“We’re All Thatcherites Now”

“We’re all Thatcherites now” said David Cameron, just before the massive state-funded party political broadcast that was Thatcher’s funeral.

Nick Clegg tried to distance himself from that sentiment, citing apartheid and gay rights as crucial differences. Cameron has led the call in the House of Commons for allowing gay marriage and, I’m fairly sure, isn’t trying to promote apartheid on the grounds of skin colour. Apartheid between the haves and the have-nots, here in Britain, is much more to his taste, and everything the Tories do to that end is being supported by the Liberal Democrats, even if it goes against LibDem policy. (The “Mansion Tax” springs to mind.)

If Clegg, and the Liberal Democrats, want to distance themselves from the Conservative Party, the best way to do so is to vote against them in Parliament.

In particular, a vote to dissolve the most divisive government since Thatcher’s would be welcomed throughout the country, even by many members of the two parties that make up the coalition.

Related articles

• Nick Clegg dismisses David Cameron’s ‘we’re all Thatcherites now’ claim (metro.co.uk)
• Nick Clegg rejects David Cameron’s claim that ‘we’re all Thatcherites now’ (independent.co.uk)

Fourth Plinth Statue for Thatcher?

Philip Hammond, the defence secretary, has suggested that the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square could be used for a statue of the recently deceased Margaret Thatcher. Personally, I think this is a bad idea. She was extremely divisive, and any statue would likely just be a target for vandalism.

If it is to go ahead, may I suggest an idea for a statue that might avoid the possibility of graffiti and damage?

Related articles

• Calls for Margaret Thatcher memorial to be placed on Trafalgar Square fourth plinth (standard.co.uk)
• Cabinet minister backs campaign for Thatcher statue in Trafalgar Square (thetimes.co.uk)

Ding Dong! Thatcher’s Dead!

“There is no such thing as society.” Thatcher, 1988
“There is no such thing as Thatcher.” Society, 2013

Yet Another Daily Mail Assault on the Disabled

George “Gideon” Osborne flouting the law. Again.

Remember that Facebook campaign against disabled people, attacking their “privilege” of having parking spaces reserved for them?

Well now the Daily Mail has stepped up that campaign.

After the Chancer of the Exchequer (and no, that’s not a typo) was photographed getting into his car which was parked in a bay reserved for disabled people, Liz Jones, a harridan of ill repute, wrote an article yesterday, in which she bragged of deliberately parking in those reserved spaces, despite not possessing a Blue Badge, the permit required to park in the specially marked parking bays.

Ironically, she is deaf, and so entitled to get a Blue Badge, but finds it too much of a bother, claiming that her mother once had one but “the red tape required to get the sticker required a PhD, beaten only by the fact it had to be renewed every year, just in case she was miraculously able to walk again.”

So, rather than “doing the right thing”, to borrow a phrase from the government front bench, she chooses to park illegally, even parking at “at a crazy angle“, so it’s likely her Land Rover takes up more than one space.

Of course, what she’s really doing is trying to encourage other people to park illegally. Disabled people, to her and her ilk, should be kept indoors unless, like hers, the disability is invisible.

It all helps the right-wing crusade against the most vulnerable people in our society.

After Jones called  Holly Willoughby’s lack of make-up in public a  ”betrayal to women”, Willoughby’s “This Morning” co-presenter, Phillip Schofield, said “I swear there can be no greater force against all womankind than Liz Jones. She is inconsistent, bitter, nasty and unhinged.”

I quite agree.

Related articles

• George Osborne ‘parked in ANOTHER disabled bay on gallery visit’ (mirror.co.uk)
• Despicable George Osborne, who cut the benefits of the disabled, is caught parking in a disabled bay (dailyrecord.co.uk)

Don’t Forget the #wowpetition!

Would you like to annoy this person? See below!

There’s been an astounding response to the petition demanding that Iain Duncan Smith back up his claim that he could live on £53 a week if he had to.

It’s a semi-jocular petition, but it has already had an impact. IDS was rattled enough to declare the petition a mere “stunt“, missing the irony that his comment, that inspired the petition, was no less a stunt.

At the time of writing this, the petition has been signed by 420,233 people. This is very embarrassing for IDS (though he would not regard it as shameful  as he doesn’t seem to have a sense of shame) and I hope many more people sign. (To do so, click here.)

If you’ve signed that one, why not sign the Wow petition? It also has the potential to embarrass IDS, but this one can do that in the heart of Parliament. It has already passed the mark where there has to be an official response from the DWP, but if we can push it to 100,000 signatures, that triggers a debate in the House of Commons.

It isn’t any more difficult to sign than the other one. The only extra thing you need to do is to click on the link in the email you’ll be sent. (If you can’t see it in your inbox, check your spam/junk folder.)

