« Osborne calls for cut in corporation tax to stop exodus of businesses | Main | Brian Coleman: Britain's Olympic winners "left their consciences at passport control" »


"In the end people are not going to get married for a tax break, and people are not going to suddenly stop separating because we change the benefits system."

Why the hell are planning to spend the money then, you donkey?

On capital punishment he says, And I just don’t honestly think that in a civilised society like ours that you can have the death penalty any more, but I don’t think it’s a particularly civilised, or just, society that spares the ultimate penalty for those who take innocent life, but allows, and even encourages, the murder of unborn children, including handicapped ones up to birth.

Capital punishment for taking innocent life would not be a matter of us taking revenge, but is sometimes said to demonstrate the value we place on human life.

Apart from perhaps this one aspect, all excellent stuff… e.g. getting rid of the culture of paperwork and political correctness, dealing with drugs on our streets, addressing the underlying causes like family breakdown, start saying no to things – to people falling down drunk in the streets, to shops selling booze to people underage…, and supporting marriage as this makes it more likely mum & dad stay together, thus generally giving children the best chance …

"..... it’s not just about me any more, it’s about us, it’s about us together, we have commitments to each other, I think it’s a really important thing. I am unashamedly pro-marriage… Some people will say, you’ll sound a bit old-fashioned – I don’t care. I think it’s important."

'Old fashioned' is good. 'Commitment' is valuable.

There is evidence that the people in arrears with their mortgage payments are much more likely to be cohabiting than married couples.

It seems to be the case that the recent and rapid increase in cohabitation has triggered the repossession boom and the accompanying house price and economic slump.

For example, research shows "the difference in family breakdown risk between married and cohabiting couples is sufficient that even the poorest 20% of married couples are more stable than all but the richest 20% of cohabiting couples" [www.bcft.co.uk/research.htm SEP 06 'Family breakdown in the UK' (pdf)]

Research also indicates, "On average change in marital status increases the risk of default 4.5 times".

This is supported by other research: "Why have a rising number of Americans defaulted on their mortgage payments in recent years?"

"When economist Darryl E. Getter of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development set out to answer this question, he discovered that the problem was often not chiefly financial, but rather marital: many of the American homeowners who fall behind in their mortgage payments are experiencing the economic distress occasioned by divorce or separation from a spouse ...."

"Whether looking at all households or just at those with 'normal and unusually high' incomes, Getter finds unusually high default rates for home mortgages among Americans who are divorced/separated ....." (Source: Darryl E. Getter, 'Contributing to the Delinquency of Borrowers,' The Journal of Consumer Affairs 37.1 [2003]: 86-100.)

The mortgage lenders are being very coy about the arrears and cohabitation figures.

When will we be told the truth?

Interesting what DC has to say about capital punishment. I have always been in favour of having the death penalty available as the ultimate deterrent and I still hold the same view, though viewing the biopic on television recently about Albert Pierrepoint the last executioner did make me think hard! He it seems was a basically kind and sympathetic man who took pride in his work but carried it out with always the utmost respect for the condemned prisoner's ultimate humanity. As the film went on one could see how having to carry out his terrible duties took quite a toll on not only him but also his wife. I do, along with DC, wonder if the death penalty SHOULD be available in a civilized country but when I think about the worst kind of criminals, murders and paedophiles I do believe the State should have recourse to the ultimate sanction.

Sally Roberts,

I agree with you again!

I think that there may be a case for the ultimate penalty to be available but only in cases where there is absolutely no doubt of guilt whatsoever and no mitigating circumstances.

Unfortunately this is no possible. It is forbidden by the EU.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker