Full name: Darren Jones
Age: 23
From: Bristol
PPC for: Torridge & West Devon
Website: www.darren-jones.co.uk
Member of the Labour Party since: 2003
CV:
I'm currently a trainee commercial lawyer and was previously the President of the Students’ Union at the University of Plymouth, where I gained an honours degree in the Human Biosciences.
I'm also a director for a community charity and previously sat on the boards of the University of Plymouth and the Plymouth University NHS Foundation Trust as well as being an executive member on the Co-operative Party Youth Committee. Have worked in the NHS for the last eight years and am a member of Unite.
I was inspired to go into politics because:
Unless we campaign for the fundamental rights and values we believe in they could easily be taken away without us realising.
The values of the Labour and Co-operative movements seem, to me at least, to be so fundamental to the way society should operate that I sometimes find it hard to understand other political ideologies.
Liberty, justice, equality, fairness, opportunity, freedom, democracy, community – these aren’t just words, they mean so much and people have fought to keep them real in our society today. That’s why I’m involved in politics.
My main policy interests are:
Education – because I have experienced first hand the power of getting a good education. It’s so crucial in order to give every person the opportunity they deserve to reach their full potential.
Health Care – because it’s a fundamental right and, like education, needs to be right in order to support people properly.
International Development – not just in the sense of helping developing countries but in the larger sense of globalisation, climate change, international co-operation and solidarity. I see community as a fundamental building block of society and globalisation as an example of a very large version of that building block; it needs to be done properly because the risks are so much bigger.
Democracy and the Constitution – the power of people to govern their own lives is a basic right within any democratic system yet it is under threat like never before. It must be preserved.
Three things I think should be in the next Labour manifesto are:
Co-operative Communities – whilst not a jazzy headline grabber I think we need to make sure that we don’t make the same mistakes taken in the 20 year run up to the global recession and sustainable, local and co-operative models in all areas of public service delivery should be considered (especially the banks!).
Votes at Sixteen – it’s about time that we extended the franchise to sixteen year olds as a symbolic commitment to the importance of involving young people in the governing of our country.
Public Engagement – we need to think of ways to engage the public more in the actions of Parliament and show that their opinion and involvement counts and actually has an affect. This will include reforming the voting system, too.
I think people should vote for me because:
I believe so strongly that people should be empowered to control their own lives and that I’d therefore be what an MP was historically supposed to be: a representative.
I won’t go through the balderdash of detailing my key professional skills but what I will say is that I care an awful lot and I’d commit myself entirely in trying to secure a better future for my constituents and the country.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
1 ref DNA,why should a sample of an innocent persons DNA should be held on a state data base.I have nothing to fear either as I am law abiding, but I still object in the strongest terms to my DNA being held on a data base.I believe this to be very sinister and especially dangerous given I have no confidence this data is secure.
2notice no answer to the Governments past record on losing our 'secure' data except to say 'there are some examples of private firms doing this' ...well thats alright then, I feel much safer now I know this.
3 do I think local authorities should have reasonable salaries? yes I do, but i also dont want a local authority that wastes millions of taxpayers money on layers of unecessary Management, various focus groups or smoking cessation officers, quite reasonable point of view, which I am entitled to when I pay £185 council tax per month (£88 in 1997 by the way) yet my rubbish collection is reduced to fortnightly and my road has had potholes in for the last 8 years.
The public sector is funded by taxation isnt it? so no, I have no qualms in asking questions about the salaries and benefit levels we all pay for directly or indirectly.
4 Personal Pensions receiving tax relief...why shouldnt they? the public sector get contributions on top of the individuals own contributions paid for so why should those of us in the private sector not also be encouraged to save long term for our retirement ( thus being less of a burden on the state at retirement) ? I wonder why, in a period of alleged 'boom' Gordon Brown/the Government found it necessary to remove £x billion a year from Pension funds by changing the tax reliefs within those funds? where did this money go? are we not still hundreds of billions of pounds in debt ? we had an excellent Pension system pre 1997, now we do not..thats an undeniable fact.
5 Europe/EUcon/Lisbon Treaty/broken manifesto promise....nothing to say about that then?
6 ref my 'diatribe', yep, absolutely and one of my many faults, but given the state this country is now in due, to a large degree, the actions of this Government(which is not a true Labour Government in my opinion)is it really suprising? . I have not been rude or I would have been moderated, but put my opinion across strongly as I see it...thats what these blogs are for . I quite like the attitudes on the list actually, its a good site and all are free to comment regardless of view point, which is admirable... I just happen to totally disagree with your views in just about everything as you do mine. Yes I am free to leave..thamks for pointing that out, but I wont if its all the same to you.
