JobCentre+ - Staff complaints growing exponentially!

Reblogged from jaynelinney:

A recent FOI request received what I think is an intriguing response; one of the questions asked was "the total amount of complaints made against Jobcentre  Plus for the same period, 2010 - 2014". The response came under the heading of  ‘DWP Staff Don’t Treat Me With Respect’, and the figures make interesting reading -

DWP Complaints - reporting year is from April to March…

Read more… 257 more words

The woman threatened with eviction from 'uninhabitable' house over Bedroom Tax arrears

The Mirror's Real Britain columnist Ros Wynne-Jones wraps up warm to meet yet another victim of the hated tax ahead of another chance to get rid of it

Home threat: Ros Wyne-Jones, talks to Dee Newman and her mother Maggs Curley

You couldn’t call Dee Newman’s house in Breightmet, Bolton, a home. The walls are wet with damp, mouldy furniture is pushed to the middle of the room. The freezing air smells of decay.

Dee is wearing several layers of clothes, including her dressing gown, showing me her eviction letter. I am still in my coat.

“I’m being charged Bedroom Tax on a place that’s uninhabitable,” she says.

Her house is so damp her two kids cannot even visit.

As a policy, the Bedroom Tax is now so full of holes that it is barely afloat.

Read more...

Over 4000 Unpaid Workers Recruited Right Under The So-Called Fighting Union’s Nose

Reblogged from The Void:


It is hard to imagine a more toxic influence on wages and working conditions than an army of un-unionised and unpaid workers forced to be there under threat of benefit sanctions.

Yet whilst the so-called fighting PCS Union has dithered over benefit sanctions and workfare that is exactly what has happened under their very noses at the DWP.

As spotted by @boycottworkfare, Employment Minister Esther McVey recently boasted that 4,300 unpaid workers on the Government’s Work Experience scheme have been press-ganged into working for the DWP over the last three years.  This could represent up to one million hours of forced labour – potentially replacing nearly a two hundred full time jobs over the same period.

Whilst the Work Experience scheme is officially ‘voluntary’ claimants who refuse to work for free at the DWP can face being sent on a mandatory  workfare scheme instead.  George Osborne even recently announced that this was to become the policy for people between 18 and 21 – who will in future be sentenced to up to 780 hours forced work if they turn down an unpaid Work Experience position.

As well as no wage, young people on the Work Experience scheme have no working rights.  If they are sacked for gross misconduct they face benefits being sanctioned.  Gross misconduct under these terms could potentially include refusing to cross a picket line.

Some unions, such as the BFAWU, have recognised the very real dangers to all workers from workfare of any kind.  Sadly the PCS, the union for DWP workers, has remained silent whilst this grotesque exploitation has taken place.  PCS members have already instructed their union to take tougher action on benefit sanctions and yet nothing appears to have happened.  Perhaps it’s time for PCS members who care about their jobs and working conditions to bypass their tame union leadership and take matters into their own hands.

Dear Edwina, Thankyou for last night. I hope it was as good for you as it was for me. #bigbenefitsrow

Reblogged from A GIRL CALLED JACK:

Dear Edwina;

It's 9 o clock on Tuesday, the morning after the night before, where we were both on a panel on The Big Benefits Row on Channel 5. I haven't watched it back, I was there, and know what I look like when I'm angry.

I need to get this out - because it's everything I wanted to say last night but couldn't, as I kept being rudely shouted over by you.

Read more… 1,063 more words

UN Special Rapporteur’s report on the Bedroom Tax

The UN Rachel Rolink ‘s report is now out -she calls for an immediate suspension of the bedroom tax and for it to be fully evaluated in light of evidence of its negative impacts

The section on disabled people and those with long term health conditions lists the retrogression of rights and especially the impact on article 19 is copied below

1.   The plight of persons with disabilities deeply touched the Special Rapporteur. She learned from their strength and welcomed their active engagement in discussing adequate housing from their perspective, and in sharing their testimonies.

2.   At the root of many testimonies lies the threat to a hard-won right to live independently. For persons with physical and mental disabilities, as well as for the chronically ill, adequate housing means living in homes that are adapted to specific needs; close to services, care and facilities allowing them to carry out their daily routines; and in the vicinity of friends, relatives or a community essential to leading lives in dignity and freedom. Often, the compounded impact of an acute shortage of adapted and affordable accommodation, combined with other changes to the welfare system, has left them “between a rock and a hard place”: downsizing or facing rent arrears and eviction. Many testimonies refer to anxiety, stress and suicidal thoughts as a result, precisely the type of situations that should be avoided at all costs. Serious concerns about the direct impact of these reforms were already raised in 2012: “The range of reforms proposed to housing benefit, Disability Living Allowance, the Independent Living Fund, and changes to eligibility criteria risk interacting in a particularly harmful way for disabled people. … As a result, there seems to be a significant risk of retrogression of independent living and a breach of the UK’s Article 19 [CRPD] obligations.”^[1] The Department for Work and Pensions has made available additional funding under the DHP scheme to assist those affected by this measure, but, as noted above, DHPs are time-bound and limited in scope.

3.   According to Inclusion Scotland, the government of Scotland estimated that 95,000 Scottish households will be affected by this measure in the first year. In Scotland, 79 per cent of the households expected to be affected (76,000) contain a disabled person. They will lose an average of 13 pounds in housing benefit. Inclusion Scotland noted with concern that persons with disabilities will be among those least able to continue to meet their rent payments.^[2]

See also DPAC piece showing 87% of disabled people affected by the change to bedroom tax pre-1996 exemption

http://dpac.uk.net/2014/02/more-proof-disabled-people-and-family-carers-are-severely-disadvantaged-by-bedroom-tax/

 The full Rolink report can be downloaded from A_HRC_25_54_Add.2_ENG

The Big Benefits Row

Reblogged from Diary of a Benefits Scrounger:

Please share this article anywhere and everywhere you can. Thank you x 

As many of you may know by now, last night was the Big Benefits Row on Channel 5. "Roll up! Roll up for the spectacliar sight! Real life poor people for your viewing delight!" 

I was contacted by the show's producers early. Would I be on a panel to discuss welfare changes? They assured me it would be balanced and to their credit, I do think they worked very hard to make sure a range of views were represented in a way that shows like Benefit Street and On Benefits and Proud neglected entirely. Had I been a beleaguered austerity-junkie audience person, I think I would have had a rare taste of how it feels to find oneself outnumbered.

As the days passed before the show, I got that sneaking feeling I was being downgraded. Perhaps I should explain. I've done a lot of media now. Newsnight, BBC News, Sky, Radio 4, Radio 5 Live, LBC and many, many more. The pattern is almost always the same. I've learnt never to tweet about bookings until I'm in the actual studio getting miked up. For every 5 approaches, I suppose one might actually come to something.

Initially, the plan is always for real a debate, or a full feature on welfare cuts or a hard hitting doumentary. As the producers of the shows try to get guests to appear to discuss disability welfare cuts in any serious kind of way, they realise the task is almost impossible.

For some time now, the DWP and No.10 have refused to put anyone up against me. (and presumably other campaigners) at all. At first, 3 (all BBC) went ahead, but the various researchers were all genuinely shocked at the lack of government engagement. All said they'd never known such blanket refusals to debate an issue.

Perhaps more sinisterly, they were shocked that invariably the DWP refused to take part unless the stories were edited their way. Iain Duncan-Smith has written repeatedly and furiously to the BBC about their lack of balance in reporting welfare issues. Anyone who follows the debate with even a flutter of fleeting interest will know just how ironic that is. If ever there has been an issue so poorly reported, with so much ignorance and so many lies, the current "welfare" debate must be it. 

But it's clever isn't it? Refuse to debate at all and generally it will mean there can be no debate. You can shut down any and all opposition simply by saying nothing at all.

