MEASURES to increase the number of care homes will be announced in the
Queen's Speech today, opening what is expected to be the last session of
Parliament before a general election.
An NHS Bill will propose setting up "care trusts", bringing together local
health and social services to improve care for the elderly. The Government
wants trusts to develop public-private partnerships with independent homes.
Ministers are also keen to stimulate ways of enabling more elderly people to
live independently at home rather than going into residential homes. This will
require more home-based care for patients.
John Hutton, the health minister, yesterday rejected Tory accusations of a
"crisis" in the provision of care home beds. Liam Fox, Tory spokesman, had
claimed that residential homes were closing at an unprecedented rate. Mr
Hutton accused him of failing to take into account new homes. While there
were problems in some areas, he said that nationally there was overcapacity
in the system.
Mr Blair will use the Queen's Speech to demonstrate that he is "deadly
serious" about giving the police more power to fight crime. Downing Street
said it would contain "a full programme" of work for the next parliamentary
year, with crime, health, education and welfare reform taking priority.
The speech will name around 20 Bills that the Government intends to get
through Parliament. However, most MPs expect the next election in May, so
some Bills mentioned this morning will have little hope of reaching the Statute
Book.
Mr Blair's emphasis on law and order reflects his desire to be associated with
populist measures as voters start to focus on who should form the next
Government. Alastair Campbell, Mr Blair's spokesman, said yesterday: "The
Prime Minister is determined to tackle the yob culture and take forward the
responsibility agenda."
He added: "You will see we are deadly serious about giving the police the
powers they need to crack down on yobbish behaviour that blights our cities
and towns and you will see the work on crime continuing at every level."
One of the principal Bills will be a measure giving police the power to impose
curfews on children under the age of 16. There will also be measures allowing
them to impose fixed penalty fines on drunks, withdrawing benefits from
people caught committing benefit fraud twice, giving the Social Security
Department and the Inland Revenue extra powers to investigate welfare
cheats and making deregulation easier.
Jack Straw, Home Secretary, whose department should have more legislation
than any other in the speech, will also reintroduce a Bill limiting the right to
jury trial. A Bill to ban fox hunting will be included, although the Government
claims that it is neutral and that a ban is only one of several options to be put
to MPs on a free vote.
~*~
Queen's Speech fuels election speculation(UK Times)
The Prime Minister today put crime and health at the centre of the
Government’s agenda in the run-up to the next election, in the
slimmest legislative programme announced since Labour came to
power.
The Queen’s Speech, delivered to the House of Lords, contained
details of only 15 Bills, plus four draft measures. That compares to
22 Bills in 1997, 26 in 1998 and 28 in 1999.
Downing Street maintained that today’s announcements were "a
full programme that shows, unusually, a Government gaining
momentum in its fourth year, not losing it".
But there is bound to be speculation that ministers are actually
clearing the decks for a spring poll.
The speech, delivered amid traditional glittering pomp and
ceremony from the golden throne in the Lords, also confirmed that
there will be a free vote on hunting with dogs.
After this morning’s ceremonial grandeur, MPs will this afternoon
begin scrutinising the programme in detail, at the start of a debate
lasting several days.
The Commons session will begin with speeches - traditionally
light-hearted in tone - from the Labour MPs Sir John Morris
(Aberavon) and Anne Begg (Aberdeen South).
The Tory leader, William Hague, will then wade in with his attacks
on what the Opposition is bound to dismiss as a gimmicky
programme designed to be swept away as soon as Mr Blair
decides to call an election.
~*~
Arise, Sir Edward (UK Times)
There is nothing like a knighthood to focus attention on one’s
Christian name. What was once a familiarity to be spoken only to
one’s family, friends and publisher becomes, with the quick dub of
a sword, a formal monicker. Plain Mr Smith is henceforth to be
known as Sir Cuthbert; Prime Ministers who discourteously refer
to their interviewers as “Mr Day” can be tartly reminded that the
correct form is — or was — “Sir Robin”.
The change in status is all very well if you were christened with a
polysyllabic name suggesting appropriate overtones of gravitas,
pomp or aristocracy. Sir Humphrey or Sir Athelstan make
admirable permanent undersecretaries; Sir Llewellyn is a natural
ambassador. But what if you have been known all your life as
Bob, Jim or Ted? Should this demotic familiarity accompany you
into the ranks of the noble order of St Michael and St George? Sir
Edward George, the newly titled Governor of the Bank of
England, may hanker still to be banker to the people; but Lady
George does not think “Sir Eddie” is quite the thing. Nor did the
former Conservative Prime Minister take to Sir Ted Heath.
Edwards, it seems, are a proud breed, conscious that their name
goes back centuries to the deepest roots of Saxon England.
Starting with the Confessor, there have been at least a dozen
kings, princes (murdered or living) and pretenders who have
gloried in the name Edward. Some ended less than happily — the
second and eighth came to unkingly ends — but the name remains
a monarch’s favourite.
So widespread, however, have Edwards been that nicknames and
derivations were inevitable. Ted, Ed, Eddie and Teddy made their
names across the English-speaking world, some as poets (Mr
Hughes), some as Presidents (Mr Roosevelt) and some as
Olympic ski jumpers (the eponymous Eagle). None was knighted,
and all would have seemed faintly ridiculous if they had reverted to
Edward — “Sir Edward Eagle” would crush any hint of the
chutzpah, bravado and gawkiness that made Britain’s great
sporting failure a hero.
Edwards inhabit every art form (Elgar, Thomas, Albee) and most
foreign languages (Munch, Degas and Shevardnadze). Their
diminutives are associated nowadays with children’s bears or with
young men in jeans and slicked quiffs. But Edwards still have
something of the English oak in their soul — sturdy, upright,
reliable, old-fashioned. Indeed, the name suggests the very
qualities one seeks in a banker. . . Arise, Sir Edward.