One thing I hadn’t noticed in much of the budget coverage was that the idea to charge a 50p a month tax for having a telephone line, to fund rural broadband is alive and well (hat tip The Register). Though only if Labour win another term, or if the Tories decide it’s a wizard wheeze to take more money off us. Of course once they do you can bet it will be as temporary a tax measure as VAT is.

Meanwhile Letters from a Tory picks up on some news that has been over shadowed by the budget. The proposed ban on smoking in cares being put forward by the Royal college of Physicians has been excellently dealt with by LegIron. However if you can somehow bring yourself to ignore this huge attempt at encroaching onto private space (not something that should be ignored by any account) the other worrying thing that lept out at me was the idea that this would “see children … shielded from the sight of adults smoking

The size of wedge that could be the thin end of is staggering. Once that wedge is in smoking on the street or anywhere a child might somehow see you would be right out, and after smoking what other “undesirable” activity would be safe from future legislation. They’ll be compiling a black list (or new versions but a black list would be cheaper) of every book, film, play and TV show that shows smoking in anyway and slapping an 18 certificate on it. Followed by an outright ban the moment some spotty teen finds his dads stash of smoking videos and accidentally gets a small burn/horrific scar from playing with the lighter found next to them.

But to finish on a lighter note government cut backs could see 25 per cent of charities fold. Where by charities we’re really talking about state funded bodies not charities that actually depend on people voluntarily giving them money. Yes this will no doubt affect vulnerable people, and even impact those much vaunted “front line services” that Labour have promised they’ll protect. But they’ll be able to deny it all as these charities aren’t run by them (honest). You can probably safely bet that it will be charities that actually do something useful that will be affected first, and not those that spend our money lobbying the government to tell us what to do.

Amongst all the talk of what can or can’t be cut, there has been mention of cutting “unnecessary programmes“. Which I certainly haven’t been alone in wondering why we’re spending on anything unnecessary in the first place and why cutting back on waste isn’t just an on going process.

Still it’s ever so nice to see the ever erudite Frank Field asking the same thing.

I can’t believe I’m different from the average voter. If there are unnecessary programmes what the hell are we doing providing them?

(Go read the whole article, you know you want to, he also feels that there will have to be “mega cuts”).

And on a related topic it seems that our troughing MPs not only aren’t being quite so prompt to pay back money they owe as perhaps other people would be expected to (No surprise there I know), but also aren’t even terribly good at settling their tabs in the subsidised bars and restaurants within the palace. Which just makes me wonder why the fee’s office doesn’t take the same approach as most universities (who withhold your degree whilst you owe them money) and not allow MP’s with outstanding tabs to return after any of parliaments breaks. Or if that’s felt as being too harsh I’d almost settle for MP’s with money owed to the fee’s office (and by extension to their constituents and tax payers generally) being barred from standing for re-election.

© 2010 Anonymong Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha