Tuesday, 22 November 2011

Adults in Need

This year's Children in Need was the most successful ever. Raising £26 Million it showed the very best of the UK. Even in these times of austerity - perhaps especially so - people emphatically and unstintingly showed that they will always protect the most vulnerable.

I felt the same sense of pride when the UK was by far the biggest donor to the Pakistan flood appeal and the famine in Somalia. I feel the same sense of pride when I remember that the UK is still the biggest donor of foreign aid, despite our own difficulties.

But at what point do all those brave, terribly sick and damaged children become scroungers? Is there a cut off point where our sympathy runs dry? Where a cute, worthy child becomes a lazy, feckless adult? There must be. When does the abused child become an adult statistic of alcohol or drug dependency? - The lowest of the low in the benefit system according to Maria Miller. When does a disabled child become a drain on the welfare system? When does a terribly unwell little boy become a man facing persecution and abuse by his neighbour? When do we decide that a little girl with learning difficulties becomes worth nothing more than a 12 mile round trip to a soup kitchen every week just to stay alive?

If politicians are now united on anything, it is that the "scrounger" rhetoric, so beloved by the Daily Mail, Express, BBC and other outlets must stop. It harms the case for welfare reform, disability hate crime is rising and society is becoming more and more polarised over the issue of sickness and disability support and care.

Chris Grayling says that he is "bemused" by the stories that appear in the paper, yet time and again, the DWP have been warned not to use their press releases in a way that leads to inflammatory, "scrounger" articles. They have been warned repeatedly not to use misleading statistics. Lord Freud says that it concerns him, the Work and Pensions Select Committee has repeatedly called for it to stop and even Iain Duncan-Smith has renounced attempts to paint the sick and disabled as workshy.

This week a report by Dame Carol Black suggested ways that people on long term sick leave might be encouraged and supported to stay in work. The report was heavily leaked to the newspapers days before it was released with accompanying quotes from welfare ministers and peers.

Dame Black said that said that she "travelled round the country" speaking to sick and disabled people and found that they wished they had "A sense of self worth" and that they had a job.

Well, I have a sense of "self worth" Dame Black. Self worth does not come from a paycheck. It comes from family and love and achievement, It comes from within, it is not dependent on the zeros on my salary.

Lord Freud went further. He seemed to imply that those signed off work sick for more than 4 weeks drifted into some kind of no man's land of despair, he claimed that politicians were therefore creating "An incubator for idleness" by not addressing the problem.

An incubator for idleness!! So now if you should become unable to go to work for a few weeks, for almost any reason you are "idle". Not unfortunate, not unwell, not disabled, but "idle"

In perhaps his most offensive faux-pas yet,**  recently, during a committee debate, Lord Freud referred to sick and disabled people as "stock". Not claimants, not customers, not even the highly impersonal "flow rates", but "stock"


Can one hear that description and fail to think of cattle, herded against their will? What else does it make you think of?

So really, how mystified can our politicians be? Is it really so hard to see that language like this reinforces a general perception of worthlessness, failure and anonymity? How dare they, with their paternalistic, patronising, assumptions pass judgement on 1 in 5 of the population so flippantly?

In my experience, if nothing else, politicians choose their words incredibly carefully. Words win elections. One brilliant sound-bite can bring down a government. One killer slogan can topple heads of state.

It is inconceivable that our politicians do not know exactly what they are doing when they refer to idleness and worthlessness and "stock"

When Children in Need become Adults in Need it seems politicians will stop at nothing to ensure that your sympathy runs dry.


** Though telling Jane Campbell, a peer in a wheelchair, that his department was "leaning over backwards" to make committee stage accessible came pretty close

If you want to help, please sign Pat's Petition here :

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/20968

45 comments:

  1. Apologies in advance for strong language, those offended by such, feel free to skip this comment.

    "But at what point do all those brave, terribly sick and damaged children become scroungers? Is there a cut off point where our sympathy runs dry? Where a cute, worthy child becomes a lazy, feckless adult? There must be. When does the abused child become an adult statistic of alcohol or drug dependency?"

