The NHS is Being Sold Off Behind Our Backs; We Must Send a Message to this Government That We Intend To Get It Back !

On the 24th of April the House of Lords voted in favor of privatization of the NHS. It took place with little publicity from the main stream media. Had the main stream media done their job in informing the people of extremely important matters like this, the public may well have been able to take some form of action that would make clear to the government that the privatization of the NHS is not what the British public wanted. In fact a referendum would surely have quashed the government's plans. But this is not the most disappointing thing about this situation. More disappointing is the governments ability to get away with this vote whilst keeping it away from the knowledge of the majority of the public. The evidence is clear. The government knew the public would have voted against this in a referendum. They took action to keep the details away from the public.

Here are a list of facts you should have been told by the government before they decided to privatize your NHS.


1..Approximately one third of all the Lords and MPs that voted in favor have interests in private health companies.
This interest would involve ownership or running the company or both. 

The interests these Lords and MPs have varies.

Some own private equity companies that own private health businesses.

Some own shares in health care companies.

Some own or have part ownership on companies that buy patents related to new health treatments.

Some own or have part ownership in businesses that specialize in financing private healthcare businesses.

So as you can see, a third who voted in favor of privatization of the NHS are going to be able to profit from it's privatization.

I don't think this is any one's idea of democracy.

2..Substantial debt will be added to the Health Service.

All kinds of investment businesses will be used to buy NHS contracts and services. Although Lords will be involved in buying up these services........They will be using debt from investment banks........The risk involved in this debt however will be removed from those directly involved, including the banks onto the public.......Because pension funds will be used to pay off the debt. This means the Lords and private equity companies can be 'successful' themselves whilst regardless of how successful the business is. Executives and owners of a business can benefit from debt being added. These people are simply a cost of the business. A cost that can be funded by debt. When the debt gets out of control it is the people payiing in to pension funds who will lose their investment, not the Lords, private Equity companies, or the banks. .....Does this explain why they borrow the money rather than using their own? ....There is no risk to the borrower or bank.... Only to pension funds.

3..Services provided by the NHS will be subjected to a tendering procedure which means existing organisations including charities which carry out healthcare will have to bid against the new debt backed businesses.
This is a quite important one.......
Just say Marie Currie Cancer care was in a situation where the charity organisation was bidding against one of the private medical for a service Marier Currie are providing at the moment........

Marie Currie may have to offer a financial incentive to the government in order to secure the business. Remember the farce over the contract renewal between Virgin and First rail service providers? First initially won the bid,  simply because they were willing to borrow more money to pay the government for the contract.Although after a lot of fuss by Richard Branson and others, the bids are still awaiting review! The bidding process has been proved a failure, but the government has not admitted this.
This system for awarding contracts is no different to just legalizing bribery. But the NHS is going to be up against this legalized corruption.

The other problem is that because the private companies will on the whole be backed by pension funds, removing risk from the banks- Access to money from banks is easier for them. They will have better chances to win contracts.....They will be able to spend fortunes on glossy PR Campaigns that will deceive the public........But the charities could be put at risk and face closure..........But when the private companies screw up the service......Collapse due to debt.........Reduce  their services by two thirds due to rising costs.......In other words, provide services to a fraction of the patients that their charity backed counterparts used serve........The charity organisations may be unable to pick up the pieces because they have lost funding and donations. Then we will be left with no Public health service, no private or even charity driven service.

4..The private companies will be able to cherry pick from the NHS, choosing the health services which are the easiest to make a profit from.

Potentially profit making NHS Services which could have helped carry the NHS forward as a public service will be lost to the profit vultures. Banks will want to get on the 'payrolls' of these businesses and contracts. But tax payers will be left to foot the bill for services regarding the old and disabled. Because these people are less likely to be able to pay for their health care personally.

5..Tax payers will still be paying for what will be both price inflated and reduced services.
Tax payers paying national insurance will be paying for services to private companies. The higher staff costs. The many more executives that will be in the health service. And all the banks and financiers and their investors. The reality of this is quite clear. The services are going to be unaffordable to tax payers. They will be cut as a national health service. If you need the services of these private companies in years to come you will have to have cash to them.........Or suitable health insurance.........It's just as well the Lord's have thought of this and have investments in various insurance companies that specialize in health insurance !

6..Tax payers have, and still do pay for education and training for health professionals who are being poached by the new private companies.

The private companies and the NHS are currently in competition for staff and will be more so as Section 75 rolls into action. Private companies will be able to pay more staff for two reasons;
 a).....Businesses they are involved in will charge a premium to what will on the whole be services to the more wealthy among us.
b)......The businesses can feed off a wealth of debt from banks and investors.

