London Mayoral Election 2016 Candidate: Rosalind Readhead

View this article on our brand new website: http://politicsbulletin.co.uk/london-mayoral-election-2016-candidate-rosalind-readhead/

The London Mayoral election is less than three months away and media outlets across the UK are unquestionably expecting it to be a two-horse race between the Labour and Conservative candidates – Sadiq Khan and Zac Goldsmith, respectively.

However, writing for Politics Bulletin, Iain Fenton and Manuel Tenga take a look at the candidates outside of the ‘top two’ and question whether or not Londoners should instead use their votes to facilitate change in London whilst at the same time, moving away from the ‘status quo’.

“I am proposing a vision that may seem radical, but will address the serious issues, free from interference” explains Rosalind Readhead from her small London flat in Islington.

Rosalind Readhead is not your stereotypical London based politician, quite the contrary. She is not a career politician, a badge of honor it would appear in our contemporary society. She positively values her role as a mother of three and the 53 year old artist and textile designer describes herself as a ‘creative big thinker with a practical, critical and no-nonsense attitude.’

With the bookies are pricing her at 500/1, Rosalind knows that she is an outsider in the London Mayoral race. Although lacking the extensive resources accustomed to most London Mayoral candidates, Rosalind maintains that her first priority is  to open up the debate surrounding the health issues of Londoners and after that objective is achieved she maintains that ‘anything could happen.’

Mother of three Rosalind is eager to make a significant difference for the people of London

“If I can explain to Londoners the urgency of the crises we face and provide them with some serious choices, then I have succeeded in opening up the debate. And if there is a growth in support for my policies, then I will aim to go as far as possible in the Mayoral election.”

In her unique position as an independent candidate, Readhead does not hide her frustration with the current mayor of London, Boris Johnson, she is undoubtedly unhappy with the direction in which her home city of London is heading.

“During Boris Johnson’s two terms as Mayor, 75,000 are estimated to have died prematurely from air pollution, predominately from road transport. Not only has this impacted hugely on the health of Londoners, but fuel consumed by transport is directly linked to CO2 emissions, contributing to global warming.”

Readhead is basing her election candidacy on an environmentally friendly platform -in 2014 the independent candidate launched her website ‘Ban private cars in London’ and has been vigorously campaigning for a more environmentally friendly London. Air pollution, obesity and global warming are high on her agenda.

“The health of Londoners is the number one issue and is one that can be resolved successfully with current Mayoral powers,” she explains. “Inactivity is killing 1 in 6 in the UK and half of Londoners are either obese or overweight. 1 in 10 Londoners in Brent and Newham have diabetes. Air pollution is a killer.This is a health time bomb.”

The World Health Organisation has called air pollution a ‘global health emergency.’ Some have advertised that her position on pollution levels and perspective of climate change are closely aligned with Green Party policy.

“Addressing air pollution is a public health emergency. I will address it with focused and bold policies; emergency car bans on high air pollution days, banning private cars in central London, banning diesel in Greater London and re-allocating road space from cars to clean transport such as cycling.

“My main policy to ease overcrowding on the tube is to unlock space on the public highway by banning private cars in central London and introduce 24 hour road pricing throughout Greater London.

“This space will then be re-allocated to segregated bike lanes on the main arteries and even whole roads just for bicycles. I want to create a London where active travel such as cycling and walking are prioritised.

“Winston Churchill once said that ‘Healthy citizens are the greatest asset this country can have.’ 75% of the Mayoral budget is for transport, and strategically, prioritising active travel such as walking into London’s infrastructure will pay dividends for the future health of our city and the environment.”

Although cycling infrastructures alone cannot completely solve our health crisis, the recent Volkswagen scandal adds weight to some of Rosalind’s arguments and highlights the dangers of air pollution. Another thorn is the third runway at Heathrow airport which adds significantly to the levels of pollution, pushing air quality further beyond the legal limit. Some argue that the vehicles which cause the most pollution are cars that run on diesel which emit up to four times more toxic pollution than a bus. Furthermore, the 306 New Routemaster buses which were introduced as ‘green’ by current mayor of London Boris Johnson, despite having been proving to be emitting worse fumes than the older buses, have recently been called “London’s dirtiest, most polluting buses” and will be exempt from traveling from 2020 due to new pollution guidelines.