    When they dare to leave home for an adult life. Apparently if you're too sick to work you should be kept by your family, even if they're the ones who have raped and tortured you to insanity in the first place. Hell, they might as well go on doing it, because after all, you're not a human being, you're a scrounger. The reason child abuse is so bad is precisely because it destroys the victim. I want to stab people who fail to make the connection between the saintly child victim and the screwed up adult, because as another survivor once said to me, it seems that they'd rather we all killed ourselves, as some do, because then they wouldn't have to look at us now. They seem to feel it would be cleaner that way.

    While I'm on the subject, this is an interesting illustration of the wrongness of the self-worth points made above: the guy who raped me when I was 19 is still, the last I heard, earning £30,000+ per year. Imagine the amount of lovely income tax he's paying. Imagine how much more "right" he is given to speak than I am. Apparently he is allowed self-worth and I'm not, because he has a job and I don't. HE'S A FUCKING RAPIST. It's not difficult to see the problem here.

    There was a good article somewhere pointing out that instead of facing towards the public, celebrities during CiN should do a Jamie Oliver and head right to politicians, demanding to know why such charity is still necessary. I don't hate the whole thing as much as some do, but I can't help agreeing that that would be a better approach.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This post struck a chord.
    I was one of those children who grew up to be worthless benefit scrounger. I don’t remember anyone being nasty to me but then children always only see the good in adults their trust is unconditional. I can remember childhood fantasies and dreams like knights in shining amour riding to the rescue and fairy like happy places. Oh to be a child again…

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am sorry to say that Motability has now joined the group who are tending to regard their clients as scroungers. Their new rules deliberately excludes cars needed by disabled people with large wheelchairs and equipment. Mine fill the boot of a VW Passat estate. Am I to be denied the basic Human Right to take out my familiy. I cannot fit ebrything into a Ford Focus. I was also told by one of their customer care staff that Motability was not for me.

    The rot is spreading everywhere and this government and papers like the Daily Mail are at the root of it

    ReplyDelete
  4. Its a shame that it has come to this, i totally agree we should look after our own first but then what can our own do for us, hence aid for other countries. Dave has said that the economy will not be good for a long time so why dont they just stop with the out and out persecution of the disabled right now and perhaps we should take to another level. Dave there aint no jobs for able bodied people let alonf the less able

    ReplyDelete
  5. I used to work. At the time I was seriously disabled. But I was lucky and had found what was probably the only job in the country which could accommodate my rather complex needs.

    I was considered "brave, inspirational, outstanding, determined" and a lot of other such things. I even have awards to prove it.

    My illness however had other ideas. It continued to progress and eventually despite my obstinacy and stubbornness I had to leave the career I loved. Once my brain was affected it was difficult to continue a job in academic research. I think even Hawking would agree with me. ;)

    According to newspapers, politicians and policy makers (oh, and complete strangers on the street), I am now considered "idle, a scrounger, worthless, lacking in self motivation".

    What has changed? Have I really undergone a personality transplant? Nope. I am just much much sicker. The drive which allowed me to work is now swallowed up in simply getting me out of bed.

    But just as children in need suddenly become "scroungers" when they become adults, ordinary adults likewise become despised if they have the misfortune of their illness deteriorating or having a serious injury which prevents them from working.

    If you're not working, you're worthless. It is as simple as that. It matters not what you did or were before. And more tellingly it matters not that "worth" means a lot more than the size of your paycheck.

    The people around me do not consider me worthless and couldn't care less what I do or what I have done. It is a great shame that society does. And what is worse is that through the drip drip drip of insidious articles, even I am starting to believe it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In contrast, follow the link from a Guardian article from last night:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/21/for-corporate-welfare-queens-no-caps

    It made me feel physically sick. In one poor state Formula charges the government 50-75 million, even though they cannot afford to look after their own citizens. And, it's all going to happen here, just like the poor we've always seen on the news over the years. No welfare system, no housing for the low paid unemployed or disabled, no health system, no minumum wage, no statutory sick pay, and as a result those at the bottom suffering from malnutrition (some already do) and dying from easily treatable health problems. This will be our reality now.

