The Miranda Warning – is this a – Real Wake up Call – to our Future

Great Seal Bug from NSA archives

Great Seal Bug from NSA archives (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This article was published a few days ago by News Press and relates to events that have now taken a step further in relation to reason for the arrest! So whether we believe it or not, what seems very evident from studies l have undertaken, is the future is more like ” big brother is watching you” than we ever imagined possible!    

The exert below copied and pasted from the article, which is excellent and well worth a read:

Over the past decade, the United States has stretched the definition of( “terrorism” )

to justify or disguise expansions of surveillance and war. In 2003,

President Bush declared that overthrowing Arab dictators was part of the

“war on terror.” From 2004 to 2007, the Bush administration persuaded

the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to define massive,

overwhelmingly innocent clusters of communications data as

terrorism-related “facilities” subject to authorized U.S. surveillance.

In 2009, U.S. officials labelled the Fort Hood shooter a “terrorist” for

killing fellow U.S. military personnel. In 2010, the CIA designated the

fatal bombing of its drone-war operators in Afghanistan as a “terrorist

attack.”

So my reading of just this particular extract allows me to see deeper into people’s minds, and see why when they are polled independently, that up to 60% said it was a necessary evil, the question is who is the real evil in reality,  the protectionism ,or the terrorism! So this led me to write about ” How l can see Times are a Changing” and the liberty and justice that the people of the US and our country, once enjoyed so freely, will soon be all but eroded!  All in the name of ” NEW ” – Liberty and Justice – same as before but this time very, very different!  No longer the right to speak out about your government, as this is called “treason” once was called “Free Speech” or just mention a certain government body like the NSA or CIA and you instantly become a sympathiser, once you were a libertarian!  You get my drift!

Well the Miranda Warning is just that a friend of the editor of a UK news paper was targeted for one reason and one reason only, that was first the whereabouts of Edward Snowden and secondly what was on his laptop! Someone, maybe a whistle-blower told some high-ranking official in security that it may be worth stopping this person on this day!

Well of course to even the most ardent investigator this can not easily be proved, but as all journalists know providing the facts behind the story is all about honesty and not speculation, but in the case of David Miranda, he was arrested on the pretence of being a terrorist, not that he just happened to be a close friend and confidant of the Guardian reporter who first released the Edward Snowden story! Or that sometime later the same UK reporter had his offices investigated and his laptop was also searched!

No this was just to protect the US and UK people and the “Land of the Free” also stated many times by politicians alike as a country of “Free Speech” maybe l should have called this article another name like “When is free speech really Free” of course it would not have had the same impact as the mere mention of the name Miranda, but my reason for calling it, by the excellent article writer William Saletan was simply, it is a warning to people of what is to come, as nobody did anything to stop this “Terrorist Act” being written, and legislated and now, as we have seen put into action! So it is a Warning in my personal opinion a dire warning of control by new and more stringent laws, brought about by the people themselves, asking for more protection measures!

Always remember every country is judged on the fairness of its laws, not the harshness by the way they are laid down!

So this today with the ever-changing political landscape, of change for change sake happening daily, spare a thought for those that through no fault of their own have and will become a scapegoat of a system, that was designed by people who convinced the people, that what we are doing for you, is providing a way to protect you from the evil doers.

My last question is who really are these evil doers?        

The Miranda Warning. Please read and comment as it is you the people that change the world, either for the good or for yourselves! 

 

#acenewsservices, #snowden, #definition-of-terrorism, #edward-snowden, #george-w-bush, #intelligence-surveillance, #miranda, #miranda-warning, #real-evil, #terrorism, #united-states, #united-states-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court, #william-saletan

Hidden tax on older – Care Home Residents – that councils rely upon

Care In The CommunityAccording  to a press release by Laing and Buisson in January 2013

Councils rely on a ‘hidden tax’ on older care home residents

Data presented in the latest edition of the Care of Elderly People UK Market Survey 2012-13* shows that 175,000 older residents (43.4%) paid the full costs of their long-term care fees in 2012. A further 56,000 (14%), while being supported by councils, also relied on ‘top-ups’ from family or friends. This means that a total of 231,000 older residents were paying in full or in part from their own or their families’ resources – this marks a record high of 57% of all (403,000) older residents of independent sector care homes in the UK.

The remaining 43% of residents either had their fees paid in full by councils (143,000) or by the NHS under the continuing healthcare programme (29,000).

Commenting on the findings, author and Laing & Buisson chief executive William Laing predicted a further shift to private pay in the future.

Mr Laing said:

‘The private payers’ share is projected to continue growing in the future as the rate of owner occupation continues to expand among the very old population at risk of entering care homes. Meanwhile, the quasi-private, top-up market will be reinforced by the minimal or zero local authority fee uplifts which look likely to continue in the medium term.’