7..Due to what will certainly be a reduced public health service, the public will be forced to pay for their healthcare where the healthcare would be free today.

As the costs of the private services rise.....And they will rise to pay the additionally executives, investors and of course debts, these services will be with held from the NHS as the NHS pulls plug on funding (Or signifiantly raises taxes to continue to pay for them).

8..A & E is not likely to prove popular with these businesses, so will stay public. But because hospitals will lose funding and staff due to losing their payment for other services, A & E departments are likely to face closure due to lack of funding.

9..Times for people receiving healthcare will differ considerably. Private care companies have an incentive to keep people in hospital whilst they have money to pay for their care. Whilst those who have little money and are suffering from an illness may find they can not get any care at all. This is known to be a problem all over the world where healthcare is privatized.
The U.S. pays over twice the amount that we pay per capita for health care  and health insurance combined. It is clear that private health companies have incentives to keep the wealthy or those with health insurance in their medical centers, whilst their insurer is paying their hotel.....Sorry medical bill !

10..You will be unaware of using many of the privatized services as they will be allowed to use the NHS logo. Tax payers will be paying the costs of the businesses, whatever those costs may be. Costs which also now include private equity partners, bankers and pension funds.

11..Whilst people will feel they are forced to take on health insurance, these insurance companies will avoid paying out where they can. They will also be able to exercise their exclusive right to discriminate! Offering healthy people unrestricted services whilst keeping their grubby services away from those who may need it most, because they will be unwilling to insure people of higher risk of illness. I find this beyond belief. It makes apartheid look like a minor issue!

12..The financial problems that PFI has caused in the NHS, has created a shortage of cash leading to all kinds of problems which we are now hearing about every day. Shortage of hospital beds, waiting lists, increasing dieing patients, short staff. The government is using these problems contributed by PFI as a reason to justify, "more efficient privatization".

Whilst doing this it blames failings in the NHS system on individuals over burdened by government caused problems. Such as blaming training standards of nurses!

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Here are a few of the businesses that would prove that lords and MPs have a strange attraction to businesses linked to the health industry. It has not always been this way. This addiction has developed mostly over the last few years. There were were cynical people who predicted that something was about to change in the National Health Service a few years back, because politicians and lords were all investing in private health related businesses. I must admit I found it difficult to believe this could happen to the NHS. But it is happening, and it is clear the House of Lords has been preparing for this for a few years.

The majority of the businesses below are businesses which provide medical and pharmaceutical products or services. Some of the others are businesses which are providing contractual services to medical organisations such as the NHS. Some of these businesses providing services which for example charge the NHS for consultancy services will raise questions and doubts as to whether it is really necessary for the NHS to be paying out for such services. It may be raises questions about those who are at the very top of the NHS and whether they can be trusted to spend tax payers money responsibly without being influenced by 'lobbying' by many of the businesses below. The remaining companies listed are businesses which provide finance to buy the medical and pharmaceutical businesses. They will also provide finance to buy the NHS under section 75 over the next months and years. Some of these financially orientated businesses will provide the pension funds which will carry all the risk involved with the debt put onto many of the medical businesses below and also the NHS services. The people buying the services will not use their own money. It will be borrowed. But the banks won't be at risk. Because pension funds will be paying off the mortgages of the business or service regardless of how well the privatized services perform financially. It means any idiot can run one of these services without any financial risk to them selves. Those on the payroll of National Health services is on a dramatic increase. They include the Lords themselves, the executives and staff of private equity and asset management companies. The pension investors who will be carrying most of the financial risk for these executives, the banks and the Lords.

How can all these extra people on the pay roll of the NHS not affect it's ability to actually make ill people better. The size of the industry will reduce because the costs have just gone up significantly. Over all staff will be reduced, thus jobs will without doubt be lost. ......Tax payers are likely to pay more in the future, but then pay again when they find the NHS is not going to be able to provide the care they need.  It's difficult to see how this won't happen. The U.S. health services, public and private combined including total health insurance costs the U.S. people individually almost twice the amount per capita compared to the U.K.  !

 People here are going to suffer and die if we let this happen. It is going to cost thousands of lives.

 The evidence is clear for all to see.

To cap it all.......The Condem government has put in place rules which prevent a future government from re-nationalizing health services once privatized. These private companies will apparently have the right to sue the government and make us tax payers pay out again, should we return the services to public ownership......