    I don't want the riches of Ecclestone and his family; as a chronically ill person, I just want to remain in my home of 24 years and have enough to pay my bills, but that is to be denied to me and hundreds of thousands of others who will have to find the 70% difference between housing benefit and actual rents, and as we can't possibly do that or afford to rent in the private sector, due to the enforced homelessness many of us will die.

    Meanwhile, the government will move new tenants into my home, you know, the people on average wage levels and above who can afford the 'affordable' new rents charged at 80% of market rates (£250 per week and above), and, hey presto, they get to buy the property with a 50% discount, solving the housing crisis almost overnight whilst simultaneously pushing the crisis to those firmly at the bottom of the pile.

    And work won't 'pay'. My carers who are also social housing tenants will not be able to afford to pay their new 'affordable' rents either.

    Adults 'in need' indeed, but ironically, many who were not actually children in need who grew up to be so like some tragically were.

    I keep trying to accept it; psychologists say that acceptance is the best way to go, but how can I? Can anyone with a death sentence hanging over them possibly accept that?

    Clarebelz

    ReplyDelete
  7. Clr Ralph Baldwin22 November 2011 at 11:37

    I think this raises questions about Lord Freud's psychological state. Dehumanizing people is a very bad sign.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I've always been against children in need you shouldn't need it with a proper decent humane government

    That's the role of the government not the citizens as all that happens is nothing so year on year instead of the government's responsibility it falls to public the same India and Bangladesh to feed and support the under privileged

    That's not the way to run a country and never has been

    As for lord Freud he will abuse us until his death i hope i live long enough to attend his funeral

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it is time to set up a charity for all the longterm sick and disabled. A crisis fund to help pay emergency food or rent for those facing eviction. Or, my preffered choice, buy some land where those cast out by society can set up an alternative community. Perhaps the UN Disaster Relief fund will provide the tents?

    Let us see the total hypocrisy of the British public in action.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Now if we could only set a pay cap (and claw back) on the head of Barclays who, by the ratio of his pay packet to that of the average earner, is 169 times "better" than the rest of us...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sue-I am not sure Lord Freud did make a faux-pas.He must be aware of his choice of language.He appears to be making a habit of using derogatory terms,feeding into the rhetoric and then feigning horror at the resultant quote being "misinterpreted" and the media coverage.Indeed this seems to be a "tactic" of all DWP Ministers.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Lord Freud's choice of words is no faux pas.

    Perhaps just as worrying is his grasp of the Welfare Reform Bill he is championing so vehemently!!

    Debate in Grand Committee 8th November -

    Lord Freud: My Lords, I must start off by saying that the contributions of noble Lords today is highly informed and very moving.

    IT’S A PITY LORD FREUD IS NOT QUITE SO WELL INFORMED. HANG ON, ISN’T THIS HIS BABY? HIS WELFARE REFORM BILL? THE BILL HE IS CONTINUALLY COMMENDING TO EVERYONE? YOU’D HAVE THOUGHT HE’D KNOW WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THEN, WOULDN’T YOU?

    My Lords, clearly, the detailed mechanics of that is something that we will need to work out and set out in regulation. I AM NOT ABSOLUTLEY CONVINCED WE HAVE IT LOCKED DOWN - WE MIGHT, BUT I SIMPLY DON'T KNOW.

    My Lords, I am not sure what the extrapolation would be. Those are the figures we have. If I have a longer run at it, I will make the figures available when, or if, I have them. I am sorry, but we do not have any figures stretching out beyond that point.

    My Lords, as noble Lords know, direct comparisons of systems are terribly difficult to make.

    The amendment would allow them to go onto the contributory support element of ESA as of right. That carries a cost for which I DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT FIGURE. WE ARE WORKING ON IT.