PS CCTV cameras..I still dont care, i dont break the law and the images dont go on a long lived data base.
Entirely agree, Derek, but the criticisms were directed against public pension schemes and I am merely trying to show that for the vast proportion of public sector workers - who are also low-paid - these are not 'gold-plated' schemes as was alleged. The earlier bit of your message I don;t understand. The only thing I can say that you cannot accumulate more than half salary in the public pension schemes (non-civil service) however many years you work over the 40 (I can't understand why anyone would want to).
I would be interested to know what proportion of people are in a private pension scheme. I'd like Ricki to let us know what his condition is likely to be.
Neither, however, must we let state pension schemes erode in value - they are often the basic sum and the private occupational pension scheme simply a top-up, and, of course, because of historical circumstances, many people are dependent on the state pension. Under the new proposals, my brother-in-law will have to work for 50 years to be entitled to his state pension.
Dave Postles has a good point regarding the 'activities of the LSE.'
I did a lot of looking at pensions arrangements a few years ago, at the time of the Turner review.
What I did discover, amomgst a lot of other things, is that final salary arrangements both favour and subsidise top earners, basically because the underlying investments grow nowhere near the rate as the top earners' salary progressions.
Pensions are a minefield. The proper solution, as I wrote in a piece last year (reference below) is a good level of state retirement pension, with personal arrangements to “top up” as required.
http://www.labourlist.org/labour_needs_bold_state_retirement_pension_peter_barnard
As I understand it, even if you worked until you were a hundred, you would still only be entitled to 40/80ths in your public pension scheme - the 40/80ths is a maximum. It is rather difficult for some people in local government and higher education to make those 40 years. In local government, graduates don't start earning until they are 23 (it takes a few years to get the post-degree qualifications and then find a job) and in universities, since a doctorate is the accepted qualification now, possibly 28 (four years for the doctorate and then some years to find a full-time appointment). Despite the legislation about age discrimination, universities usually manage to compel people to retire by age 67. Working in several different sectors - private and public - I only managed to accumulate 35 years (with my AVCs) before deciding to give it up.
I should add also that final salary pension schemes are about to disappear in the public sector. In the mid 1980s, the USS scheme had so much money that its members were suggested that the arrangements should be 2/3 of final salary rather than 1/2 (40/80ths), but the Trustees wisely declined. As a result of the activities of the LSE, the USS is now considering that the pension should be 40/80ths of the average salary during the career.
accountancy eh ?
Not quite trillions .... at the end of 2008, the occupational pensions funds (both public and private sector) had £928 billion total assets ; income was £58 billion and expenditure £49 billion.
(Source : "MQ5" - ONS - Table 4.2).
I hear what you are saying about pensions funds and balance sheets, but I believe that there are genuine obstacles why this can't be done. Don't ask me what the obstacles are, but if it were that simple, I'm sure that it would have been done.
I've tried to explain this before, but I'll endeavour to do so again, so thanks for asking. Contributions to public sector pension schemes consist of 7% contributions from the employee's salary and 14% contributions from the employer (local government/USS - i.e. University Superannuation Scheme). The pension consists of one-eightieth of salary for every year served, up to a maximum of 40 years. If you work more than 40 years, you still cannot receive more than 40/80ths - that is half salary. The salaries of most people in local authorities are very low; because of that and part-time working, it is estimated that the average pension in the local government scheme is about £4000 p.a. Let's look at the refuse collectors in Leeds. They are the elite of the manual workers in local government. Their salary was £18k before the Lib council attempted to force a pay cut on them. So, if they work as a binman for 40 years, they will receive £9k as pension - though probably now more like £7 as a result of the council's action (if they survive the job, of course). Most graduates in local government reach a maximum salary of £26k or so. Tha preponderance of people working in local government are employed on what used to be clerical grades (C1-C2) - round about the 8-12k mark on career progression. The vast number of people working in local authorities are on these grades - low-paid people like in the private sector.
Now, as to your personal allusions, I do not actually commit to socialism - I believe it impracticable - I'm a mixed-economy person. My idea of fairness derives from John Rawls, a late philosopher at Harvard University, who could by no means be described as a socialist.
