A document from the Department of Work and Pensions explaining Britain's position, which has been leaked to the Guardian, says: "The UK government does not support the proposal for a regulation on the fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived. It believes that measures of this type are better and more efficiently delivered by individual member states through their own social programmes, and their regional and local authorities, who are best placed to identify and meet the needs of deprived people in their countries and communities. It therefore questions whether the commission's proposal is justified in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity."

I left my hometown because there was no work (35% unemployement) and a lot of people (inc. some of my own family) depend on Red Cross food parcels to make it through the month.
It makes me really sad to see that they are becoming common in the UK too

The fact that politicians tolerate wages and benefits being so low that they need this assistance should shame them. Unfortunately this lot really do not care about anyone apart from themselves so expect a lot more poverty before they are booted out.

What is your definition of sustainable? It is perfectly capable of designing a solution that is not sustainable, and so use that as an excuse for not doing it. Just do not moan about it when members of your family start to need food parcels. In Gove's own words they are the reason for them needing it.

My definition of sustainable is one that is actually costed and funded and doesnt rely on ever increasing borrowing. Begger tomorrow for todays gain.
As for my own family. They seem to be able to cope and get enough food etc and if they did need help then I would help as best I could.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

I left my hometown because there was no work (35% unemployement) and a lot of people (inc. some of my own family) depend on Red Cross food parcels to make it through the month.

Sadly it seems unlikely doesn't it? We have a capitalist culture which has become obsessed with 'profit growth' (not even profit itself is good enough, only the increase in profit), a management class for whom the first tactic for growing profit is cutting costs and labour (i.e. wages) is usually the largest cost in any business. So basically wages will continue to be sacrificed to appease the stock market gods.

The fact that there need to be enough people who can afford to buy products to generate this increasing profit doesn't seem to have filtered through enough yet. It possibly will by the time of the next election after 5 years of 'austerity'. However as you suggest, it's not like there's really an available alternative...

Both of those thing are impossible, France hasn't had 5 years of austerity, which we all know is the necessary and sufficient condition to make that happen.

In one of the most shameful episodes ever witnessed in Parliament, Tory backbenchers sniggered and hooted as Labour MP Fiona MacTaggart told of shocking scenes at her local Tesco in Slough, Berks, as people battled over cut-price fruit and veg.

She said the store had now been forced to draft in extra security.

Almost drowned out by mocking Tory MPs, she asked: “Isn’t that a shocking sign in the 21st century?”

During a debate in the House of Commons on such things, Iain Duncan Smith leaves.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fo ... in-2941100
(there’s a video of that bit)