Anyway, I digress.

Even if a show does get made, invariably it gets watered down to the point of, well, no point at all really. An hour becomes half, which then becomes 15 minutes, which then becomes a 3 minute bulletin. A coalition MP becomes a "governmnet spokesperson" which then becomes an intern, which then ends almost without fail, with a member of the Taxpayers Alliance. And it's just too easy to make them look silly, they do most of the work themselves.

I've been edited to make me look like a "shirker", I've hauled my crohn's riddled butt all the way to London only to be told "Oh, sorry, it's not happening now, did no-one let you know?" I've been booked for shows under the pretence that a particular subject-du-jour is the subject only to be ambushed scrounger bashing vitriol the moment we go live. (Yes Nick Ferrari, I do mean you.) I've been made to walk to locations, despite pointing out repeatedly that I can't walk far or stand for very long. "If you could just manage....."

I've uncovered vast and shocking welfare stories only to find I can't get them published anywhere. Bumped for Egypt. Bumped for Syria. Bumped for chickens in cat outfits. (That last one's not even sarcasm!?!) Repeatedly I hear in a loop "But welfare isn't a story."

Well no, why would it be? The current social security cuts are stripping away an eye-watering £28 BILLION from the support and services sick and disabled people rely on just to get through the day. That's a full FIFTH of the entire deficit reduction plan falling on those who often have no voice to defend themselves. One pound in every five!!!

In all, I've found dealing with the media to be the most revealing and frustrating part of the whole "being-a-campaigner" thingy. You have to get REALLY tough REALLY quickly and be prepared for an infinite prism of disappointments and frustration.

And so I bumped down those now familiar media steps last week with depressing familiarity.

First I would be on the panel. Then the panel became the front row with assurances all of the main invitees would be sitting there with me and all would get a fair say. I was an "invited guest" and "disabled people's voices would be heard blah-blah-diddly-blah". And so yet another hour became a 15 minute section of the show from which I might get to throw in a 3 minute soundbite or two. This in turn became "You'll get a chance to speak from the audience" which fizzled out into "Ah, wheelchair issues mean you can't sit here/there/anywhere so we'll tuck you in that dark the corner out of the way."

As I said, I've been around the media block a few times now. 4 years of blogging and campaigning is actually 56 in human years. I was emphatic with the producers from the start that I wouldn't waste my energy spoons getting to London for nothing. They assured me repeatedly that that wouldn't be the case.

As it happened, I also had a hospital appointment in London yesterday at 3pm. As only us sick people can really know, that is traumatic enough in itself. It takes 3 hours for Dave to drive me to central London and 3 hours to get home. Ordinarily, that alone would exhaust me for days after the actual event but instead, yesterday, I chose to wait 6 HOURS for the Big Benefits Row to start. By 8pm, every one of my loved-ones know not to phone me or expect intelligent reponses. Waiting up to do a show that starts at 9pm is significant in my world.

Sickies like me will also know just how much it costs in emotional energy to even contemplate a day like I had planned for yesterday. The only way I can get through them is on adrenaline. Bodies like mine, so used to ignoring physical crisis signals, compensate the only way they know how. As the adrenaline floods through your body it makes you feel shaky and sick. I can't eat anything significant, I get a bit hyper. That good old fight or flight response recalls echos of demands from its genetic history. I wouldn't even think about eating anything significant before a show like The Big Benefits Row anyway, just in case it causes some involuntary vomit to land on someone's shoes. (*Other bodily fluids also available by request))

But our trials had barely started. Mik Scarlet (Writer for Huffington post and the Independent) Jack Monroe (working for Sainsbury's, ITN to name just a couple). Lisa Egan (Sky contact for disability related welfare issues & an articulate, intelligent blogger.) and I (Guardian, BBC & this little bloggy-woggy) all met up beforehand to get something to eat and so arrived at the studio together.