Finally, I have not advocated anything that I am not prepared to do myself - a guiding principle - as I have endlessly tried to clarify. To repeat, from my pension fund (expanded by AVCs - so I have also used a private pension scheme) of £18k p.a. gross (before tax), I make contributions by standing order and regular one-offs payments to charities which would put me in the 40% tax bracket. In my privileged position, I see money as a resource to do good for good's own sake. I'm sure that you - polite as you are - and your ranting and railing colleagues differ on that, but can we please between the two of us continue a civil conversation as we have.
BTW one piece of legislation should be enacted that pensions funds should never show on balance sheets (it is not the companies money !!) and should be exempt from liquidation process's.
Let me start to respond to your points in this way. 1 It does not hurt. I thought it simply a cock-up in the private sector. I actually paid the £80 to be shut of them. 2 There are many instances of private firms losing data, but they don't attract the attention in the press - I will dig some out for you. 3 Your insulting reference to my question about the stats: as has been pointed out in the reasonable press, you are not comparing like with like. Compare the salary of a chief exec of a local authority with many thousands of employees with that of a similar position in a private organization. As has been demonstrated often in the press, the salaries of the higher level officers in local government have been dragged along by private sector salaries and, indeed, lag far behind. Do you think a chief exec doesn't merit at least a fraction of the remuneration of the former CEO of the RBS? Do you not think that local authorities should not have reasonable salaries to attract the best people? You are completely wrong about the level of pension schemes in the general public sector - you are citing civil service pension arrangements. I have previously gone to great lengths to explain the general composition of non-civil service public sector schemes. I'm quite prepared to go to the police station tomorrow and volunteer my DNA sample. What's to fear? If it helps them, fine. Look at like for like salaries of graduates in the public and private sectors - I think you might well find some considerable difference. If you consider £50-100k to be a fat salary by comparison with the remuneration of people performing similar roles in private industry, then I find that somewhat difficult to comprehend. As to pension schemes, as I understand it, they had a heavy tax exemption and that tax exemption was reduced. You also fail to understand the nature of expenses in local authorities for the general run of officers under Standing Orders - which again I have tried to explain elsewhere. I see that you do not address the issues of safety in the use of cctv cameras - again what's to fear - especially since they may well deter drunk and dissolute behaviour in town centres which is one of the objectives.
I think I asked you in fairly polite tones to give some reasoning to your bald statements. As usual, we receive back a fair diatribe. I shall ignore the tone of your invective. IMHO, it rather reflects back on yourself that you cannot enter into a rational discussion. If you don;t like our attitudes on this list, you are free to leave - it is, after all, Labour List.
It's very difficult to quantify (the "tax grab") because there are no numbers on the record, as far as I am aware. There are lots of numbers put around by vested interests, but you need a shovelful of that currently rare commodity, salt, when you read them.
What is on the record is the reduction in the main rate of Corporation Tax under Labour : down five percentage points, so that on £320 billion* of profits in 2008, companies paid around £16 billion less Corporation Tax - more than enough to put a bob or two into the pockets of those receiving occupational pensions.
* Annual Abstract of Statistics, 2009, Table 16.1
besides when shares rise again, all will be fine but will the funds learn lessons and make the 'profits' more secure and less influenced to the vaguries of the market.
That's one reason, amongst many.
The pensions holidays taken by companies was a result of Nigel Lawson, as he then was, placing a cap on the "surplus" that a pension fund could build up. He was afraid, amongst other things, that companies would find a way to leak the (tax-payer subsidised)money somewhere else, far away from the intention of the pension funds.
Other reasons are : (i) RPI-index linking of pensions payments (Pensions Act, 1995), which became effective in 1997 (ii) people living longer (iii) abject equities performance, world-wide.
Stephen Yeo, a senior partner with Watson Wyatt, and a former pensions adviser to the Conservative Party, remarked in the FT two or three years ago that "Gordon Brown's so-called tax-grab wasn't in the first three reasons for the problems in occupational pensions." He gave the reasons that I have just listed.
Perhaps, it was Mr Yeo's statement, where he placed his conscience before the Tory party line, that caused him and the Tories to part company, but that's speculation on my part.
The source of the problems began when the Tory Government under the sainted Margaret Thatcher allowed firms to take pension holidays in the 80's when it seemed that the funds were awash with cash.