It is clear that Readhead’s policies will not necessarily be to every ones tastes, it is argued that the suggestion to ban cars from central London infringes on people’s individual freedoms. The fact remains, over half of the British population and the majority of households in London own a car. But the statistics show car owners are more likely to suffer from obesity. For Readhead, however, it is imperative that through her policies, she is able to spread the word of the ‘public health crisis’ that has already arrived in London – and she is adamant that she will be able to do more for the people of London as the Mayor of London due to her independence as she will not have the shackles of party politics to pin her down.

Rosalind Readhead is not weighed down by the anvil of party politics

“As an Independent candidate, I can freely speak my mind. This gives me the ability to retain my integrity without pressure from the party machine. I have also experienced a wide range of cultural influences, having been in care, fostered and then adopted,” explains Readhead.

“Sadiq Khan, Zac Goldsmith, Caroline Pidgeon and even Sian Berry are all signed up to the much wider national policies of their respective parties which inhibits their ability to put Londoners first.”

Readhead further alludes to the notion that many politicians do not always seek what is best for the public and instead seek what is best for corporate interests, she says, “They may claim ‘independence’ but major political parties use figureheads such as the Mayor of London to support and publicise their national objectives – very worryingly, some political party interests have become alarmingly aligned to powerful corporate lobbyists, both in the media and in industry.”

The voters know they are voting for an individual rather than a specific political party therefore there is greater expectation for accountability. However, most politicians advocate for transparency yet very few stand up to the mark once elected, furthermore they are not held accountable when they fail to deliver on their campaign pledges – their failed pledges are more often than not simply forgotten about.

An assertive Readhead proposes plans to scrap car parks and “review how we allocate space in London” she adds “I would like to designate car parks as brownfield sites to build social housing for key workers.” With regard to home ownership she acknowledges that it is a complex systemic issue. However, she does not inform much by way of figures and potential costs, she instead drives attention to prohibit the buy-to-leave scheme and build social housing on designated brownfield sites. To keep housing for Londoners she proposes “we stipulate a five year residency as enforced in Copenhagen.” Another scheme Readhead wants to adopt from Copenhagen is the national bike promotion as a better alternative to cars. Air pollution will put our generation at risk, nitrogen dioxide is bad for our health a high percentage of people are expected to die every year due to air pollution.

Clearly, Readhead is standing as an election candidate in order to make a real and substantial difference to the people of London, she says,”As Mayor of London I want to lead the way with focused, clear objectives to cut emissions alongside Mayors around the world.”

The worlds most bike friendly cities – will London ever be on this graph?

Regarding her pro-environment policies, Readhead indisputably wants Britain to pull its head out of the sand and strive to save the planet for future generations before it’s too late – and one day it really will be too late if environmental concerns are not met with a degree of haste. One thing is clear, the issues she campaigns for cannot be ignored. Rosalind has a strong conviction and clear stance on many single-issues unlike many politicians in the Westminster village. Other major European cities such as Copenhagen and Amsterdam successfully maintain bike friendly policies so maybe it is time for us Londoners to get on our bikes too.

‘Only when the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will we realize that one cannot eat money.’ – Cree Indian Prophecy 

Digital Health: The Future?