    There may be different costs to having an easement of five or 10 years but WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE COSTS OF THIS AMENDMENT. So I cannot accept that we make this amendment and urge that it is not pressed. I AM COMPLETELY LOST IN MY BRIEF.

    I AM SPEAKING SLIGHTLY FROM MEMORY BUT the running rate is about £1.7 billion a year. I AM SORRY - I HAVE TRIPPED MYSELF UP ON THAT.

    I will refer to it in a minute. LET ME GATHER MY FORCES


    Baroness Lister of Burtersett: Is the noble Lord saying that you can get backdated money for the assessment period?

    Lord Freud: YES, THAT IS PRECISELY THE POSITION.

    Lord McKenzie of Luton: Surely that is not right. It is backdated to the end of the assessment period?

    Lord Freud: SORRY, I WITHDRAW THAT.

    THIS MAN IS IN CHARGE OF A BILL WHICH WILL AFFECT THE LIVES OF MILLIONS OF VULNERABLE PEOPLE. HE SIMPLY DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Can someone who is on twitter tweet @stephenfry with a link to this post.

    Given his recent programme Planet Word - about the power of language - he should be very interested in this disturbing trend.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Now enough is NOW enough.I am not a non person i am someone who has been in pain for over fifteen years.EVERY DAY......Its not my fault i became ill.I wont bloody have it...what do we have to do to make them bloody listen.If we dont all get together NOW and stand up together as one then we are finished.God damn this bloody govt who are only concerened with lining thier own pockets.WE all know the agenda of the mps and lords who represent private health companies but the public dont and they dont want them to know so we should tell them.
    Lets turn the tables on them and see how they like it.Bloody osborne can sell of northern crock cheap to Branson but leave us with the 21 billion toxic debt side of it and he gets away with it so you have to wonder what bloody chance we have but in one word F**k em what do we have to lose.Lets have a TRUE sick disabled alliance and have the agenda of voting these bastards out when we can.The power of lobby works we know that so lets become one ALL OF US..before they kill us all off.TO FREUD AND BLACK WE ARE PEOPLE NOT STOCK AND WE WONT PUT UP WITH YOU ANY LONGER.WHAT DO WANT US TO DO GET ON TRAINS AND GO EAST....SHAME ON YOU SHAME ON YOU....

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is high stakes political posturing, the destruction of subsistance welfare not only for the disabled but for the unemployed is an act of economic genocide, that is being perpetrated by a political elite upon a large section of society - do they really think they are going to get away with it?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well said Sue. Agree with the sense of self worth point - the fact that the press hate me because I'm disabled, and the government refer to me as 'stock' and don't consider me worth keping alive by taking away my benefits impacts not one jot on my self worth, but it does on my mental and physical health.
    Those whose self worth depends on what they earn are shallow individuals who probably need some kind of therapy. Agree with the poster who thinks Lord Freud could do with some help too. If he ever had a plot, he's certainly lost it now.

    ReplyDelete
  17. [QUOTE]Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Adults in Need":

    Lord Freud's choice of words is no faux pas.

    Perhaps just as worrying is his grasp of the Welfare Reform Bill he is championing so vehemently!!

    Debate in Grand Committee 8th November -

    Lord Freud: My Lords, I must start off by saying that the contributions of noble Lords today is highly informed and very moving.

    IT’S A PITY LORD FREUD IS NOT QUITE SO WELL INFORMED. HANG ON, ISN’T THIS HIS BABY? HIS WELFARE REFORM BILL? THE BILL HE IS CONTINUALLY COMMENDING TO EVERYONE? YOU’D HAVE THOUGHT HE’D KNOW WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THEN, WOULDN’T YOU?

    My Lords, clearly, the detailed mechanics of that is something that we will need to work out and set out in regulation. I AM NOT ABSOLUTLEY CONVINCED WE HAVE IT LOCKED DOWN - WE MIGHT, BUT I SIMPLY DON'T KNOW.

    My Lords, I am not sure what the extrapolation would be. Those are the figures we have. If I have a longer run at it, I will make the figures available when, or if, I have them. I am sorry, but we do not have any figures stretching out beyond that point.