Had this not gone ahead the reserves would have withstood the decline in the value of assets that happened since.
@Mr Postles...medians/quartiles?what a lot of tosh.There is no need to use medians etc..I urge all on here to go find out how much your local county council executives are on, £50,000 to £100,000pa plus? PLUS fat pay offs when they leave or retire PLUS 2/3 final salary pensions (which are almost extinct for us in the Private sector). Check the Guardian or your local rag for the advertised jobs and benefits you pay for, YOUR incompetent, wasteful Government have been in power for 12 years Mr Postles..YOU prove to us that public sector staff are not on inflated salaries and benefits...you justify to us why we need smking cessation officers and the like..and why our politicians justify their inflated salaries,gold plated pensions , 'parachute'payments? AND MULTI THOUSAND POUND EXPENSES ?
Re private pensions,your comment "Please justify to us that your private sector pensions should have been exempted from the tax which was 'reclaimed' by the government" this is arrogance beyond belief. Browns changing of the tax treatment of private pensions has brought the once finest private pension provision in Europe to its knees...how the hell can you defend that? he was warned that his actions would wipe billions of the value of the funds yet the arrogant fool continued to do it. And my justification for him not doing it is that he has ruined the retirement plans of millions of hard working and thrifty people and destroyed all faith in long term savings in this country. Whats the matter Brown? dont like people having some financial freedom? or was it Political spite that drove you to attack Personal Pensions (came in under a Tory Government I believe) Re the Torys policy on Europe? same as Labour..spinelessly break a Manifesto commitment to have a referendum on the renamed constitution,use any twisted means possible from preventing the Public from having their say, weasel out of it and allow your country to become a vassal state of the EU monster...disgraceful.re Police and DNA data bases, there is no law to govern this as far as I know. It is at the discretion of the Chief Constable of the area as to whether DNA is routinely kept on the database, even for those who are proved inncocent of any crime. Apparently for most forces, there has to be 'extreme circumstances' where the DNA is NOT kept. Why are innocent people having their DNA kept on a data base? do you think this is reasonable? do you think this is safe give the Goverments appaling history with losing data? I dont. ref CCTv..I dont care in the least..glad you suffered the offhand rejection of that firm of solicitors though, because you just off handedly rejected our very real and legitimate concerns about our country s independant governance and the destruction of our private pensions. Hurts doesnt it?
Perhaps it was as a voluntary worker or a part-time hospital porter - who knows? Perhaps he'll address that.
Ian - good luck with it.
Darren - keep the idealism and remember people like Ricki and Ian.
(Working for a Think Tanks as a Policy Wonk is not a productive job).
(Anybody who joined any political party when younger than 20 should also be disallowed - they should be out having a life.)
Please show us some stats (other than some misleading mean - and if you do use the mean, use the standard deviation, median and first and third quartiles) - on salaries.
Please justify to us that your private sector pensions should have been exempted from the tax which was reclaimed by the government.
Please be more specific about what you consider to be gold-plated pensions.
Please advise us what is Tory party policy on the Lisbon treaty.
Please describe to us the policy and practice of the police on DNA databases.
As to cctv cameras, my worst experience has been with those proliferating numbers in private spaces. A new system was introduced at Moto Services at Donington Park. I happened to park there on the first day of their introduction and on the second day - consecutive days. They claimed that I had parked there overnight because their cctv cameras had evidence of me arriving on one day and leaving on the next day. I sent an e-mail explaining what the correct situation was. Oh, they would look into it. Nothing from them - assumed it must be sorted. Then I received a letter from a solicitor demanding £80 because I had not paid the £30 within the specified time. I rang them and received the most offhand rejection that I have ever experienced - I'm inclined to say typical of the arrogant self-justification of solicitors.
Old people and young women, I would suspect, would be particularly pleased to have cctv in urban centres. They are something of a deterrent against anti-social and violent behaviour and have also provided invaluable evidence in convictions.
He then goes on to spout the Political buzz words of his Nu Labour Masters, Liberty, Justice, Freedom, Democracy blah blah blah, but does not come to the same conclusion as the rest of us that his chosen Goverment has reneged on the Lisbon Treaty (no democracy here)DNA Database and ID Cards, Detention without trial etc etc (No Freedom here)Public Sector employees now earn more than the people paying for it and as well as higher salaries, Gold Plated Pensions that have been taken from us in the Private Sector by Gordons 5 Billion a year Tax Grab(No Fairness here)
I would suggest you either need a Brain Transplant or you are willing to lie and pretend you know what you are talking about!