Strange that isn't it.....It seems they've predicted the public wouldn't want the NHS handed to to profit motivated, debt backed, government corrupted private profiteers.

It's time to get the parasites out of business and government. You should be protesting against this just as many around the world are protesting against dictatorship.!...........

Below are just a few.......Yes there are many more........Of the companies which the Lords who voted in favour of Section 75 (Privatization of the NHS), have interests in !
That is they are directors, executives, or have ownership in the businesses.

 

                                         
                                                               

The Businesses.......

Bupa.

Baroness Bottomley is Director of Bupa.
Bupa has recently issued £500 Million in Corporate bonds. One of the worlds most successful health care companies has issued these bonds probably to buy NHS services. This is debt added to our health services which will end up paying on top of the Doctors and nurses we already pay.........It means there will be less doctors and nurses on the front line of the health service. 

BUPA Finance PLC.

Lord Edmiston has shares.

GlaxoSmithkline.

Lord Boswell, Baroness Byford, Lord Charrington, Baroness Eccles, Lord Glendon Brook have shares.

Reckit Benckiser.

Lord Boswell, Baroness Byford has shares.

Vectura.

Lord Charrinton, Baroness Byford have shares.

Alere.

Lord Feldman has shares.

The Priory.

Lord Ashcroft has a 34% stake of this company. Bought in 2010 for £44 Million.

Interserve.

Lord Blackwell is Chairman.

BTG. (Owner of  Biocompatibles since 2010)

Lord Feldman has shares.

Marsh Inc.
Insurance Broker

Lord Ashton has shares.

Zurich.

Lord Ashton has shares.

Chime Communications Group.

Lord Bell is Chairman.

Reynolds Mackenzie.

Lord Bell is Chairman of holding company- Chime Communications Group.

VCCP Health.

Lord Bell is Chairman of holding company- Chime Communications Group.

Open Minds.

Lord Bell is Chairman of holding company- Chime Communications Group.

Open Plan.

Lord Bell is Chairman of holding company- Chime Communications Group.

Greenhill.

Lord Blyth of Rowington is Senior Adviser to the Investment Bankers who specialise in Healthcare and medical investments.

Odgers Berndtson.

Baroness Bottomley is Chairman.

Teijin.

Lord Brittan is Advisor.

Unilever Ventures / Unilever PLC.

Baroness Byford, Lord Glendon Brook, Lord Charrington have shares.

Croda International.

Baroness Byford has shares.

Huntsworth.

Lord Chadlington is Chief Executive.

AMT-Sybex Group.

Lord Coe is Director.

Cumberlege Eden & Partners.

Baroness Cumberlege runs the company.

Synergy Pharmaceuticals.

Lord Deighton has shares.

Fidelity International. (Owner of Telehealth Solutions Ltd since 2011)

Lord Edmiston has shares.

Investec Asset Management.

Lord Flight is a Director.

Arden Partners. (Investor in Deltex Medical Group which supplies NHS)

Lord Flight is Chairman.

Evercore Bank.

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

Chairman of the Advisory Board.

Parity Group PLC.

Lord Freeman is director.

UBS Bank.

Lord Garel Jones is Managing Director.
Baring in mind that the purchases of the NHS contracts will be through the use of debt, this Lord may come in very useful and this is why UBS is included in this list.

Ansell Ltd 

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Abbott Laboratories.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Astrazeneca.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Johnson & Johnson.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Novartis.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Novo Nordisk.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Pvizer.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Serco Group.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Siemens AG (Medical).

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.

Smith & Nephew.

Lord Glendon Brook has shares.


THIS LIST IS YET TO BE COMPLETED.................

                                                                                                                                                                               

Retail Banking Losing the Battle with Investment Banking ;... Retail Banking Being Disadvantaged by Leverage with a Crow Bar !....... Better Known as........Private Equity!

Lloyds have announced the closure of a call centre which is located in an office tower in Southend on Sea. 850 jobs will be lost by the end of the year.

There will be a total of 15,000 job losses from Lloyds Banking Group by the end of next year. A total of 40,000 since Lloyds took over HBOS in 2008.

In recent days Lloyds has also announced a significant return to profitability. A £2 billion profit during the first quarter.

HSBC has also been successful recently and we all know about Barclays £7 Billion profit for last year. The fact that the banks are moving back in to profit should be good news. But the problem is we know that little has changed over the last couple of years as far as retail banking is concerned. We know that few people are still receiving mortgages. We know small businesses are still struggling to get loans. So how are they earning their money?