There is, of course, wide regional variation with a much higher proportion of ‘pure’ private payers in affluent areas of the country including the South East (55% of residents), South West (53%) and East of England 50%). The North East, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, meanwhile, have the lowest level at just 22%, compared with the UK average of 43%.

What’s more, with the per week fees being paid by councils either frozen or subject to very minor uplifts, the gap between what councils pay and what private payers are being asked to pay is opening up to an alarming extent.

On average, according to the report, English councils are paying just £480 per week for residential care in 2012/13, approximately £50 – £140 less than the ‘fair market price’ range of £528 – £623 calculated by Laing & Buisson (with nursing care fees being about £150 per week higher).

‘The private payers’ share is projected to continue growing in the future as the rate of owner occupation continues to expand among the very old population at risk of entering care homes. Meanwhile, the quasi-private, top-up market will be reinforced by the minimal or zero local authority fee uplifts which look likely to continue in the medium term.’

There is, of course, wide regional variation with a much higher proportion of ‘pure’ private payers in affluent areas of the country including the South East (55% of residents), South West (53%) and East of England 50%). The North East, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, meanwhile, have the lowest level at just 22%, compared with the UK average of 43%.

What’s more, with the per week fees being paid by councils either frozen or subject to very minor uplifts, the gap between what councils pay and what private payers are being asked to pay is opening up to an alarming extent.

On average, according to the report, English councils are paying just £480 per week for residential care in 2012/13, approximately £50 – £140 less than the ‘fair market price’ range of £528 – £623 calculated by Laing & Buisson (with nursing care fees being about £150 per week higher).

Mr Laing commented:

‘The reality is that independent care home providers are having to rely more and more on cross subsidies from private payers. Without these subsidies, large numbers of care homes would be literally bust. It is understandable that cash-strapped councils are seeking to pay care homes as little as they can, since this is now the biggest single cost that councils have to bear, but it needs to be recognised that this amounts to a ‘hidden tax’ on private payers, who are in effect bearing the brunt of austerity measures.’

Addressing the long-term funding debate, the report says that implementation of the Dilnot proposals would certainly reduce the burden on private payers and their families, but it will by no means remove it, because the proposal is that only ‘care’ costs will be paid by the state once an (as yet undecided) cap is reached, leaving the individual to pay for ‘hotel’ and other costs which are included in care home fees.

For the first time, Laing & Buisson has split care home costs into their component parts (see table below) for a care home meeting all the latest physical and other standards:

‘The private payers’ share is projected to continue growing in the future as the rate of owner occupation continues to expand among the very old population at risk of entering care homes. Meanwhile, the quasi-private, top-up market will be reinforced by the minimal or zero local authority fee uplifts which look likely to continue in the medium term.’

There is, of course, wide regional variation with a much higher proportion of ‘pure’ private payers in affluent areas of the country including the South East (55% of residents), South West (53%) and East of England 50%). The North East, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, meanwhile, have the lowest level at just 22%, compared with the UK average of 43%.

What’s more, with the per week fees being paid by councils either frozen or subject to very minor uplifts, the gap between what councils pay and what private payers are being asked to pay is opening up to an alarming extent.

On average, according to the report, English councils are paying just £480 per week for residential care in 2012/13, approximately £50 – £140 less than the ‘fair market price’ range of £528 – £623 calculated by Laing & Buisson (with nursing care fees being about £150 per week higher).

Mr Laing commented:

‘The reality is that independent care home providers are having to rely more and more on cross subsidies from private payers. Without these subsidies, large numbers of care homes would be literally bust. It is understandable that cash-strapped councils are seeking to pay care homes as little as they can, since this is now the biggest single cost that councils have to bear, but it needs to be recognised that this amounts to a ‘hidden tax’ on private payers, who are in effect bearing the brunt of austerity measures.’

Addressing the long-term funding debate, the report says that implementation of the Dilnot proposals would certainly reduce the burden on private payers and their families, but it will by no means remove it, because the proposal is that only ‘care’ costs will be paid by the state once an (as yet undecided) cap is reached, leaving the individual to pay for ‘hotel’ and other costs which are included in care home fees.

For the first time, Laing & Buisson has split care home costs into their component parts (see table below) for a care home meeting all the latest physical and other standards:

Table. Breakdown of care home fees £ per resident per week, England average

 Care Costs
 Accommodation Costs
Ancillary Costs
 Operator’s Profit  Total Costs and Profit
Residential care
frail elderly
 £197 £151 £205 £44 £596
Nursing care
frail elderly
 £347 £153 £205 £59 £764
Residential care
dementia
 £221 £151 £205 £47 £623
Nursing care
dementia
 £356  £153 £205 £60 £774

On these figures, residents and their families would under the Dilnot proposals still have to pay £399 – £418 per week in care home fees on average, even after the state picks up the full cost of ‘care’. And in affluent parts of the country the costs to the individual will much higher. It would still be necessary post-Dilnot, therefore, for most private payers entering care homes to sell any house they own to pay for fees – either at the outset, or at death for those benefiting from deferred payment arrangements.