Former Health Minister Aneurin Bevan who spearheaded the founding of the NHS in 1948

View this article on our brand new website: http://politicsbulletin.co.uk/digital-health-the-future/

Since its foundation in 1948, the NHS has been a key characteristic of the United Kingdom. It was created out of the ideal that good healthcare should be free to all, regardless of wealth and hitherto it has been a monumental success with many countries across the world striving to replicate the National Health Service for their own citizens. However, the past few years have seen the NHS hit turbulent times with politicians using it as a political football to kick around at will. The NHS has currently come to a stand still in terms of its future projection – it has fallen behind the health services of various Scandinavian countries and according to research by The Kings Fund,  by 2020, Britain’s spending on its health service will be £43 billion less a year than the average spent by its European counterparts such as France and Germany. Britain’s GDP investment into its health system is at an all time low and because of this critics have labeled Britain the “sick person of Europe.”

So why is the NHS in decline? Well firstly it costs the government and indeed the tax payer well over £100 billion to fund the NHS each year – compare this with the cost to run the NHS in 1948 which, after adjusting for inflation was roughly £9 billion at today’s value. As aforementioned, the British government is planning on spending less of its GDP per year on its National Health Service compared to previous years and there is no doubt that less money will mean a lesser service provided. According to some experts, when looking at the NHS in it’s current nature and comparing it with services in Scandinavia, the UK has probable lost 3-5 years already.

Last week the UK Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt initiated plans to fund the NHS with £4 billion in order to “create a paperless NHS”, Hunt wants the NHS to use technology to its advantage and that means investing in Digital Healthcare.

The Present

In basic terms, Digital Health is essentially the use of technology and communication networks to improve the service offered by heath providers for the care of patients and the population. Innovators in the field of digital health are focused on using new technology to improve the healthcare experience for both healthcare staff and patients.

According to one innovator in the field of digital health, Peter Ohnemus, the UK must ‘rectify its strategy on digital health,’ he said: “The UK has lost a lot of time and money as there is not a clear digital health strategy within the NHS. This has to change very rapidly or the NHS will have very serious financial and delivery problems – this cannot be in any UK politicians or citizens interest.”

Ohnemus, who’s company dacadoo recently won the 2016 BIG Innovation Award 2016 regards investment into digital health for all health care groups and governments across the world as paramount because of the advantages digital healthcare would permit to the tax payers, patients and health care staff: ” Digital healthcare is here today and can save up to 25% of our healthcare spending today. Digital sensors/mobile health at home can save up to 80% of the hospital visit cost.  The upfront investment in England is probably 10% of the overall healthcare cost and long term it will provide cost savings of 15-25%.

“Digital healthcare means that you can track, document and improve your health in real-time over your smart phone. It means that elderly people can live in their private homes a lot longer and have assisted living at very low cost. People from the ages of 30-65 can have their lives followed and improved on their smartphone. In the future you can track your blood pressure, blood values, health and weight in real-time wherever you are at a very low cost. That is digital health.”

Technological advancements in healthcare have meant that progress has been achieved in all fields of Digital Health thus far, from medical devices used directly by doctors to mobile health and computers that aid in health management and diagnosis. Aakash Ganju, the CEO of Mirai Health – a website and smart phone app dedicated to improving health care outcomes for both patients and doctors, believes that Digital Health has “put a lot more information into the hands of the consumer whilst it has also pushed doctors to becoming substantially more communicative with patients.”

Digital Healthcare activity within the average American household

According to statistics by the Deloitte Centre, UK smartphone use has risen by 8% within the last year alone whilst at least 80% of all health care consumers in the UK have a smart phone and internet access. It is to be expected that this trend will continue to rise and many experts believe that it is imperative health care providers make use of this information and act now.  New technology has allowed patients to be able to access their medical records online as well as book appointments with their GP using their mobile phone – and this is only the beginning.

The Future

It is an ever increasing trend that technology is improving industries throughout the world and Jose Miguel Cacho – a professional in Digital Health, finds it curious why governments wouldn’t invest heavily in new technology for healthcare: “By comparison few people doubt the benefits of digital banking or online travel services. Digital health is not only necessary, it’s just that, it’s necessary to bring to the population processes to improve their overall health, which are based on the technology we use today.”