Well the closure of the call centre is a clue to what surely must be going on. Along with the other jobs that are being shed. It's clearly a reduction in the size of their retail banking sector. The investment banking sector however is being preserved. This is not good news because it just means that the banks are more interested in deals on a wholesale level. Lending millions and billions rather than the mere £100,000 we might need to buy a home.

Here's another bit of news on Lloyds. Fairly random. It's from a couple of weeks back;

Lloyds Banking Group has sold it's 25.3 % stake in the Marussia Formula 1 Team after it had made huge losses and failed to perform on the track.

The team is Russian.......Joined F1 in 2010.......Has not scored a single point since !

The funding came from LDC, Lloyds Development Capital. This business is owned 43% by the tax payer.

In 2009, LDC invested £10 Million in the team. In 2011, LDC handed a loan to Marussia of £38.4 Million. By this time total debts amounted to £77.7 Million.

Considering this was only a short time after the financial crisis you could may be think; "Strange financial decision.","Casino banking Idiots.", "They're gambling our money so they can jet around the world to corporate boxes and behave like celebrities.", or "A great investment seeing as it's been funded by the tax payer."

It's difficult to see the logic to this deal without thinking along the lines of the above.

To me though the fact that Lloyds have invested in a team that had the odds stacked against it isn't the only concern. There is an other. Lloyds Development Capital is a private equity company owned by Lloyds. The growth of these private equity companies within banking organisations has been on the increase. Barclays Capital is a big part of Barclays' business these days. This is also a Private equity company.

The problem is in how private equity companies work. Basically any debt that is supplied by Lloyds will be handed over to a client, but there will be little risk to that the bank even though the investment may be risky. This is because a pension fund that collects cash regularly from investors will be used to make regular mortgage payments on the debt. The private equity company then collects payments from the business being invested in. It is these payments from the business (Marussia) that will determine how well pension investors will be paid back. In this particular situation this was very questionable at the beginning and pensions invested in Marussia will have suffered a substantial loss. You have to also take into account that private equity companies charge a fee to pension funds, regardless of how successful or unsuccessful they are. So they will be paid before the pension investor receives a penny. The people who run these businesses can earn individually in the tens of millions of pounds, annually. It's even possible for these private equity firms to lose all your money, then send you a bill for their services !  

Any way, what this example really high-lights is;
 1...How irresponsible bankers can afford to be whilst they pipe their money through private equity companies.

2...Employees and business owners paying into pension funds really need more control over the debt their funds are being used to guarantee. I'm sure their money would be safer this way if this was the case. (Some may well want to take a bit of a gamble but they should be consulted. )

3...This is the one that is the biggest concern. These private equity companies within the the banks are growing. They obviously do form a reasonable safety net to the banks. Just as long as this safety net is not abused though we are obviously far from being guarantee'd that. The problem is we are seeing a reduction in retail banking and it is looking like a permanent one. By far, the majority of job losses have been on the retail banking side. Where as the investment side has grown substantially in many of the banks in recent years. The reason this a worry is private equity companies are still able to access the same money you or I may want for a mortgage or a loan for a small business. Us individuals are therefore in direct competition for the same money as the private equity companies who finance not just Formula 1 teams, but Formula 1 it's self. It's owned by an other private equity company. They are also involved in lots of buyouts of mobile phone companies, food companies, building companies and high street stores. Due to the pension funds being used as a safety net for the debt of these big businesses, the banks favor these deals in preference to lending to the retail market of mortgages and small business loans.

Whilst the bankers are in control of our money, they will be able to choose how it is used. The fact that Lloyds is 40 per cent owned by the tax payer potentially could lead to an opportunity where we could influence these decisions. But it doesn't look like that will happen. Not under the current government. This is a real shame I feel. An opportunity is about to pass us by. Once it is sold off, our only real chance of a retail lender is if we create it our selves. If that was to happen it would then be in competition with the banks that our money had saved.

I find this a totally mind boggling situation. There is so much that could be done. But Osborne and the bankers in charge are sitting on top of their big salaries, when they are there to be doing a job for the people.
Banks are moving into profitability not because they have been of good service but because they have been profiting from gambling in still unregulated financial markets. Also adding debt to big businesses where the bankers and private equity firms can see potential in increased turnover by charging the public raised prices. The banks just have to visualize their debt in the gap between current prices and the future one after adding debt. There's no rocket science here. And where this 'profit gap' isn't quite so clear, it's always nice to know their are plenty of pension funds who will foot the bill when you deviate off the straight and narrow onto a bendy more precarious Formula 1 circuit.

Trafalgar Square Protest; The 99 Percent People's Unity. Protest Against Cuts & Austerity, Stealth Privatization of NHS, Corporate & Government Corruption, Media Corruption...

Yesterday, 4th May 2013 the 'We are the Ninetynine Percent People's Unity' protest took place in London. Beginning and ending in Trafalgar Square with a march to the houses of Parliament and back.

The reasons for the protest ?....

Well one was austerity measures being made by the government in the aftermath of the financial and on going economic crisis.

 Some were there to protest against the corporate corruption that obviously contributed to the original crisis which the 'Occupy' protests were partly about.

Some were there to protest against tax avoidance of corporations.

But there were a couple of issues which have been prevalent in the news (or social media any way) in recent weeks. These are;

1 The bedroom Tax.

2 The 'stealth' privatization of the NHS.

There were plenty of people there yesterday protesting against either of these two.

However this brings us to yet another reason for some protesters to be there. This is the main stream media coverage of the House of Commons imminent handing over of 75% of NHS Services to privatization. The way this has been blacked out by most TV Channels and newspapers, even with all the other issues was possibly the worst and most worrying. This was done in a way that you would expect from a country that is under control by an evil dictator.

Because of this media blackout there were fewer people at Trafalgar Square then there surely otherwise would have been. But even more importantly, the possibility of these media blackouts happening is something that we all must be made aware of for the future. It shows that politicians can not be trusted by any one. The media would have reported the Privatization of the NHS to the public but has been successfully gagged by the government.

                                            ******************************

This then brings me then to the reason for writing this post.

During the 'Occupy' protests that went on all over the world, the media seemed to do a terrible job in covering what was a major story. Although organizers of protests had gone to much trouble, and people traveled many miles to get to a protest, and the inconvenience (understatement I know) that the protesters went to sleeping in tents and in what can only be described as very challenging conditions, seemed to almost go unnoticed by the press and media. It was surprising that when ever any one was asked by a TV company for a response to what was going on, they would find some one who could answer the question in may be only a few words. They should have made more of an effort to find people who really understand what is going on. But this I am sure was intentional. Papers and news papers came out with this 'It's about corporate greed.'
Well if you're still coming out with this BBC, people don't go to these lengths because people are greedy. But do if those same people happen to be fraudulent,corrupt and thieves.

So back to the 'Ninety Nine Percent Peoples's Unity Protest.'

Here are some of the reasons they gave to me for being there..............

Nancy (First from left) is appalled by the media blackout of the announcement in recent days of the of the privatization of 75% of the NHS.
 Also there was nothing on any manifesto of the politicians who are currently running the country, to warn them of the possibility of the NHS being privatized. Doesn't wnat national Insurance money going to Care U.K. and Virgin.
She also objected to Austerity affecting the poor most.
Objected to targets being set by politicians who have little knowledge in the services under their control. Policing, NHS and Teaching. Services are suffering whilst boxes are just being ticked.
No genuine alternative government.

Kevin (Second Left)
Austerity cuts were too much too soon. But also supported Nancy's opinions.

Sonia (3rd from left)
Wants to live in a real democracy. Currently, politicians con their way in to power by misleading the public. Then do whatever they like once in power. Then it is too late for the people to do any thing about it.
Government is getting away with this due to ignorance of the majority of people, though this is vastly contributed to by the government's manipulation of the media (Media blackouts) .

Sam (Works for NHS) (4th from left)
Objected to over crowding in hospitals. She had seen emergency patients turned away from a hospital she works at.
Objected to financial responsibilities being handed from the NHS trusts to individual GPs.

'Anonymous'. (Holding sign with green lettering).
Protesting about the Austerity measures --Cuts, as well as corporate     tax avoidance, corporate interests of politicians as well as many other issues.
Took on responsibility of educating the masses that turned up for the protest and any passing tourists using a megaphone. In his two years as a protester, he has a accumulated a wealth of knowledge in what we all should be on the streets protesting about and the government should be listening to.
Anonymous doesn't go to these protests to vent personal grievances.
He's there to speak for the people. He 'turns up for work' as well dressed as you would expect some one to enter a West London haunt of a wealthy stock broker or banker.


Note on ' Anonymous' protest group. Anonymous is the name of a protest group. But 'anons' like to keep there identity a mystery. Hence will call themselves just 'Anonymous'. They can be recognized by the now well known Guy Fawkes masks.

Terry (Teacher and charity worker) & Lesley holding banner below.

Terry: Protesting that NHS has been sold off behind our backs.
Austerity is not working. Cuts hitting the people with the least to start with. The disabled and poor.
Lesley: Against hounding of 'small people' whilst letting corporations avoid taxation.
Whilst corporations get finance easily, finance for privatization etc, small more productive businesses that generate employment can not get finance.
The idea behind the banner was that, if  'We, the people' were running the country instead of the current politicians they could do a better job of it.


Aoife Kyna (Joyful Warrior)  With 'Peace' flag.

"I'm protesting about the Governments attack on vulnerable people. I feel people are really suffering."

"I can't sleep at night unless I try to change things."
"People say 'Do you think it will make any difference?'. I tell them I have to try."

Began protesting when Maggie Thatcher brought in the Poll Tax.

The peace flag is to remind people that we were there for a peaceful protest.

But Aoife is also a Piece activist, protesting against a number of wars.




Jim (Teacher), Elise & 'Love'
Jim (Left). Currently a further education teacher of 16-19 year olds. Will find out this week if he still has a job. Cuts and reductions in budgets mean he may be losing his job. He says that teachers are having an extremely stressful situation put upon them. To add to this, the government tries to blame the teachers for problems whilst the government's interference and lack of budget is the problem. He says that all though teachers are paid a wage that reflects the holidays teachers apparently have when schools are closed, he is often working during those holidays effectively for nothing.

'Love' on the right; "I'm protesting about the treatment of the disabled, old and poor. They are all being hit the hardest. Also the sustained attack by the media that we (people on disability benefits) are scroungers !"
"The government has broken it's contract with the people. Whilst the people have paid their taxes and national insurance, the government has impoverished the nation."
"The rich are taking from poor! Handouts from poor to rich! Poor subsidizing millionaires!"
"The media has had a gagging order placed on it by the government!"

Tim (Youth Worker) & Dan ( Founder of 'The Ninety nine  Percent People's Unity')

Tim & Dan

Dan(right) is protesting because "It is a Draconian Society running the country."
"The austerity program has been proven not to work."
"Corporations are controlling the country instead of people."

Dan formed the 'Ninety nine Percent People's Unity.'

Attempted to form a political party which people could support through social media. After many thousands had pledged their support for the party the face book page leading the campaign was closed down, probably by political forces.

Tim (left) is a Youth worker.
"People have lost faith in the political system. Only 44% turned out at the last election."
"We need to stop corruption and manipulation in businesses. For example the oil industry trying to slow down our progress to a conversion to new energy sources."
"Activist groups will join together and grow."
"There has to be time when people will say, 'What's happening just isn't right.'
"We must stop believing what the news papers are telling us is all true."
As a youth worker, he said he was also well aware that there would be more young people protesting, if they had money for transport to get there.

Ann

Ann

Traveled from Surrey to take part in the protest.
Protesting about austerity measures.
"I'm protesting because the rich are taking from the poor through cuts to services and benefits paying for bank bailouts and bonuses."
"We need a new government."
"There has been a media blackout on privatization of the NHS"

Angie

Angie
Traveled from Bristol for the protest.
As you can see she was there to protest against the spare room tax.
A short time ago, she was rehoused by the council. But now is being asked to pay the spare room tax on her home. She has no spare room. She has two sons. One 14 and one 15. As one of them has a disability, she is also a full time carer so can not take on work to pay the extra money which is £14 per week. The two sons are now expected by David Cameron to share the same room.
The travesty of this is that there are thousands of spare rooms in properties all over the country, but the owners won't be taxed on them. They include those with multiple properties which include many Lords and MPs.
Also landlords who have accumulated masses of properties with the help of the banks. Landlords have been raising rent whilst tenants are being forced to pay for the cuts. -Uncontrolled raising of rents means tenants move more often than home buyers. -Tenants are being evicted when charges become too high- The more moving there is, the more empty homes there are whilst new tenants are found.......These properties can be vacant for six months or more ! Hence a lot of spare rooms in vacant homes...... The fact that many landlords do not rely on the income means they may not bother to reduce the rate of rent........These same landlords are actually being helped instead of being taxed with the funding for lending scheme. They are therefore going to accumulate more properties and increase the welfare bill in the future !.............Why is it that landlords are being allowed to increase rent and are immune from taxation..................Vested interests as many Lords have investments in property companies presumably.

The question is ;How much of that welfare bill is going to landlords?
............David Cameron.......It is this figure that should be the focus for welfare cuts. By this I mean the amount of money that the landlords are receiving. Not the money the less fortunate are having to find to enrich the wealthy.  Not single parents with disabled children !

Silver Fox (Bottom left of picture)

Silver Fox.
(You can just seem him in the bottom left of the photo opposite taken by Sun Prints' at the protest).