To sign the WOW petition, click here, and fill in the boxes. It’s easy!

Related articles

• Tory benefit hatchet man Iain Duncan Smith says petition calling on him to live on £53 a week is ‘a complete stunt’ (dailyrecord.co.uk)
• iain duncan smith calls benefit petition stunt (thesun.co.uk)
• Iain Duncan Smith wriggles as £53 a week petition calls bluff (belfasttelegraph.co.uk)
• Was £53-a-week Iain Duncan Smith petition rejected by government website? (metro.co.uk)
• How about we stick Cameron’s entire cabinet on £53 a week (leftfootforward.org)
• Iain Duncan Smith Petition Goes Viral: 400,000 signatures in less than 4 days (philosophers-stone.co.uk)
• Iain Duncan Smith: I have already lived on £53 a week and petition calling on me to do so again is a complete stunt (teessidesolidaritymovement.wordpress.com)
• Iain Duncan Smith claimed £39 breakfast on expenses (that’d leave him £14 for the rest of the week) (mirror.co.uk)
• The Iain Duncan Smith petition shows how social media can lead political debate (newstatesman.com)
• Make Ian Duncan Smith live on £53 a week (beautifulrailwaybridgeofthesilverytay.me)

Daily Mail Bigots Reach New Low

How stupid are the idiots at the Daily Mail?
Their front page today branded everyone on benefits as murderers, suggesting that welfare makes the crime inevitable.

Even if their readership is gullible enough to believe that (and I dare say some of them are), why would it matter to them if the victims of the killing (manslaughter, as it happens, but murder in the eyes of a Mail devotee), were themselves “products of the welfare state”, as much as their parents anyway. Did they deserve to die then?

Of course not, the whole thing was utter bollocks, an opportunistic jab at anyone who unfortunate enough to rely on benefits.

If I was as stupid and insensitive as a Daily Mail editor, I could claim that an excess of money leads to homicide, as in the case of Ian Workman. The Mail missed that connection when they reported on his case. I wonder why?

Mail journalists often express indignation at being characterised as Nazi sympathisers, just because the paper’s owner Harold Harmsworth, 1st Viscount Rothermere, was a good friend of Adolf Hitler, and often praise him for his ”great and superhuman” work.

If those journos object to such crude generalisations, they should refrain from making them themselves.

Related articles

• The Daily Mail: How the poor die and how the rich die (leftfootforward.org)
• Was this tragedy really a “vile product” of Welfare UK? (newstatesman.com)
• Vile Products (redbrickblog.wordpress.com)
• Daily Mail: PETER SUTCLIFFE – VILE PRODUCT of long-distance lorry driving! (tompride.wordpress.com)
• Daily Mail uses dead children to make a political point about the welfare state (tompride.wordpress.com)
• The Daily Mail’s lesson of the day is “The smaller they are, the harder you kick ‘em.” (chillercold.wordpress.com)
• Sickening Headline (johnager.co.uk)

 

Loadsabastards!

So the Tory led coalition, aided and abetted by the Liberal Democrats, has brought in changes to the welfare state, putting lives at risk, either from the effects of poverty, as people on benefits (including many in work) see their income slashed and their expenses soar, or from the lack of healthcare, as the National Health Service is picked apart for selling to vultures who include members of the cabinet.
Meanwhile, in a few days, most of that same cabinet will be giving themselves a huge tax cut. though why  Iain Duncan Smith needs so much money is a mystery, since he claims he could live on £53 a week if he had to.

“We’re all in it together.”

The purported reason for slashing benefits is to “make work pay”, yet now the government has floated the idea of freezing, or even cutting, the minimum wage. Obviously, if they still maintain that they want to “make work pay”, they’ll want to cut benefits even more, to make sure those without jobs suffer even more than those with. Given Iain Duncan Smith’s fondness for a mediaeval style Christianity, he’ll probably want to get rid of the welfare system altogether, and replace it with the giving of alms. Many Conservative voters would probably agree.

At least until they hit upon hard times themselves.

Related articles

• I could live on £53 a week benefits, claims Iain Duncan Smith (thetimes.co.uk)
• Live on £53 a week? I could if I had to, insists Iain Duncan Smith (standard.co.uk)
• The only place benefit reforms are fair is Iain Duncan Smith’s mind (pauldsmyth.wordpress.com)

 

Voluntary Slavery?