But are the improvements in Digital Healthcare worth the extra costs? Only time will tell. Peter Ohnemus believes that like any new innovation you first have to invest and then you will receive the pay back: “It will provide a lot of jobs and growth going forward, if politicians do not act the jobs will go to other countries – Digital does not know borders.

“In terms of the future for healthcare I personally believe that the brightest minds in digital are today working on digital outcome and digital bio-sensors that will be able to track our life in a ‘passive non-invasive way.’ Meaning that we can calculate your health in real-time and hopefully get the right ‘wrong’ signals early and help people have a healthier and happier life at the end of the day.”

A growing trend in Digital Health funding in the USA

Global companies such as Apple and Google are also investing heavily in Digital Health. Google have created Verily.com a website which researches how ‘technology can be implemented to create a true picture of human health’ whilst Apple are investing heavily in Digital Health mobile apps – apps such as docadoo enables users to track, manage and benchmark their health in an easy and fun way on their smartphones using a variety of techniques from online games to social features – healthcare truly is changing.

However, with huge amounts of capital being poured into Digital Health, innovators should not take their fingers off the button, Aakash Ganju said: “There have been many false starts (IT deployment in the NHS, for example) and missed expectations. We have to keep the bar high and make sure that the stakeholders in driving Digital Healthcare adoption are multidisciplinary and appreciate the unique dynamics of healthcare ecosystems. We can’t afford to celebrate ‘inputs’ and must really focus on measuring the ‘outputs’ of digital interventions. Only then will we know if the improvements are worth the extra costs.”

It seems set that if money is invested into new technology wisely then the world should see a digital healthcare revolution with improved healthcare systems all over the world for patients and staff. Unsurprisingly, innovators and entrepreneurs working within Digital Health are excited to sell the products they have created and patented to health organisations across the globe but it is imperative that patient happiness and healthcare comes before profits; only when we see an improved healthcare system that is backed up by doctor and patient happiness statistics as well as an improved level of health and well – being for patients will we know that government investments into Digital Health have succeeded. The future of healthcare is almost certainly in Digital Health but it needs to be implemented in the correct way – that there is no doubting.

The Trump Effect

Donald Trump recently stated that ‘the country needs someone who knows what they are doing’. On his road to the white house, he has expressed his views without mixing his words. So far he has completed six debates and the polls have put him ahead, so it begs the question just how accurate is the polling? In our UK general election last year, despite all the polling statistics we were met with a very surprising Conservative landslide win. After the unexpected loss in Iowa, if Trump falls again at the New Hampshire hurdle then that might be an indicator that perhaps he should throw in the towel rather than wasting more time and money going against the grain of history.

His non-concession speech did not give credit to Ted Cruz but rather it was an attempt to underline why his republican counter-part is not eligible to run. Trump has brushed shoulders with a number of politicians over the years so he is no stranger to the political arena, but even now that he is running he claims he is not a politician. Some have questioned his motivation for announcing his bid back in June. I suppose there is nothing untoward about his decision, he wants to make a difference but do we know enough about the person behind the billionaire businessman status?

Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness – this is the American way. But there is something profoundly flawed when the front-runner for the republican nominee race can boldly state that we will place a ban on an entire religious community. What is more frightening is that his views largely resonate with many middle class Americans. We are aware that Donald Trump has many controversial views; he claims to be pro-life but he has publicly said planned parenthood does some ‘good things’ despite accusations which surround the abortion clinic, he is all about the creation of jobs -particularly in manufacturing in order to stay competitive with Japan and China. He has expressed great concern about the country’s deficit. Trump wants a stronger border as a means of strengthening the security of the country. It is a fair assessment to state that he certainly has tough plans for immigration; with many Americans and Europeans alike stating that his views on this topic are racist. He has been branded sexist too, what we do know for sure is that he is not a big fan of the Fox News journalist Megyn Kelly; he calls her a ‘light weight’ whatever that means. She has highlighted the many derogatory terms he has used to label women on his twitter account, to name a few; fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals. Hilary Clinton accused him of being part of the war on women. I wonder what his views are on equal pay for women. Another observation, it appears every republican candidate backs the second amendment, so nothing new on that front. But the battle over gun laws will persist as long as mass shootings continue to happen because of the availability and easy access to guns. Of course everyone should have the right to self-protection, which is essentially why the second amendment is in the Bill of Rights.