    My Lords, as noble Lords know, direct comparisons of systems are terribly difficult to make.

    The amendment would allow them to go onto the contributory support element of ESA as of right. That carries a cost for which I DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT FIGURE. WE ARE WORKING ON IT.

    There may be different costs to having an easement of five or 10 years but WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE COSTS OF THIS AMENDMENT. So I cannot accept that we make this amendment and urge that it is not pressed. I AM COMPLETELY LOST IN MY BRIEF.

    I AM SPEAKING SLIGHTLY FROM MEMORY BUT the running rate is about £1.7 billion a year. I AM SORRY - I HAVE TRIPPED MYSELF UP ON THAT.

    I will refer to it in a minute. LET ME GATHER MY FORCES


    Baroness Lister of Burtersett: Is the noble Lord saying that you can get backdated money for the assessment period?

    Lord Freud: YES, THAT IS PRECISELY THE POSITION.

    Lord McKenzie of Luton: Surely that is not right. It is backdated to the end of the assessment period?

    Lord Freud: SORRY, I WITHDRAW THATTHIS MAN IS IN CHARGE OF A BILL WHICH WILL AFFECT THE LIVES OF MILLIONS OF VULNERABLE PEOPLE.
    HE SIMPLY DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING![/QUOTE]

    I cant see why it's a very simple bill so simple even my mp tells me i have it right. If lord Freud is struggling so much with it he can always come over to my house with my mp and i can take him through it step by step it would only take no more then 2 hours or so

    ReplyDelete
  18. Their was a meeting in my area today about the new benefits , with the Tories.

    I would not even bother applying for the PIPs to be honest. I'm diagnosed as being L5 lesion leading to Paraplegia and that does not even make me disabled, and if that's not a disability then what is for god sake.

    sadly this is about cuts.....it's about redefining disability.

    ReplyDelete
  19. When does the abused child become an adult statistic of alcohol or drug dependency?

    can you change that? not all abused children become an adult statistic of this? i know you dont mean to say that, you just imply it..

    ta

    ReplyDelete
  20. @allbigideas

    Do you feel that it's shaming? It's just that to me it's just an example of one of the multitude of problems that can plague abuse victims/survivors; "the" meaning one abused child, rather than some archetypal abused child being implied. I have a list of symptoms as long as my arm; drug and alcohol dependency are not on it, but that is purely down to chance. It might be offensive to say "when does the abused child become an abuser of children", because that perpetuates a harmful existing stereotype, but there is nothing shameful in being forced to resort to substance misuse to make ones life bearable.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Robert, Not applying is wrong im afraid thats what they want more people who dont more money they save. why should people be afraid to apply for something they need could it be they dont want to put themselves through the process and being denied in fact the more who are denied help will highlight the plight even further, So no more negative thoughts my good man

    ReplyDelete
  22. *Stock* - Is that what you call a Freudian slip?

    In a recent debate with the Lords the Lords he also described a policy (I think it was the housing) as a 'work in progress'. The man is clearly not fit for purpose!

    ReplyDelete
  23. The man is fit for purpose, of course he may not fit our needs. but he fitted the needs of Blair and Cameron.

    ReplyDelete
  24. It wouldn't at all surprize me if people in England with illnesses and disabilities will be afforded any human rights if the Human Rights Act is replaced with the UK Bill of Rights.

    Prof Alan Miller chairman of the Scottish Human Rights Commission - Quote:

    "Especially in these times of budget cuts the public - particularly the most vulnerable - need more and not less protection, and more and not less security in employment, housing, health, social care, and education,"

    Human beings are treated like machines and if they're not financially productive the assumption is that they are worthless? I don't feel worthless, though my self esteem is taking a knock. When we break down or malfunction we can now look forward to being thrown on the scrapheap.

