November 24th, 2006

Guardian reports:

A new contract between the state and the citizen setting out what individuals must do in return for quality services from hospitals, schools and the police is one of the key proposals emerging from a Downing Street initiated policy review…

Even from the beginning this is yet more topsy-turvy posturing from the Government. Once an individual has paid for State services they should be provided to anyone entitled without qualification.


The aim is to build on the government’s rights and responsibilities agenda, and papers released yesterday by the Cabinet Office speak of seeking “a new more explicit contract between the state and the citizen on agreed public outcomes”.

Explicit Contract? Well literalism is always the touchstone of the stupid, inept and authoritarian. But again it would not be individuals driving legislation/writing the contract it would be government definitions of rights and responsibilities, and we know how fucked up Neu Labour‘s ideas of ‘social responsibility’ are.


The review is likely to examine fundamentally the future relationship between citizen and state. The public service commission has been asked to consider “whether it is possible to move from an implicit one-way contract based on outputs, to one based on explicit mutually agreed outcomes”. It asks “should we be aiming for a more explicit statement of the contract that covers both the service offered by the public sector (what is in and what is not) and what is expected from citizens (beyond paying taxes and obeying the law)”. It also asks “whether these explicit and binding contracts could work not just for individuals and communities”.

The big question this raises is what happens when you refuse to sign such a ‘binding contract’ will the State ‘allow’ you to get O-U-T or will they attempt to fine/jail people into their ‘slave grid’ contract?

I think you know the answer.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.