Every republican falls on the opposing side when discussions about Obama Care feature, I stress again nothing new there. However some of the other candidates in the race have explicitly suggested that Trump simply wants to expand on Obama Care, he has previously revealed that he supports socialised medicine available to every American citizen; this view is not dissimilar from that shared by senator Bernie Sanders – the democratic presidential candidate. Trump has not expressly stated that he will raise the minimum wage, provide more funding for childcare, or guarantee paid maternity leave. There are no plans on the table to tackle tax evasion by big corporations. As a republican, Trump is expected to cut social security and do away with medicare. Trump certainly has a strong stance on illegal immigration, what I have found is that in most cases immigrants do not come to “take our jobs” as people are quick to fire in the debate. On the ground you will find that they do jobs most people would snob or shy from. America has had a couple of notable mass immigration waves in the not so distant past. The famous Freedom Boatlift saw over 100,000 “undesirable Cuban” refugees fill the shores of Miami from Mariel. We cannot forget the Chinese. What these incidents depict is the level of intolerance that is rife throughout American history, although immigration is a cause for concern in many countries.

In Europe we are currently undergoing a major migrant crisis which to some extent has influenced David Cameron’s decision to pander to the dissatisfied-wing of his party who want Britain to push for a referendum. We have closet euro sceptics in the Tory party who are gagged from airing their personal views on the issues; it has become a complicated battle of compromise, hypocrisy and cynicism. Trump has spoken freely of his desires to control the borders but his words have been divisive and destructive. He has conjured and moulded a negative image of Mexicans and Muslims – although America has had sceptical opinions of both of these populations for many years now.  The Black population publicly suffer from racism. In the past racism was rampant and vicious against the Chinese who were marginalised and isolated. In 1882 President Chester A Arthur enacted the Chinese Exclusion Act in order to prevent Chinese labourers coming into the country. It is understandable that when arriving as an immigrant to another country one should attempt to adapt and assimilate but it seems that many U.S. citizens feel immigrants coming into ‘their’ country have to be ‘Americanized’ in order to fit in. Should one have to shed a little bit of their culture, heritage and even religion in order to be accepted into Trump’s ideal America?

Trump’s arguments have been called ridiculous, it causes one to wonder what life would be like for minorities if he did get elected, his sentiments do not promote integration but bleak future. For months now, his hard-line rhetoric has triggered heated emotional debates. His comments about refusing Muslims entrance into the U.S. led to an uproar of condemnation from political figures here across the pond. A controversial character like Donald Trump – to disagree with MEP Paul Nuttall – is not a bland politician and does give straight answers albeit outrageous and somewhat ‘colourful’.

Whatever his deficiencies, Trump brings drama to the US presidential race and the general political sphere, his actions give him exactly what he wants: Attention. He knows many American voters will take notice back him on his various controversial outbursts. American politics is fascinating to say the least if not backward and is currently littered with interesting albeit controversial characters. Some claim to run out of a sense of duty, evidently others are obsessed by career politics. The fact is, he had a presence before this campaign but can he run the country that is the question which comes with some extremely resolute answers. Perhaps he is just the latest flavour of the changing Republican Party. We have heard pledges to renew America, now ‘the Donald’ feels he can “make America great again” for him to win would imply wholly that the American people in all their patriotism do not feel the country is great. He is running this race with his own money; this should give his credibility a boost, running alone is high-risk let alone with your own capital. Although it has to be said that Trump is sure to have many key friends in high places. Whether he is running a smart campaign is yet to be determined but he has shown that he is willing to go back to the drawing board, it is an open race so far. Can he be trusted on the defence of the country and foreign policy? Well it very much depends on which side of the fence you are on, pun intended.