    Self worth is not dependent entirely on one's capacity to work or earn. How many epitaphs do you see that read "Here lies Joe Bloggs. Ruthless in business. Earned £50K per annum. Proud owner of a BMW and flat screen TV. Sadly missed." Would be rather shallow if that's what we believed self worth was all about. It's not what we ulimately celebrate or remember. Unfortunately we need hard cash to survive in this society. We are given no alternative.

    I can imagine someone who may be taking time out of work for cancer treatment for example, just delighted to learn that Lord Freud thinks they are idle scroungers. Frankly I am sickened to my stomach with the language currently being used by the people at the top, who by sheer chance circumstance of birth were never 'children in need'.

    Why do we lack sympathy for vulnerable people and adults in dire poverty? If a child commits a crime they are suddenly labelled a youth or man if they're 18. It's the age when you become responsible for yourself I guess. Which depends entirely on the individual and if you have special needs, mental illness or certain disablilites that could be never in a lifetime. If they brand sick people as being scroungers and too idle to work often enough the population starts to believe the rhetoric. It then becomes acceptable to strip them of their rights and their incomes.

    It's very scary!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Here you go this is about the Royal Mail opening letters from ATOS..

    Our Ref: DG/NATH01001/01110173







    Dear Robert,



    Handling of ‘ESA 50 claims



    Further to my email of 19th October 2011, I have now had a reply from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).



    In this, the Minister for Employment states that DWP awarded a contract for these services to Balfour Beatty Workplace (BBW), and that BBW’s service delivery model uses Royal Mail (RM), as a subcontractor to open DWP and ATOS post at Royal Mail Opening Units and to deliver opened and pre-sorted post to offices. (Mail to individuals marked private and confidential is sorted and delivered without opening.)



    He goes on to argue that both BBW and Royal Mail are bound by Confidentiality Agreements and the Official Secrets Act. The Data Protection Act 1998 also applies.



    He finishes by saying: “I can assure your constituents that this process is handled within a robust and secure environment.”



    I am attaching a copy of the letter, so that you may read it in full, for yourself, and make up your own mind as to whether he has adequately answered the issues raised.



    Yours sincerely,

    ReplyDelete
  26. This is another area I've been discussing.......

    I put it here maybe interesting to some...



    Dear Robert


    NHS Risk Assessment Thank you for contacting me recently concerning the Government’s Health and Social Care Bill and their failure of the Department of Health to publish the risk assessment for this controversial and ill-conceived Bill. I share the concern that many local people, health professionals, staff and patients have about the Government’s reorganisation of the NHS, which I have always thought is unnecessary and that it will risk the break-up of the NHS as a national public service. the Government should drop this legislation and work with Opposition MPs and health experts to achieve the shared aim of clinically-led commissioning without this unnecessary cost and upheaval. I am particularly concerned that the Government’s plans will set up the NHS as a full-scale market, that it will break up one of our most cherished public services and that it will make the NHS more bureaucratic and less accountable to the patients who rely on it. I am also disappointed that the Government have repeatedly refused to publish the risk assessment for the Bill, despite the Shadow Frontbench pressing them to do so and despite two formal requests being made under the Freedom of Information Act. The Department of Health’s risk assessment is an extremely important document and one that should be in the public domain in order to allow the public, health professionals and MPs to scrutinise the Government’s proposals. I am pleased, therefore, that the Information Commissioner has now ruled that the Department of Health must publish the risk assessment and that their failure to have done so has been against public interest and the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act. The Government now have 35 days to publish the assessment and I would urge them to do so in full and without further delay. Shadow Health Secretary, Andy Burnham, has twritten to Andrew Lansley to demand that the document is released in full by Wednesday morning to inform the debate in the House of Lords. I am attaching a copy of that letter for your reference and I can assure you that I, and my colleagues in the Labour Party, will continue to fight the Government on this very important issue. I believe that the Health and Social Care Bill continues to risk fragmenting and fundamentally altering a service that we all value and rely on. That is why I voted against the Government’s proposals at Third Reading and why I think it is vital that the Government now publish the risk assessment on the Bill immediately.