Protesting about austerity measures, but still wants bankers dealt with.
"Our banks should have been allowed to fail. Just as they were in Iceland. The finance industry in Iceland is now much stronger as a result. Because they know that their people are not waiting with a safety net to catch them when things go wrong."
"I also have my pet hate which is the Rembrancer. He validates legislation behind the Speaker in the house of commons."
"I would have protested here today against the rembrancer alone. He has a £5.3 Million budget which pays for staff and an office."

Deb & Jane

Deb
"We live under a corrupt dictatorship."

"I am affected by the welfare cuts because I  have a son who has VCFS Syndrome. People with this syndrome under this government are having their benefits reduced. "
"As a result of the benefit cuts, my son and I are £28 a week worse off."
"Access to disability services has become non-existent."

Jane (School Teacher)
"I'm protesting about Privatization and MPs having a vested interest in the privatization of the NHS. MPs should not be allowed to do another job which could obscure decisions they make on our behalf. This has clearly influenced the recent vote to privatize the NHS"
"I have been protesting since the poll tax. Went to the October austerity march. I am going to the Bilderberg protest in Watford soon."
"I where the mask as as I prefer to remain anonymous as a protester, partly because of my job.....But this is also a symbol representing 'Anonymous'.....It is a group of like minded people that take part in peaceful protests. It is recognized all over the world. Any one can become part of 'Anonymous'."

Tina & Julie (Sisters in pink)

Tina & Julie
"We are protesting about many issues."
"Shail Gas Extraction."
"The bail out of banks."
"The HRMC -Goldman Sachs
 £10 Million let off scandle."
"Stealth privatization of the NHS and schools."
"We are also protesting about the police force starting salary being reduced. This will affect the future standards of policing."
'Took part in 'Occupy London' & 'Occupy the London Stock Exchange.'

James  & Mona

James & Mona.
"We are protesting about Agenda 21,"
"Corruption in the Financial system."
"The selling off of the NHS."
"We want to show the world what is going on. We are showing our faces, Not wearing masks.
We also protest about 'Bedroom tax' and cuts affecting disabled. Many of the cuts, many people will not be aware of until something happens to them or family member, when they suddenly become affected."
"We also protest that the finance industry remains in control regardless of the political party who wins an election."
"There is also the media affect. Why was what happened with Iceland's banks hidden by the media. Iceland's government let banks crash but now have a much improved system which is making forward progress. News on this however could only be found on internet."

Jack & Sam. ( No pic...Walking with flag)
Jack.
Jack was protesting that the welfare bill had been reduced by £1.1 Billion.
Also about tax avoidance by corporations.
"We are not the real scroungers".

Sam.
Sam is a teacher of further education.
"I'm upset about policies that appear to blame working class people for all the problems."
"It's now harder to get loans for training for teaching."
"This is going to affect Britain's reputation and high standards of teaching in the future."
(If you have a picture of Jack and Sam, I would like to add it as I seem to have lost the pic I took ! They were walking with I think a green 'Anonymous' flag).

I would like to say here, what a great experience it was talk to all kinds of people on May 4th. Some times I have felt that may be I had got it wrong. Because I found it difficult to believe how bad the current government and previous governments had done in the U.K......And in fact, going back to Maggie Thatcher's day (See my previous post).

However there are lots of things going on in the financial industry which are well hidden by the politicians and also the media. You may think you already know but I am afraid unless you spend months or years investigating the financial industry you will not be aware of the problems within. This post has high-lighted the corruption of the media with what has happened with the privatization of the NHS. You should then start to ask your self if other vital information is being with held by the press and media.......

...........Lets go into a few details about what privatization of the NHS will mean........

First of all massive debt will be added as a result. It is the debt that will be used by what are primarily financial businesses which will according to the government 'run' the businesses. Debt which suffering people will be asked to find. Of course we will be offered insurance which will prevent many from paying out for expensive treatment when it becomes necessary. But look at the situation today with unemployment still out of control. How many will not be able to afford insurance to protect themselves?

Second is this. Though private equity companies will say they are 'running' these businesses, if you was to ask some body working for a company who had their business employer taken over in this way, they are likely to tell you that these people do not contribute very much towards running a taken over business. These people will be rarely seen if at all. But you will be aware of them alright. Because there will be less staff,as your work mates have been made redundant. Those who are left will have a bigger work load. Money saved from redundancies will help pay the loan off which was used to buy the business or contract.

