Tuesday, 27 January 2009

The New CSA, A Sinister Admission

Watching the horrible Biased Broadcasting Corporation news channel this morning chilled me to the bone. The new CSA, known as the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission, will be given the powers to remove passports and driving licences from non-paying parents without having to apply to a court. Now at face value that doesn't sound to bad really, especially to a single mother with a dead-beat absent father, but lets look at this a little more closely, because it is a really sinister step towards a totalitarian state.

For a start, the Government cannot run a department successfully, there isn't a single one that has succeeded at it's job. Especially not the CSA which lost literally billions of taxpayers money, £500million was lost on an IT upgrade! The easy targets will get lumbered with the bill again as fathers who want to and do pay for their children's upkeep will face higher and higher payments as the Commission tries to raise it's balance of payments to disguise the fact it is hemorrhaging money from the treasury.

What if you get hit with an amount you cannot pay? Maybe you have a new family and a 'clerical error' decides you have to pay an unaffordable amount? Without having to go through the trouble and inconvenience of going to court and having an impartial magistrate decide on the case, a government appointed Common Purpose stooge can take away your Freedom of Movement and civil liberty by simply emailing HM Customs immigration and suspending your passport and the DVLA to suspend your licence. Oh they say you can appeal the decision, but while you are waiting months for your day in court they have taken away your rights as a citizen. The removal of a passport is a bail restriction reserved for criminals undergoing court proceedings and the suspension of a driving license is punishment for doing something dangerous with a car. Both fitting punishments and precautions in the right circumstance. The removal of a passport and driving license because you have not done what the government COMMANDED you do is a totally Communist, Totalitarian form of control.

They have the nerve to call the BNP fascist? The CMEC have the authority to examine the tax records of anyone reported to them to assess their ability to pay. When did the Data Protection Act 1982 get scrapped? The whole problem here is that Labour and the EU only know one way to remedy a situation, by rule and by force. They cannot see that each and every person has a different reason for every decision they make. A relationship break-up is stressful enough without having the government come down upon you. How many suicides were the CSA responsible for during the nineties? I can't remember but one was too many.

In many cases it is the 'right of entitlement' attitude that is at fault. The parent with custody uses the children as a weapon, dictating when the absent parent is 'allowed' to see his/her children so the absent parent in retaliation uses money as leverage. They go to court and have an argument over it and the magistrate decides that the current situation should not be changed as it might upset the child, so he/she is stuck with 2 or 3 hours every Saturday. Then the absent parent is clubbed by the CSA/CMEC into paying through the nose for children he/she has no time to maintain a bond with. The custodial parent then gets a new partner who spends infinitely more time with the kids and builds a stronger bond than the absent biological parent. Where is the fairness in this system? The CWEC only exists to 'stealth tax' absent parents and make the benefits bill look lower. Any time the Treasury needs a cash injection, your payment will be 'reviewed'.

So what would be fairer? How about a policy of zero discrimination where it is assumed that separated parents have joint custody and financial responsibility for the children? That the child spends an equal amount of time with both parents unless there is an issue of safety. Instead of wasting billions on a committee that just adds stress to the situation, we should have an American style 'family court' to deal with these types of cases. If the parents have a disagreement over child welfare or financial contributions they can go to the court and have the court issue a summons to the other parent. In the event of non-attendance an arrest warrant can be issued to force the dead beat to court where they can make a legal attachment of earnings.

On the other hand, a parent who wants to spend more than money with his/her children, who wants to have an equal influence in the upbringing of their offspring will never need to bother the court. The parents simply split up and the children have a home at mummy and daddies house. Mummy supports them, feeds and clothes them at her house and Daddy does the same at his house. All responsibility and liability split 50/50. If for some reason one parent cannot make that commitment to their children then the parent with majority liability needs to be compensated financially. How simple is that? Any JP or Magistrate with an average IQ could sort that out. Better for the children, the parents and the benefits system. There would be incentive to make this an amicable agreement without court as reasonable costs would be assigned with a weighting of share towards any party being intentionally awkward or obstructive.

If you support this hands-off, mediation style approach to relieving the country of the bureaucracy of government interference in YOUR life, then support the BNP. If you want some semi-educated brainwashed communist stooge forcing you to live the way they want you to, vote for one of the others.

No comments:

Post a Comment