    Yours sincerely,

    ReplyDelete
  27. It's not just disabled folk who are discriminated against by the notion that 'sick = worthless scrounger': many women have to have hysterectomies and require many weeks to recover and whilst doing so have to be very careful about what they do. No doubt there are other maladies that require long recuperation periods. This whole diatribe is, methinks, the usual government-in-trouble creating a scapegoat (in the past, Jews, single women, homosexuals,...) to ensure the people do not rise up. Shame on the ConDems!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I feel worthless. I've applied for hundereds of jobs and not even received and acknowledgement, except from one. I'm female, in my fifties and I have a degree. I worked from the age of 15 (weekend jobs) until my forties when both my physical and mental health began to deteriorate. The newspaper attacks on the long term sick/disabled feel personal. That 'scumbag' with the 'so called bad back' is me. Then of course bipolar disorder is often scorned as a 'fashionable' illness and depression or anxiety just excuses not to work. On other occasions it is pointed out that 'lots of people with these conditions work' - the unspoken words being that as I don't I must have made a life style choice not to. I'm tired and discouraged and guilty.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Its going to be very interesting if GP's cant sign you off for more than 4 weeks. So you break your leg, you work in a job where you need 2 legs. Your GP says don't worry it will only take 8weeks and you be right as rain. But alas I can only sign you off for 4 weeks.

    Not to worry you then can take your xrays and your broken leg to a *NEW* panel who will then tell you if your leg is broken. And whether or not you can return to work. Sound like a waste of time yet?

    Great plan lets make it impossible for you to be sick then you will never hit the 26weeks sick limit to claim ESA what a wondeful idea. Give that women a gold plated pension.

    ReplyDelete
  30. So when my father, who started work aged five due to extreme parental neglect (pushing people's shopping home for them in a wheelbarrow so he could buy some food) and now still works despite his impending 70th birthday, needed 6 weeks off post op because of a massive abscess he suddenly became idle and in need of some fabled work ethic? Poppycock, drivel and inane rhetoric worthy only those plugging workhouses and penury.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I watched the Scottish Assembly’s Health Committee’s horror-struck evidence session on the impact of this bill. I heard the words "blind rhinoceros running wild" and I think that says it all. No real world impact assessments; in breach of UN Convention. These reforms have been written for people who barely comprehend them. All they can do is repeat the weasel words drummed into them by memos from the insurance lobby. Not a glimmer of any kind of humanitarian input to be found.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Somewhere on a disc from a few years ago I have the government impact sheet for some of these welfare reforms, from memory the human rights (impact) box is not even ticked.

    ReplyDelete
  33. A lot of us are going to learn what results from being put into a position of "learned helplessness". Let's hope my jobcentre assertiveness training comes in handy. Govt have arrogantly ignored all sorts of legislation, probably in the knowledge it would all have to be undertaken "litigant in person".

    ReplyDelete
  34. What hope do the sick and disabled have with people like this?
    David Cameron should have declared his purchase of land neighbouring his Oxfordshire home from the chief executive of one of Britain’s biggest lobbying companies, the former parliamentary standards watchdog said on Wednesday.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/8911520/David-Cameron-should-have-declared-land-deal-with-party-donor-says-former-watchdog.html

    ReplyDelete
  35. We know how much the WHOLE system is skewed in favour of these corrupt robber barons BUT the trouble is most of the populace dont and go about thier business in a state of bloody ignorance.Sell everything is the govts motto...not even to the highest bidder or for the best return as in Northern Crock and other cases but thats ok cos MOST people dont care and they get away with it.All we can really hope for is that the masses do wake up and see the whole system for what it is.It seems to me that as some parts of the world are gaining freedom ,albiet at a heavy price, we in the west are losing ours bit by bit...yes there is debt but who pays the most in real terms...those with the least and you know really in the end in will not end until the ones who are more comfortable among us feel the squeeze in greater numbers and react.Maybe when the banks here start robbing bank accounts by small increments as they are doing in the states then who knows.If we want a system of victorian dystopia then we are heading in the right direction for that but lets hope they the blinkered great public out there do wake up from the govt media induced slumber and start to fight back

    ReplyDelete
  36. I told you it will be difficult to get 100,000, I was down at a meeting this week to discuss welfare changes and every single disabled person told me I was scaremongering and that only cheats and scroungers would be in trouble.