Go and get a life, spend some time learning about how attrocious Nu Labour have been and actually say something meaningful.
We do not need any more silly little boys in Goverment, we have our hands full of incompetents allready.
I`d guess there are loads of sitting MPs who`ve dogged a spliff or 2 in their time but are scared to "out" themselves.
I agree that it makes Cameron, for a Tory, more normal, and probably stronger too.
Off topic, but a good read & discussion here at The Register
"UK jails schizophrenic for refusal to decrypt files"http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl/
is the problem that the papers as soon as there is a whiff of scandal go so over the top they cause the politicans to be as clean and secretive as they are.
As non party point who cares if Cameron had a whiff of cannabis or not, I certainly have done in my time but you would know the uproar if he admitted to that.
I would actually think it makes him a 'tiny bit' more normal
I`d rather vote for a "real" person, than someone with no life experience.
Most people have a skeleton or 2 in the cupboard, hell I`ve a few of my own, (peeing in the fuel tank of a bus is one =£50 fine). It`s what makes us people, not faceless lifeless beaurocrats.
There`s an MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly), here in N. Ireland by the name of Sammy Wilson, who`s main claim to fame, apart from being a city councillor, had been to run through a field of cereal crops starkers a few years ago. It was in all the Sunday papers. He kept his seat and as I said earlier became a very good MLA. He got my vote on that alone :0)~
The days of MPs being "characters" seem to be missing perhaps it`s just me being old-fashioned but I miss those days and people.
@ Ian Robathan
Good luck, hope you get accepted and elected!
I agree with your sentiment but Millbank always has the last say these days which means any constituency trying to go their own way will be told by Millbank to take what they are given or suddenly find they are the constituency chosen to have the gay, different coloured, alternately sexual, vertically challenged candidate to meet the Millbank quota and facing a NE inquiry into the way they have formed their constituency party for the cheek of actually thinking they could nominate their own choice.....
PS: How are you getting on with the petition to call an EGM of the Labour Party over Gordon's leadership?
I also believe to stand for election at whatever levberl you have to live in the area for a while. I have lived on my estate for 37 years but have three councilors (all tory but irrelevant) who have never lived on it, that can not be right.
Local people would help to get back the link between the people and politicans.
Look at the leaders of the three main parties
Brown - TV journalist
Cameron - an advisor to the Tories then a communications director
Clegg - Journalist and EU advisor
none of these have done a proper day's work.
So i should be shunned forever for making a mistake 9/10 years ago even though i have served my punishment ? The point i was trying to make is that if we have plastic mps then we will have no real life experience in forming policy ? the house should have a wide source of experience and then we might start getting policys right .
ricki
I agree , it also means that only the rich and the middle class have any representaion , I do not think it will get better after the next election (whoever wins) .
ricki
Therefore instead of being a vocation it has become a career for the professional middle class and I believe at heart (and there are exceptions maybe like Darren) they are not the conviction politicans we want and desire.
The reason you wont see "real " people standing for any party is because because many normal people might have been convicted of a crimanl offence and as the partys are scared of neagitive headlines in the papers , Ie I think that if you had ex drug addicit was helping to form policy the newspapers would go for headlines of there past and not the policy , Thats why we have more and more plastic mps with no real life experience .
ricki
"Liberty, justice, equality, fairness, opportunity, freedom, democracy, community – these aren’t just words, they mean so much and people have fought to keep them real in our society today"
Yes the PEOPLE have fought but the Government have literally taken the above away from us.
Good luck on the day job.
Labour has been the party at the forefront of taking away and reducing our fundamental rights and values.
Detention without charge.
Illegal DNA database.
No protests near Parliament.
ID cards.
Terrorism laws used to stop legitimate protest and spy on people.
Local councils using terrorism legislation to spy on parents and peoples bins.
Mass immigration to change the demographic and cultural nature of the country and thus its values.
CCTV everywhere.
Large numbers of organisations and groups allowed to break into your home.
Police gathering as much DNA as possible from as many people as possible.
All adults to be suspected of child abuse.
Large number of databases to contain details on everyone in the country.
Constitutional change undertaken without any understanding on how it would change the status quo.
Have you taken into account the unintended consequences of votes at 16?
I wish you well , Does this mean you will follow your voters views or the whips?
ricki