I really thought that the Salvation Army in the UK did a lot of good, on balance, despite my antipathy to religion and religious organisations. Their involvement with workfare has finished off any residual respect I had for them.
The government doesn’t like the word “workfare”, and neither does the Sally Ann, They always talk about the people who are forced onto these schemes, with a withdrawal of benefits as punishment for not complying, as volunteers, which is adding insult to injury when the only alternative is “volunteering” to starve, or freeze, or go homeless. Or all three.
All this is bad enough for people who have just left school, many of whom may have families to support them, but it’s often older people, who have worked for decades and don’t need “work experience”, who are placed on these schemes, and the government have extended the scope of workfare to include disabled people, with the added sting that their placement can be indefinite. If the “volunteer” doesn’t turn up for any reason, such as a vital hospital appointment, they can lose all their benefits.
Even workfare for younger, fitter people is detrimental to society though, as it depresses wages. Why would an employer pay decent wages, when they can use free labour? In fact, why pay wages at all?
An organisation that claims to work for the greater good should not have any involvement with workfare, and quibbling about the name won’t persuade your opponents.

Related articles

• Workfare Picket Report – End Unpaid Labour At Poundland (gogwit.wordpress.com)
• Salvation Army denies existence of Workfare scheme it participates in (no – not satire) (tompride.wordpress.com)
• Is workfare close to godliness? Some Christian charities seem to believe so | Sarah Ditum (guardian.co.uk)

The Thin Skin of the Coalition Government

I mentioned the other day that Mark Hoban had refused to meet a delegation from the Spartacus group, a loose affiliation of disabled people and supporters, and even refused to talk to Michael Meacher MP about it when he asked why there was a delay in responding.

Today, Meacher succeeded in getting an adjournment debate, to discuss this unprecedented and ill-mannered refusal. Hoban wasn’t there.

He had an excuse. He was in Scotland, according to Esther McVey who stood in for him, and the plane he was supposed to have travelled back on had mechanical problems.

This may even be true, but it does smack of a schoolboy excuse.

Anyway, McVey proceeded to talk about anything other than the subject at hand for as long as she could (to stifle debate, I suspect) until, at last, she gave a reason for Hoban’s ignorant behaviour, albeit a paltry one.

She read out a single line from the foreword of the Spartacus Report ( which you can download as a pdf file by clicking here ).

 ”The process is reminiscent of the medical tribunals that returned shell shocked and badly wounded soldiers to duty in the first world war or the ‘KV-machine’,  the medical commission the Nazis used in the second world war to play down wounds so that soldiers could be reclassified ‘fit for the Eastern front’.”

That’s from the foreword, remember, and it’s a tiny part of the foreword at that.

Look at that paragraph closely. It says that the process (the Work Capability Assessment) is “reminiscent” of, not just the Nazis on whom McVey focussed, but also of British first world war medical tribunals. And not “exactly the same”, but “reminiscent”. McVey claimed that that line precluded any possibility of “constructive dialogue”, despite the fact that such dialogue had already occurred several times previously, and involving the very same people.

It seems that, to this government, “constructive dialogue” has to be complete capitulation to them. They don’t want to hear anything other than surrender.

If Hoban, McVey and the rest of David “blood on his hands” Cameron’s cronies are such delicate little flowers, then perhaps politics was an unwise career move.

Related articles

• Why won’t DWP REALLY meet Spartacus? (diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.co.uk)
• Is It Coz We Is Disabled? (wheresthebenefit.blogspot.co.uk)

The Name May Change, But Disdain for the Poor Remains the Same

Liam Duncan Smith….or is it Iain Byrne?

On Wednesday, Iain Duncan Smith brought in a bill designed to deny illegally sanctioned jobseekers redress, by retrospectively changing the law. Picking on people who are barely able to afford to eat is bad enough, but legislating to declare your illegal actions legal after all sets a dangerous precedent.

The Labour Party should have opposed the bill on both counts but instead, at the behest of Liam Byrne, all but around 40 Labour MPs abstained.

Whenever Liberal Democrat MPs allow Tories to win votes in the House of Commons by abstaining, Labour MPs are quick to point out that they are, effectively, voting with their coalition partners.

I agree, but the same applies when the boot is on the other foot.

The Labour MP who purports to represent me wasn’t one of those who voted against IDS’s bill, so I will now have a difficult decision at the next General Election, unless the Labour Party return to their roots, and start to actually defend the poorest and most vulnerable people in society.

The longer that Liam Byrne stays on the front bench, the more difficult it will be to persuade voters that they are any different from the Tories.

Related articles

• Liam Byrne is going too far by endorsing Iain Duncan Smith’s failed programme (liberalconspiracy.org)
• On Workfare & Labour (anoccasionalmissive.wordpress.com)
• Liam Byrne cannot escape culpability for today’s Workfare vote (liberalconspiracy.org)
• Labour’s Workfare Shame – A New Low For the Party That Pretends to Care About the Poor (johnnyvoid.wordpress.com)