Having only needed to use a wheelchair for just under a year, the reality of disabled access has shocked and appalled me too. Did you know for instance that most trains only have ONE disabled space and so can only take one wheelchair user? No, I had no idea either. And did you know that you can't get in to most restaurants and shops despite access being a legal responsibility? Nope, nor me. Or that supermaket aisles often make it impossible to get around a shop independently? Or that you can't use almost any of the London Underground?I didn't know any of that stuff

When we got to the Channel 5 studio an epic confuddle broke out. As I've also learnt, they often do when some people are faced with several people on wheels all at once. They could only take 3 wheelchairs. 4 would apparently tip the building over into a dangerous and unforgivable fire risk. They couldn't evacuate four of us!

I'd been trying not to cry for about two hours by this point and the only way we were all going to get in was if I left my wheelchair in the foyer and hobbled down to the basement studio. I was the only one who could walk at all.

Once on the set, even bigger confuddlement broke out. "You can't put them here, they're in the way of the cameraman" (I thought the "them" was a nice little dehumanizing detail eh?) "You can't let them sit at the front, it makes them look too important" (I precis) etc etc.  After at least 10 minutes of this infathomable conundrum, Mik shouted to the audience who were now in their seats ready for the show to begin. "Get a job they say?? Are you watching this? Most of the time, we can't even get a bloody seat!"

I noted with great irony that the panellists had to sit on a raised platform anyway, so even if they had kept a disabled person on the panel, it's unlikely they could have overcome the first and simplest of barriers and actually got up on to the stage.

Already brimming with brittle frustration, adding Edwina Curry and Katie Hopkins into the mix with no off button took every ounce of professionalism I had to survive without actually combusting.

Surprisingly, I thought the debate was very good. If anything, it was biased in our favour for once. Matthew Wright held Hopkins and Currie to account frequently and the range of people who did get to speak were varied. I think it surprised everyone when Rachael Johnson, (Boris' sister and editor of The Lady) and Sam Delaney, (editor of Heat magazine) defended people who have to rely on social security and presented some very helpful myth-busters about "welfare".

However, I could barely breathe with pent up frustration. As each part of the show went live again following an ad break, I'd pray that something would be said about disability and every time it wasn't, I deflated further and further (DON'T be a crybaby on national TV...DON'T be a crybaby on national TV....DON'T be a crybaby on national TV, repeat) How are you suppoed to have a debate about social security and not include sick and disabled people? We rely on it more than any other group! Here's a few facts, just in case you've never read this blog before

• Disability Living Allowance (DLA) is being cut by 20%
• The criteria to qualify for DLA slashed has been by 60%
• 1 MILLION people are to be stripped of Employment and Support Allowance
• The Independent Living Fund has bee scrapped**
• 1500 people lost their jobs as Remploy factories were all closed
• Just 3% of the entire welfare budget goes to unemployed people
• Social security fraud is around £1.2 Billion per year - less than half of 1%, or 0.15% of total welfare budget. That's just £1.50 lost for every thousand or 0.15% of the total welfare
• The DWP pay out much more in their own errors - 2.2 Billion
• A whopping £16 BILLION goes unclaimed, generally to avoid the stigma of "welfare"
• We have some of the toughest criteria for claiming social security in the developed world.
• Is our UK social security systemn too generous? No again. In international terms we come just 46th out of 51, paying some of the lowest benefits anwhere
• 440,000 sick or disabled people will be hit by the Bedroom Tax. That's over 2 thirds.

The very second the show ended I got Dave to bust me out of there without even saying goodbye to MJ or Lisa or Mik. I cant recall another time I've been such an emotional coward, but I just had to run away (well, wheel away, but you get the idea)

As Dave pushed my official fire risk chariot back to our car, I tweeted "Yes,I was kicked off the panel at the last minute and no, of course there was no-one disabled person in my place" #BigBenefitsRow

But just as he did, something magical seemed to happen as we started the tedious drive home. My tweets exploded all over twitter, it was all I could do to read them quickly enough as they flooded in. Thousands and thousands of you, it was quite awe inspiring. By midnight I was trending 4th in the UK

And yet again my friends, we shall have to make our own news. If you've read to this point, PLEASE don't close the page until you've shared it with your networks. You can use the buttons just below to retweet or post it to Facebook. But PLEASE, if you can support us in any way, sharing this article can show producers of shows like the Big Benefits Row that we DO have a voice, we DO matter. 