There are also hidden dangers from Dilnot for care home operators, according to the report. In particular, moving the upper limit of the asset threshold from £23,250 to £100,000 would mean that large numbers of care home residents who are presently private payers would be drawn within the ambit of local authority payment, meaning that a significant proportion of the premium fee rates which are presently needed to cross subsidise inadequate local authority fee rates may gravitate towards the low fee regime of councils.

Looking at the financial health of care home operators, and with one eye on government proposals to instigate some form of financial regulation on the largest corporate providers, the report highlights the very different fortunes of providers across the ‘north/south’ or ‘affluent/non-affluent’ divide. Those facing the toughest market, and bearing the brunt of council expenditure cuts, are operators with large slices of their care home portfolio in the North and the Midlands. Providers with a portfolio concentrated in more affluent areas are performing comparatively well, subject to the debt overhangs from pre-crisis days that still affect some healthcare providers.

Mr Laing added:

‘Market polarisation means that three of the four largest groups, including the market leader Four Seasons Health Care, are becoming increasingly unrepresentative of the market as a whole – and this is reflected in operating margins. Four Seasons, Bupa Care Homes and HC-One all have significantly higher than average exposure to publicly paid residents, and each has reported a significant decline in EBITDAR as a percentage of revenue since the austerity measures began. Meanwhile, the operating profitability of private-pay focused Barchester Healthcare remained above 30%. The 2012 results of the largest groups will be awaited with great interest.’

Elsewhere the report once again shows that, despite public policy which seeks to divert elderly care away from residential settings, the overall number of people being supported in their older age in care homes is on the up. In 2012 there were 432,000 older or physically people in all residential settings (independent and public supply combined), compared to 422,000 in the previous year, representing growth of 2.2%.

This fuelled an occupancy rate growth in the year taking it to an average 89.9% in 2012, compared to 88.5% in 2011.

Of the total capacity of 487,800 care beds currently operating in the country, those owned and run by the state dropped by a further 11% in the year to 38,800. Independent providers took advantage of this fall, adding 8,300 beds to its market share (now at 449,000).

Mr Laing concluded:

‘A two decade declining trend in the volume of demand appears to have been transformed into a rising trend. Independent sector capacity from new registrations continues to run at about double the loss of capacity from closures, making this unexpected surge one of the most significant trends to emerge from recent marketing monitoring. Without rising demand the additional capacity would impact negatively on occupancy rates and profitability at a time when the sector is also being challenged by council finding. However, this had not happened and new capacity has been coming onto the market at a faster rate over the last four years and there is no sign of this falling off so far in 2013.’

  • END OF RELEASE

Care of Elderly People UK 2012/13 – Key facts:

Care Homes

  • At September 2012 care home capacity in the UK stood at 487,800 places in residential settings for long stay care of elderly and physically disabled people across all sectors (independent and public) – up 3,600 places over April 2011.
  • Of this, 432,000 places were occupied in April 2011, up 10,000 over April 2011.
  • The estimated annual value of the market is £15.2bn (2011: £14.6bn). This breaks down as: for-profit sector – £11.1bn (2011: £10.5bn); voluntary sector – £2.2bn (2001: £2bn); public sector – £1.9bn (2001: £2bn).
  • Average care home fees across the UK for the financial year 2012/13 are ££731 (2011/12: £722) per week for nursing care and £531 (2011/12: £542) per week for residential care.

Non-residential care services

  • Public and private spending on non-residential social care and community health services for elderly and physically disabled people is estimated at £7.4bn in England (2011: £7.7bn). Of this, £4bn was spent by English local authorities on services, of which 60% were provided by the independent sector. A further £2.6bn was spent by the NHS on almost exclusively in-house services such as district and community nurses. Private spending accounted for an estimated £1.2bn on home care services. A further £500m was spent via Direct Payments.
  • Hours of homecare commissioned from the independent sector dropped from 175m to 168m in the year to March 2012 with council-supplied hours falling from 26m to 20m.

*Care of Elderly People UK Market Survey 2012/13. Priced at £835 for hard copy and £1,195 for hard copy and PDF. Available from Laing & Buisson, 29 Angel Gate, City Road, London, EC1V 2PT. Tel: 020 7833 9123. Web: www.laingbuisson.co.uk

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

William Laing Justin Merritt
Laing & Buisson Laing & Buisson
Chief Executive Operations Director
Tel: 020 7923 5347 Tel: 0207 841 0049
william@laingbuisson.co.uk justin@laingbuisson.co.uk

#acenewsservices, #austeritymeasures, #england, #home-care, #isle-of-man, #nhs, #northern-ireland, #nursing, #nursing-home, #residential-care