Sunday 12 August 2012

Speaking Your Mind Has Consequences

Speaking Your Mind Has Consequences:

Food, Inc.
Food, Inc. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Perdue Farms
Perdue Farms (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Remember Carole Morison from the documentary “Food, Inc.“? She was the chicken farmer under contract with Perdue, the country’s third largest chicken processor, who offered a rare look at what an industrial chicken farm looks like. The chickens barely had room to move, and many died daily due to the conditions and their accelerated breeding. She was tired of it — by agreeing to take part in the film, Morison put her livelihood in jeopardy. Perdue terminated her contract in 2008 after she refused to entirely enclose her chicken houses.
Her eyes were opened to the truth and she now uses sustainable farming methods and has never been so happy and content!
Related articles

52.267135
-1.467522

#AceNewsServices to tweet your news and views on a story
Ace News Desk to email me your news and views on a story!

Thursday 9 August 2012

Family Courts Are They One Way To Stop Legal Aid

Family Courts Are They One Way To Stop Legal Aid:
Barnet Civil and Family Court Centre on Regent...
Barnet Civil and Family Court Centre on Regents Park Road, Finchley. It is a civil and family courts centre. The building’s address is St Mary’s Court, and the photographer believes that there used to be a school of the same name on this site. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
A move has been a foot for many a year whereby successive governments have tried to find a family friendly way to deal more effectively, with family disputes over children! Some cases have dragged out over many weeks and months and of course costs have spiraled out of control. So sooner rather than later something had to be done.
The news today provided an insight to the new system and its implementation and l have added an extract or flavour of what has been published!
Extract of published proposal:- 
Proposals to change the culture of family courts and speed up cases in England and Wales have been published. The plans include a single family court run by judges and magistrates to replace the current system where judges sit in multiple court buildings. Family courts often deal with child custody cases following divorce or separation. The “time-wasting” use of expert witnesses is to be cut substantially. There will be a time limit of 26 weeks for all but exceptional cases involving children’s futures. Last spring, the average case took 57 weeks, falling to 51 weeks in the last quarter. The Mail hopes that the issue of secrecy in family courts is addressed: “But would it be asking too much if he might address the veil of secrecy that hangs over family courts – all the more worrying, since the numbers of children in care have surged by 10,000 to 30,000 since the horrifying Baby P case in 2008? Yes, children’s identities must be protected. But transparency and publicity are always the strongest shields against miscarriages of justice.”
My Views:- 
The fact that we are looking at reducing time taken to process these cases seems on the face of it, an excellent way but by cutting the time in these types of cases, leads to problems! The wasted time as it has been called provides the judges with a broader picture of certain cases,as a number of key facts, do not always come to light until late into the case! This golden opportunity would be lost and mistakes on custody of vulnerable children, may well be awarded to the wrong person. This may lead to further court cases, causing further trauma for both the child and the other parties concerned.We are not simply dealing with cases of theft or even a simple divorce [ Not that these cannot be long drawn out] but in these cases a young, vulnerable child!
The second point is the issue relating to secrecy and to numbers of children in care, is it not better that a child is put into care, either short-term or long if the welfare of that child is threatened. Let us be honest with ourselves at this point, do we not live in a precarious world of bad if not in some cases evil people. Who prey on these types of children as a vent for some twisted ideas, laid upon them by their parents or lack of good parental control! When l was young we called this ” falling in with the wrong crowd” well it has got worst not better! So some veil of secrecy must be up held as protection against these types of people and much worse using cases like this to further their own ends! We all know how much money can be made with a good story, some unscrupulous journalists hang onto a story like a ” dog with a bone ” holding on to every bit of it, just to make their facts fit a story!
Finally and the reason for my heading for this story and what is behind it all! Whenever changes to policies in government take place they have a monetary aspect, as l said by the fact cases drag out over many months! The related costs of ” legal aid” can run into hundreds of thousands of pounds and it all has to be paid for by the good old taxpayer! Well in these austere days for some, our politicians can make us feel better with words like, WE CARE, WE WANT TO HELP and my favourite WE WANT TO SAVE THE TAXPAYER MONEY! So by proposing SWEEPING changes and a DRASTIC overhaul they will be able to save money, for WHO and at WHAT COST!
This could lead to SWEEPING AWAY THE LEGAL AID SYSTEM so if you can pay and remember the costs for private legal services are much higher for the legal eagles. Then with no system of help for the less well off, we will see a lot more miscarriages of justice in this country.
So l for one look for many more of these ” Sweeping Changes and Drastic Overhauls ” and will report as l see them occurring!

Ed says! What are your news and views on this story? Either leave a valid comment, email us at
Ace News Desk or tweet your comment at #AceNewsServices  

Related articles

Filed under: Ace Healthcare News, Ace News Desk, Ace Social News Tagged: Child, Child care, Child custody, current-events, England and Wales, Family, Family court, Government, Legal aid, Wales

#AceNewsServices

New Creative Commons License Chooser – Creative Commons

New Creative Commons License Chooser – Creative Commons:
English: Three “Layers” Of Creative Commons Li...
English: Three “Layers” Of Creative Commons Licenses Русский: Трия “слоя” лицензий Creative Commons (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Creative Commons
Creative Commons (Photo credit: jorgeandresem)
New Creative Commons License Chooser – Creative Commons
Latest news just made available for the changes to improve creative commons licenses and make it easier to understand.
Creative Commons is proud to announce the launch of our new license chooser tool. The license chooser has been completely redesigned for greater clarity and ease of use. While the original license chooser was successful at simplifying the act of selecting a license and applying it to one’s work, its linear workflow resembled a registration process. Furthermore, as the tool had been extended numerous times, its interface became more and more cluttered. While the redesign is a total user interface overhaul, feature-wise there isn’t anything new that wasn’t already somewhere in the license engine. This may come as a surprise to many users familiar with the old tool.
New Creative Commons License Chooser – Creative Commons.
Related articles

Filed under: Ace News Desk, Ace Social News Tagged: Creative Commons, creative commons licence, Creative Commons license, free, License, Open Content, Open source, User interface, websites, Workflow, YouTube

" The Roving Giraffe News Report " provided through #AceNewsServices or email our Ace News Desk  with your news and views or a story and we will try to print it! If you want us to send you a link please add your email address.
Thank you Ian {Editor}

Reducing Council Tax Benefit Will Benefit Government

Reducing Council Tax Benefit Will Benefit Government:
Bill of Benefits
Bill of Benefits (Photo credit: judge_mental)
This was a snippet of  news picked up just a while ago, that interested me as to the ramifications! It seems that this was a joint decision by the coalition on the surface of it, but the full article on the this story, reveals a lot more!
Anyway here is the extract firstly courtesy of the IFS and Paul Johnson:
The Institute for Fiscal Studies has warned that poor families are set to have their council tax benefits cut due to the Coalition telling councils to cut their benefit bills by 10%. IFS chief Paul Johnson said: “They could decide to take 10% off the current cost of council tax benefit, which means some council tax recipients will be worse off. It’s quite hard to do this without affecting those who receive 100% council tax benefit – the very poorest.” Labour peer Baroness Hollis said the proposals were “deeply unfair”.
Under the present situation these rules apply and provide these guidelines:
Council Tax Benefit: key facts about the current system

Council Tax Benefit (CTB) provides means-tested help to people on a low income who have to pay Council Tax. For working age people there is a limit on savings of £16,000. If you claim means-tested out-of-work benefits (Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance) you generally receive full assistance, so that you do not pay Council Tax at all. If you are in work or have other income you can still receive CTB but are likely to get less than the full amount, so that your Council Tax bill will be reduced but not eliminated.
A more generous system applies to pensioners. If you claim Pension Credit (guarantee element) there is no limit on the amount of savings you can have and you will normally not pay Council Tax at all. Pensioners with higher incomes can also qualify, even if they do not get Pension Credit, and depending on their circumstances can qualify with an income of £400 a week or more. Around 60% of pensioners are entitled to CTB, though many fail to claim.
Under the new system whereby the amount of benefit is cut by 10% these rules would be drastically amended:
The government’s reform proposals: 
The government’s consultation paper makes the following proposals:

 Help with Council Tax will be a local authority responsibility and will not become part of Universal Credit (as DWP and some commentators have urged)

 The amount provided to local authorities for the new system will be 10% less than current spending on CTB

 Support for pensioners will not be affected by this cut in spending and will remain at existing levels with existing rules

Local authorities will be free to establish whatever rules they choose for their schemes for working age people (and will administer the scheme for pensioners using national rules)

 Central government will provide a fixed amount of money to local authorities to operate their new schemes. Unlike current arrangements, this central government grant will not be ring-fenced and will not vary according to demand

 New local schemes to provide help with paying Council Tax must be in place by April 2013

The consultation paper only directly affects England and separate proposals are likely to be made in Wales and Scotland. However, the 10% spending reduction affects all parts of Great Britain and in the analysis below and in the Annex it is assumed that Wales and Scotland follow suit in protecting the position of pensioners.
Impact of the expenditure cut:
When the new system of local support for Council Tax is introduced in April 2013 the amount provided to local authorities will be reduced by 10% relative to current expenditure on CTB, saving around £480 million a year. However, characterising this as a 10% cut is disingenuous, as pensioners are in effect excluded from the new system. In terms of the population of working age claimants, who are the only ones that can be affected by new rules, the cut is much larger than 10%.

The national picture is shown in the table below. It shows the kinds of people who are currently claiming CTB and how this relates to the savings target of £480 million. Working age people are divided into those who are receiving full CTB, almost all of whom will be claiming claim means-tested out-of-work benefits (Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance), low earners who are receiving some CTB but have to pay some Council Tax themselves, and other people who are receiving some CTB but are not in work.
Options for meeting the savings target: ‘equal pain’

As shown by the analysis above, local authorities have to make very large savings from working age claimants to meet the government’s savings target. One approach to this would be to impose an ‘equal pain’ rule and reduce all benefit payments by the same proportion (19% on average nationally). However, for those claimants currently getting full CTB this would mean starting to collect Council Tax from a group who currently pay nothing. Moreover, the reason they do not pay anything at the moment is because they qualify for means-tested benefits like Income Support, where by definition the amount of money they have to live on is at ‘safety net’ levels.

