Free elderly care under fire for cost (From Daily Echo)

Regardless of whether or not the pensioner pays what is needed is a complete shake up of the elderly care system because at the moment it's a mess.

After having looked after the well offs since 1997 and filling the coffers of lousy ‘Bankers’ and inflicting misery upon the elderly to whom at one time this government offered only 75 pence per week pension rise, now Brown has suddenly woken up to the reality of votes needed for the election. So has started promising few bits for the elderly.
While we should accept it as a step in the right direction, although for opportunistic reasons, central government should put its money where its mouth is i.e. provide sufficient funds to local authorities so that they can provide proper care for the elderly.
I fail to understand the heartless lot in Hampshire who think care for the elderly can’t be afforded. They are disgrace.
If in our names money can be found to bribe those who have been killing our brave men and women in Afghanistan, it is a matter of national shame if any elected person says that care of the elderly is not affordable.
Hampshire should demand that Brown should provide ring fenced funds for this puropse.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
After having looked after the well offs since 1997 and filling the coffers of lousy ‘Bankers’ and inflicting misery upon the elderly to whom at one time this government offered only 75 pence per week pension rise, now Brown has suddenly woken up to the reality of votes needed for the election. So has started promising few bits for the elderly. While we should accept it as a step in the right direction, although for opportunistic reasons, central government should put its money where its mouth is i.e. provide sufficient funds to local authorities so that they can provide proper care for the elderly. I fail to understand the heartless lot in Hampshire who think care for the elderly can’t be afforded. They are disgrace. If in our names money can be found to bribe those who have been killing our brave men and women in Afghanistan, it is a matter of national shame if any elected person says that care of the elderly is not affordable. Hampshire should demand that Brown should provide ring fenced funds for this puropse.

they didn't look after me when I lost my job and told me I'd have to wait 39 weeks before I could claim mortgage relief. Get in the real world, Labour only ever benefit the scroungers and the lazy

people should aways become before money. and never the other way round.

condor ask your self this who cause the problem in the first place by putting millions on the dole, then covering up the true unemployed numbers ah right that your maggie thatcher.

southy wrote:
people should aways become before money. and never the other way round. condor ask your self this who cause the problem in the first place by putting millions on the dole, then covering up the true unemployed numbers ah right that your maggie thatcher.

Southy--you are pathetic. If you want to blame thatcher why not Harold Wilson//James Callaghan going begging cup in hand to the IMF who forced austerity on the usual disasterous Labour government economic policies ??

Thatcher left power in 1990--thats right--20 years ago. Her relevance to the current economic situation is as relevant as that of Churchill's WW2 policies in Africa--ie--its not relevant in any way or form. Your weary nostalgic harping on about the past is tiring. And pointless.

Labour has been in power since 1997. Who's to blame for this cuurent economic mess if not Gordon Brown ??? I assume that everyone is keen on another 4 years of Gordon and his economic incompetance ???

Condor Man wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote: After having looked after the well offs since 1997 and filling the coffers of lousy ‘Bankers’ and inflicting misery upon the elderly to whom at one time this government offered only 75 pence per week pension rise, now Brown has suddenly woken up to the reality of votes needed for the election. So has started promising few bits for the elderly. While we should accept it as a step in the right direction, although for opportunistic reasons, central government should put its money where its mouth is i.e. provide sufficient funds to local authorities so that they can provide proper care for the elderly. I fail to understand the heartless lot in Hampshire who think care for the elderly can’t be afforded. They are disgrace. If in our names money can be found to bribe those who have been killing our brave men and women in Afghanistan, it is a matter of national shame if any elected person says that care of the elderly is not affordable. Hampshire should demand that Brown should provide ring fenced funds for this puropse.

they didn't look after me when I lost my job and told me I'd have to wait 39 weeks before I could claim mortgage relief. Get in the real world, Labour only ever benefit the scroungers and the lazy

You didn't have insurance to cover your unemployment/mortgag
e then. So what were you going to do...yes thats right pick up the handouts exactly what you are condemning others for. I think that you call them scroungers. Perhaps your own party would have made you wait longer...but i suppose that would be alright would it.
I cant imagine that you are that old or unintelegent ..so people like you dont need handouts as you are strong and capable..its the real unfortunate ones in our society that need looking after...and yes you are right there are some lazy ones that play the system and milk it.

james47 wrote:

southy wrote: people should aways become before money. and never the other way round. condor ask your self this who cause the problem in the first place by putting millions on the dole, then covering up the true unemployed numbers ah right that your maggie thatcher.

Southy--you are pathetic. If you want to blame thatcher why not Harold Wilson//James Callaghan going begging cup in hand to the IMF who forced austerity on the usual disasterous Labour government economic policies ?? Thatcher left power in 1990--thats right--20 years ago. Her relevance to the current economic situation is as relevant as that of Churchill's WW2 policies in Africa--ie--its not relevant in any way or form. Your weary nostalgic harping on about the past is tiring. And pointless. Labour has been in power since 1997. Who's to blame for this cuurent economic mess if not Gordon Brown ??? I assume that everyone is keen on another 4 years of Gordon and his economic incompetance ???

Why dont you use your real log in name...too embarassed