    Then one lady who has serious disabilities got up made the tea for all of us walked up three steps and then started to do the bingo, I left. I was asked if I'd like to go again to talk about benefit changes and I said I had retired.

    And I have written my last letter my last email and my last protest. I wonder what these people will be doing next year because from December our area becomes the next in line for WCA

    ReplyDelete
  37. What hope do the sick and disabled have with people like this that now seem to be the norm?
    David Cameron should have declared his purchase of land neighbouring his Oxfordshire home from the chief executive of one of Britain’s biggest lobbying companies, the former parliamentary standards watchdog said on Wednesday.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/8911520/David-Cameron-should-have-declared-land-deal-with-party-donor-says-former-watchdog.html

    ReplyDelete
  38. Now sorted and if you look back and the Purnell and the Mandelson and the Blunkett politician have problems knowing the rules, but they also have great lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  39. how many disabled and sick voted for cameron and the libdems and wish thay had knot more than 5000 i bet i would like to know hopr thay are happy

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yep its like i said.People ,and i should have said that a LOT of sick and disabled are VERY much among then as witnessed by robert,are slumbering on in total ignorance or maybe just stupid denial that any of these draconian changes will affect them.ITs the old trick of repeat a lie often enough and people believe it but the trouble is in this case they believe the bullshit first time its uttered on tv and printed in the media.
    God help us with peeople like that.

    ReplyDelete
  41. we the disabled should vote for the green party instead of the main two.What can thay do to us that the cons are not doing allready .Well hope i will win the lotto

    ReplyDelete
  42. The British people like to give to charity because it makes them feel all warm, fuzzy and pure inside, it makes them feel like they are good, kind, moral people and it's just a one off payment the amount of which they can decide and which they can give at their own discretion. They also like to do it because they enjoy patronising foreigners especially dark ones.

    That doesn't mean however that they are good and nice people. All it takes for them to show their nastiness is for the media who lead them around by their nose to tell them the target for the two minute daily hate are bad people who deserve it. This propaganda appeals to the British people because there's nothing they love more than having a scapegoat to attack and look down on and feel more superior about.

    Taking the Welfare State from the not so Great British public was like taking candy from a baby. The media used the ignorance, spite, malice, sadism, cruelty, meanness, self righteousness, selfishness and gullibility of the British people to do it and the British people they cheer it all on enthusiastically thinking it will hurt someone else and wont ever affect them, or those that they love and care about.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This is my Good luck that I found your post which is according to my search and topic, I think you are a great blogger, thanks for helping me out from my problem..

    ReplyDelete
  44. It's a great pity that next week we have this strike with up to two million people taking part and yet they have forgotten about the struggle the sick and disabled face

    I think their lies the real problem with the country a nation of selfish people only looking to themselves this intern gives the government a green light to do as they please with the weakest in society which is us

    They will win their argument right or wrong for the simple reason two million on strike for whatever reason is just to hot the government will back down as if they didn't we would end up like Egypt without the tear gas

    We thou the sick and disabled cant go on strike however so it wouldn't matter how much we protest as individuals we would lose

    For us as a group to be successful we would need the backing of the rest of society but that's not going to happen so we are at the mercy of the DWP/ATOS and always will be from now on

    ReplyDelete
  45. I've already made plans for suicide despite being a practising Catholic. One is totally at the mercy of corrupt morally bankrupt politicians. I've had enough of the 'useless, failure' type rhetoric as I had enough such abuse from my father. All my life even to medical professionals I had to explain that yes I really am sick and now have been proved right thanks to modern diagnostic techniques. I'd give anything to be well with a normal life but had to'prove my entitlement to benefit to have sustenance. Now even that hard won money is to be taken away. Easy life? I don't think so.

    ReplyDelete