Local authorities have some experience of the difficulty of extracting small amounts of money from people living in poverty. The ill-fated Community Charge (or ‘Poll Tax’) of the early 1990s imposed a minimum 20% charge on all citizens, whatever their income or status, so that local authorities had to trace and collect money from everyone living in their locality. While the property base for Council Tax will make the task somewhat easier, that experience shows the difficulty with moving away from full rebates for the poorest. Administering the system is likely to be expensive, with many of the 2 million people now expected to pay likely to opt for weekly or monthly payments, and there is always the possibility of mass non-compliance, as occurred with the Poll Tax.
It may therefore make more sense to look at completely removing entitlement to help with Council Tax from some groups. As well as helping with the administrative problems outlined above, this approach has two advantages. First, it means that particularly vulnerable groups, such as people with disabilities or children, can be protected from the cuts. Second, it is the most effective way of increasing work incentives for particular groups, as it will make them poorer when unemployed and no worse-off when in employment.
Options for meeting the sales target – removing entitlement for some groups!
There are a number of groups who might be candidates for removing from entitlement altogether. For instance, one possibility would be to restrict eligibility for support to tenants, so that owner occupiers were expected to pay the full amount of Council Tax whatever their circumstances. In terms of collection it might be possible to treat unpaid Council Tax as a charge against the value of the property, so that people who could not pay would effectively find arrears added to their mortgage. And low earning owner-occupiers are one of the main groups to benefit from Universal Credit, enjoying help with mortgage payments where none is available currently, creating a further reason for treating this group less favourably. Around 1.5 million CTB claimants are owner-occupiers, and though the majority of these are likely to be pensioners it is likely that removing entitlement from this group would be just about sufficient to meet the savings target.

However, a criterion based on tenure-type would necessarily affect claimants with children or disabilities, two groups who local authorities would hope to protect (and, in the former case, which they have a statutory duty to protect under child poverty legislation). A more attractive route might therefore be to remove from Council Tax support all working age people who do not meet certain criteria, such as having dependent children, living in a household where someone is disabled, being pregnant or a full-time carer. Such conditions would largely mirror the conditions for claiming Income Support and Employment and Support Allowance, so that in effect claimants of Jobseeker’s Allowance would be excluded from the scheme. Nationally around 600,000 people receive full CTB because they are claiming income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance, though around 20% of these have dependent children. Subtracting claimants with children, the likely saving nationally from removing Jobseeker’s Allowance claimants would be around £420 million, and once savings on working non-disabled childless people are included it is likely that the saving target would be met.
The harshness of such an approach cannot be denied. A single unemployed person without children or disabilities currently receives £67.50 a week to live on, and forcing them to pay Council Tax would reduce this to closer to £50 a week. It is difficult to see how they will make ends meet, and collection of Council Tax from this group is likely to be a severe problem. Nevertheless, maintaining support for people with children or disabilities, and avoiding the potential administrative nightmare of imposing ‘equal pain’, will necessarily involve making difficult choices such as this!

Take Our Poll
Slides from the DWP workshop on the changes in...
Slides from the DWP workshop on the changes in Housing Benefit (Photo credit: solobasssteve)
Related articles

Filed under: Ace Benefits News, Ace Finance News, Ace News Desk Tagged: Council Tax, CTB, Housing Benefit, Income Support, Institute for Fiscal Studies, Local government, Pension Credit, Universal Credit
Ed says! How do you feel about the way this government are looking to cut benefits! email me your News and Views to Ace News Desk or tweet your reply on my personal twitter site at #AceNewsServices

Recent Extreme Heatwaves Were Caused by Climate Change - Even Moderate Heat Has Doubled

Recent Extreme Heatwaves Were Caused by Climate Change - Even Moderate Heat Has Doubled:
The European heatwave of 2003, the Russian heatwave of 2010, last year's record-breaking drought and heat in Texas? All climate change.

Ed says! What is your opinion on Climate Change and Global Warming? email your News and Views to me at Ace News Desk     or tweet this post and article at #AceNewsServices

Colorado Utility Got a Record 57% of Its Electricity From Wind Power

Colorado Utility Got a Record 57% of Its Electricity From Wind Power:
One evening, back on April 15th, Colorado dramatically demonstrated the potential of wind power in the United States.


#AceNewsServices

Should Bike Lessons be Required to Get a Driver's License? (Poll)

Should Bike Lessons be Required to Get a Driver's License? (Poll):
This could make roads safer for cyclists, and almost certainly have the added benefit of 'creating' new cyclists by showing more people how fun and convenient biking can be.


What are your news and views? email me at Ace News and Views  and get your story printed!
or tweet at #AceNewsServices

All the posts are provided by me and any comments l provide are my own view of the markets and are not the views of the article writer and or news provider.