Due to the costs rising due to debt and also the pension funds which also need paying (they are the banks' safety net for the loans), prices will rise to customers, which in this case includes tax payers. If there is no extra money available from taxes, then some people are clearly going to suffer.

Any way, back to the point;
The government has hidden what is going on from the majority of people as far as the NHS is concerned. So the question to ask is what else has been hidden?

There is a lot of stuff going on in the financial industry, but the media does not explain it very well. Simply because the financial industry does not want you to understand.........Because if you did, you may not want them to use your savings in a bank account, or your pension.

 You here about buyouts all the time. Apparently they are good news. If you are a bank lending the money or the executives they surely are but what about the rest of us?


Buyouts. (Corporate , Management, Private Equity)
These are all funded by banks and it seems to be a condition of these buyouts that those buying will borrow a vast amount of the money. (Incidentally, you may not be aware that, mergers involve both businesses borrowing money) The people borrowing do not have to pay back the money as the debt usually gets left with the business that is being purchased.....These buyouts need no business plan. Yet they add substantial debt to the businesses. The executives and the bankers will be rewarded from the deal........But costs will go up for the bought out company. But should that company fail to increase revenue to cover interest payments it may go out of business. But whilst this may happen, outstanding debt will be paid off by pension funds which will be used to guarantee the finance behind the buyout..........Banks therefore have no reason to worry if they over burden a business with debt. Pension funds will be expected to pay off any mortgage regardless. My reason for protest is this is an unsustainable system that encourages executives and bankers to put businesses into serious financial problems.

The net result of irresponsibility which may influence these businesses is ;
1....Failure of businesses that we may rely on.
2....An unjustified loss of jobs which is caused by irresponsible debt. (After a buyout and later after the new business collapses under the debt.
3....A failure of pension funds to give a reasonable return on savings for retirement.
4....A loss of GDP and taxes. Both of these will contribute to our national debt.........Unnecessary closures of businesses will increase the deficit, the difference between the U.K.s income and out goings. The losses of these businesses will reduce corporation tax, VAT and income tax. Then there is the substantial rise in something we have all been made aware of recently. The welfare bill !

American Airways & US Airlines merger.

Well there is my addition to the 'The 99 % People's Unity Protest', or I suppose the next protest in June. We need to do something about these buyouts, because they are a drain on the economy, if only in rising costs of the businesses involved due to the  added costs of debt. But the other factor is that money used for these buyouts, and they are increasing in number currently, could be used in ways that would have a positive affect on the economy. For example to fund buying and building of homes. Costs of the buyout deals are lower as it's easier to do a $10 Billion deal then say 10,000 $100,000 mortgages! Arranging the big buyouts takes many less man hours.
From the banks' point of view it is economically the right policy. But taking into account the money they are using belongs to savers, they should be investing that money in what the savers want it invested in. In most cases savers I believe would want money invested in sustainability and in genuine job creation. In some situations, take overs are justified by the financial industry because one may be saved by another due to debts the troubled business has taken on. But I have to break it to you that the troubles of companies are often down to a previous buy out or irresponsible refinancing. Issues of bonds for example. These are much like financial time bombs set to go off in possibly seven years after issue. You can find more on this on other X-ECONOMICS posts.

Finally, the motivation for profit of the banks is clearly having a substantial  (if not devastating) affect on the economy. If the banks were owned by the public, they would be orientated to doing a job for the economy from which we could all benefit. It really wouldn't matter if they lost a small amount. The difference could come from high tax bracket earners. It would be a small price to pay for what would surely be an economy where at least the majority, and an increasing majority would be rewarded for work. Businesses could continue to offer services and products we need without being burdened by unnecessary debt. Then continue to minimize the deffeceit and thus potentially reduce the national debt !

If you agree then, you could have a banner that said ;

Buyout of Heinz buy Warren Buffet. $12 Bn of debt on Heinz.

 "Buyouts are just a way for banks to get on the payrolls of big businesses !!"

And that I am afraid to say is, that is what they would appear to be. Obviously there are major logistical problems here. This is an international problem. But as one of the two leading nations in the finance industry in the world, we should use our influence to benefit the world. Whilst we still have a chance.

The buyouts are one thing we could do without. Bonds are another. That's just a couple of issues from probably a list of a dozen which need to change in the financial industry. We must work together with the people of the U.S. Europe and the rest of the world to make necessary changes. Because without these changes we will remain on a down hill slope to God only knows where.

Thanks to every one who helped.
Hopefully this post will open more people's eyes to what we should be protesting about. And the main stream media to take more notice of what we are protesting about.
See you at the next protest.