Get real, Reg…

WITH great fanfare, the UUP has launched it’s Let’s Get Real campaign on bread and butter issues. To get things going, party leader Sir Reg Empey has called for free personal care for the elderly. He seems to have forgotten that when he was in the Assembly, Sir Reg actually voted against free personal care for the elderly. It’s not for me to decide if that’s hypocritical, but it’s definitely another spectacular UUP own goal. Nice website though.

  • old man

    Yawn Yawn Yawn another Alliane rant on personal care – i’m getting sick of this.

    I am no apologist for the UUP! but both Unionist parties are in favour of personal care for the elderly. Indeed it was Nigel Dodds (yes Gonzo shock horror a DUP member not Alliance!!) who first called for free personal care. When it came to the vote in the Assembly the Sinn Fein minister said that if the Alliance amendment to the bill was passed free nursing care and the entire Bill would fall. Therefore the DUP and others decided that half a dinner was better than none at all and voted for nursing care rejecting the Alliance amendment. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY WERE NOT IN FAVOUR OF PERSONAL CARE!! they wanted to het nursing care approved and fight another day

    Good grief when will the Alliance party stop flogging the dead horse! oh thats right they have sod all else relevance!

  • Except it’s not free. It has to be paid for. The question is by whom, why and how is this afforded within our means.

    As for Sir Reg’s apparent u-turn – back of the net – what a great own goal or a Damascene conversion.

  • daffy

    I’m no supported of the party but perhaps they have had time in the interim to look again at the policy, cost it out and realise that yes it is viable and would be a good policy.

    In terms of a conversion, the UUP does have a new leader so it stands to reason that new ideas might be brought forward. Its an interesting move by the UUP, we’ll see if they’ve anything else to follow it up with or if they’ll return to trying to outDUP the DUP on the same mundane old constitutional question etc.

  • Pete Baker

    “It’s not for me to decide if that’s hypocritical, but it’s definitely another spectacular UUP own goal.”

    It certainly looks hypocritical to me.. perhaps, in his dotage, he just forgot how he voted?.. more likely no-one bothered to check.. and no-one in the UUP thought that our esteemed press-pack would check either.

    “Nice website though.”.. Well, that is your opinion, Gonzo :o)

  • Good God in Heaven*, is there not a man about this place who will do ANYTHING other than relentlessly call for more nipple–hugging of that state teat?

    *I am not sure, yet, whether this opening phrase will offend before the petit-bourgeois morality now automatically at work here in Slugger, but we’ll see soon enough.

  • Nestor Makhno

    Surely, Karl, it’s ‘petit-bourgeois morality’ that you yourself are displaying in your suggestion?

  • If the Welfare state was still confined to the deserving poor it would be just about managable. It’s the fact that the scrounging middle classes have got in on the act that makes it the fiscally bloated, morally sapping, coming Red Chinese supremacy-enhancing monstrosity that it is.

  • George

    Why should it be the responsibility of the NHS to protect and pay for the middle class children’s inheritance?

    If they aren’t even prepared to look after or pay for their elderly parents, why should part of the health budget, which could be used to shorten the worst waiting lists in Europe, be instead given to these people in the form of real estate, a funereal nest egg to ease the pain?

    Free personal care for all those elderly who can’t afford it. Assets are money.

  • irritated

    what about the upper working class/lower middle classes, ie. the majority of us who have scrimped and saved for years in order to own our own homes, prob the first generation in our family to own our own home have it all taken away from us as soon as we are not able to look after ourselves?

    I don’t like your derogatory tone George, many older people spend alot of time worrying about things like being able to cover the cost of their own funeral when they die, being able to leave some small amount to their loved ones, not being a burden on others. Should that all be dismissed, should we sacrifice an older persons pride? For all the amount of the health budget it would take (1%), I don’t think its much to ask.

  • Michael Shilliday

    Karl! Where have you been??

  • I’m never ordering from Amazon again – that’s where I’ve been. I *still* haven’t properly read the Kerr book, but thanks for running that YU thread all the same. It was interesting to hear the author’s take. The other place I’ve been, obviously, is doing a guest spot on the last epsiode of American Dad on BBC2.

  • George

    irritated,
    I accept my last post was a little extreme but I’m just irritated about the ever-growing number of selfish people eyeing the huge property nest eggs of their parents and who happily leave their parents to scrape buy and are delighted to see the state pick up the health tab as they eagerly anticipate how they’ll spend the cash coming their way.

    If the NHS was a bottomless pit, there wouldn’t be this discussion. It isn’t and it’s a question of how best to use the funds.

    What we are seeing here is a mass abdication of responsibility for their parents by the next generation, who are looking for the government to look after them.

    I suggest either a lower cap so everyone is left with enough to cover say funeral expenses and a small inheritance.

    You talk about sacrificing an older person’s pride. It’s the children who have sacrificed their parents pride out of their selfishness I’m after.

    How about a parent allowance (funded by tax on the children) for these people and a PSA (Parental Support Agency) to hunt them down?