of adding this chemical to our water supply. But has anyone considered the possible devastating effect on our food and farming industries?

Imagine for a moment that, despite all public protest, Tynwald has been persuaded by a rich and powerful chemical industry to poison our water in this way.

Those of us who really care about the health of ourselves and our children, will know that we have to do more than use bottled water from across for all drinking and cooking. If fluoridated water has been used for feeding livestock and watering crops, we shall need to look for other imported food products, including the basics of milk, meat and bread. And how will fluoride affect the "organic" status of farms?

Our own food products are among the best, and self sufficiency is vital to the Island's economy, and in reducing CO2 emissions. So please don't let us destroy what we have, simply to appease the giants of the chemical industry.

With reference to Juan Watterson's letter ((Independent March 28), may I come back with a few points about the budget and pensioners.

Since my last letter on the subject, I have become aware of a positive improvement in payment of the Personal Tax Credit. In this respect I stand corrected by Mr. Watterson. However, I still maintain that massive increases in the cost of water, domestic fuel, and now with even greater importance, local authority rates, have left pensioners far behind in keeping up with the cost of living.

Rates are mainly a tax on the poor, from whom they take the greatest proportion of income. An increase may be hardly noticeable to a highly paid professional couple, but it can cause severe distress to a pensioner. UK pensioners may be drowning in the Council Tax, and some going to prison, but can the Isle of Man not show a better way? Ireland has abolished rates. Scotland is thinking about it. The Liberal Democrats promise it for England. Why can't the Isle of Man just get on and do it?

Until recently, people trapped between the roof of income support and the floor of income tax have gained little from either benefit increases or tax cuts. While it is rare for me to praise the action of a government minister, I must say that Allan Bell's introduction, and subsequent improvement in the Personal Tax Credit has done something to address this. My question now is whether the whole of the present tangle of means tested benefits, could be replaced by such a system of "negative income tax". This would be based on the tax return rather than the present intrusive claim form, and would not penalise those who manage to save something out of a small income.

Do we have to accept rising fuel costs as inevitable, and due to world prices? Surely with some original thought and enterprise, we can use the Island's natural resources of winds and tides to generate our own energy, cheaply and quite independently of world markets. It would not only benefit pensioners, but also the competitiveness of Island industries.

How refreshing it would be to see our government working toward some of these positive aims, instead of wasting time and money on plans to poison our water with fluoride.

March 2008 - Fluoride

The proposed telephone poll will automatically exclude those who have chosen not to receive "cold calls", or who are "ex directory". They could be the very people with the most valid opinions.

I would have thought it obvious by now, from previous discussions, that the great majority of people are against fluoridation. The only ones to benefit would be the chemical industry, finding a market for an otherwise useless by product, and the suppliers of the equipment to inject it into the water. Why Tynwald should still be considering it at all is a mystery.

The arguments against it are now so well known.

Even accepting it to be of benefit, only the most minute trace of the chemical is needed to come into contact with the teeth. So why pour tonnes of the stuff into the water supply, for toilet flushing, car washing, and all the other countless uses of water? The ultimate "sledgehammer to crack a nut"?

For the same reason, why does it have to be ingested by the whole body in a totally uncontrolled dose, with possible risk of cancer? It is already in toothpaste, so those who clean their teeth would get an extra dose.

Any compulsory medication (outside the novels of Orwell or Huxley) is a breach of human rights. Where could it end?

The real solutions for healthy teeth are: education of children and parents in tooth care; the avoidance of sticky drinks and sweets, and enough national health dentists. Don't poison our water.

We are about to eliminate passive smoking as one form of mass poisoning. Please don't let us introduce another in the form of fluoride. I urge all who care about this to voice their opinions, contact their MHKs, and press for a full referendum.

March 2006 - A pensioner's View of the Budget

From a pensioner's point of view, the only positive thing about the budget is that personal allowances have been increased in line with inflation. But that is how it should be anyway, to stop miserly pension increases being gobbled by income tax.

For many pensioners and low income households, the budget just offers a double blow. A slap in the face by no real compensation for massive fuel cost increases, followed by a kick in the teeth from a 9% rise in Onchan rates.

Are we trying to catch up with the UK's council tax? We all agree that government services have to be paid for, thus creating the need for tax. But most of us think that taxes should be fair, and fall on those who can afford them most. Consider a typical house with an annual rates bill of say £500. A pensioner receiving £5,000 a year will pay a tenth of his income in tax, whereas an MHK with £50,000 will pay only a hundredth of it. Is this fair?

I would see a budget as progressive if it did something to address this, ideally by abolishing rates altogether and replacing with income tax. An alternative might include a household income factor in determining the amount to be paid. Or perhaps we should ask the fundamental question of whether we need such a multiplicity of local authorities. Could we function as a single island government, in a similar way to some of the "unitary authorities" across?

For many years, we have seen not only our rates bills, but also domestic fuel costs, rise at many times the rate of inflation. With incomes tracking inflation, it becomes a mathematical certainty that eventually these two costs alone will consume the whole of any income, however large. For lower incomes it will just happen sooner.

I may have said this before, but government inflation figures are a fallacy, especially for lower incomes from which higher proportions are spent on fast rising costs like heating and rates. They are also distorted by including all the latest technical gimmicks, which start high and fall quickly in price. And as the world races to grow biofuels, are we prepared for the inevitable shortages and price rises of food?

So when can we have a variable "heating cost supplement" with our pensions? And is it reasonable to still charge VAT on domestic heating fuel? My question regarding the deprivation to UK pensioners of their winter fuel allowance still remains unanswered. The words "paying in and getting out", as applied to the Manx pension supplement, come to mind here. We spent our working lives in the UK "paying in" for it, so why do we not get the allowance?

All in all, this is certainly not a pensioner's budget. For us "Freedom to Flourish" will remain just a myth. and continue to attract sarcastic parodies.

January 2008 - Commissioner for Older People for the Isle of Man

The Welch First Minister has recently announced the appointment of a Commissioner for Older People. Could I suggest that there is a very real need for the creation of a similar post in the Isle of Man. We seem to be lacking any voice in Tynwald to specifically defend the interests of those who may be old, sick or disabled, against the current onslaught of cuts in services and benefits.

Our main priority is of course a pension that keeps up with prices now - not promises for the year 2012, when many of us will no longer be here. With imminent threats of inflation-busting price rises, not only in fuel but now food, it is high time to scrap the meaningless retail price index (RPI), and link pensions to the real prices of essential goods and services.

Besides the matter of money, there are many ways in which the environment and consumer products can be made more friendly to older people, and discrimination against them reduced. Far too many to list here.

May I invite readers to nominate someone for the post. Please visit www.justiceforpensioners.com, and email your suggestions, along with any other thoughts about improving the lives of older people.