As campaigners we've often reminded ourselves that "Alone we whisper, but together we shout." 

I imagine that the producers of last nights BBR got a better offer than me. Someone with a higher profile who they thought might attract more viewers. Some suggested it could be more sinister than that, but I'm convinced that for most affluent, white, able-bodied producers, long term ilness or disability simply doesn't come on to their radar. Another genetically-programmed response means we simply cannot believe in our own mortality or believe that any harm can ever cast shadows over our lives.

We can show them - and the public - that on social media if nowhere else, sick and disabled people can -and will - be heard.

Explaining the Coalition’s War on the Poor and Disabled

Reblogged from Beastrabban\'s Weblog:



A rich man ignoring a beggar’s cries for charity, from Bateman’s Chrystal Glass of Christian Reformation of 1569

The Coalition is responsible for some of the harshest and punitive legislation directed at the poor, the unemployed and the disabled in recent years. Under the pretext of trying to pay off the immense debt created by the bank bailout, Cameron and Clegg have together passed highly illiberal legislation intended to pare down the welfare state to its barest minimum. The result has seen as massive resurgence in poverty in the UK, with thousands now reduced to relying of food banks or scavenging in skips for food. This has been accompanied by a concerted campaign of vilification and demonization directed at the poor, the unemployed and the disabled. The middle market tabloids, the Daily Mail and Express, are notorious for their attacks on single mothers, unemployed ‘scroungers’ and immigrants, whom they scream – one cannot, in all decency, describe their shrill headlines with anything as mild as ‘allege’ or ‘contend’ are here to claim Britain’s generous welfare payments. The BBC and Channel 4 have both screened documentaries purporting to show the reality behind those claiming job seekers allowance. The most recent of these was ‘Benefits Street’ on Channel 4. These have singled out and portrayed the unemployed as, at best, idle scroungers, and at worst a criminal or semi-criminal underclass living by fraud and theft in an underworld of drug taking and violence.

This viciousness even extends to the disabled. The pseudoscientific assessment practised by ATOS on behalf of the government is designed to declare as many of the disabled to be as fit for work as possible. The result has seen severely and terminally ill people thrown off benefit. Thousands have taken their lives in despair as a result. Stilloaks has compiled a list over that his site, and the Void and Mike over a Vox Political, and many, many other have also blogged on this. As many as 38,000 people may have died as a result of benefit sanctions inflicted by the Department of Work and Pensions and the policies of Ian Duncan ‘Matilda’ Smith and Esther ‘McLie’ McVey. These are just guesses, however, as the DWP will not release the figures for the years after 2011. This indicates that the statistics are truly shaming, even for a department run by those two callous incompetents.


Read more...

Army of low-paid local govt workers takes to the streets

An army of low-paid local government workers will today demand an end to poverty pay rises by taking part in a joint union day of protest.

GMB, UNISON and Unite members will stage lunchtime protests are planned outside council buildings and town halls across England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Over one million workers, from street cleaners and refuse and waste collectors to school support and catering staff, have lost up to £3,844 since 2010, as the government’s miserly pay increases have languished well below inflation. More than half a million workers earn less than the living wage of £7.65 or £8.80 in London.

The unions – representing 1.6 million local government workers – formally submitted their pay claim to employers last November, and expect a formal pay offer later this month. The unions are seeking a £1.20 an hour minimum increase to bring the bottom rate of pay in local government to the level of the Living Wage and restore some of the pay lost by higher earners.

Brian Strutton, GMB National Secretary for Public Services, said: “The result of years of real-terms pay cuts is that a staggering 510,000 council workers are paid less than the Living Wage. Most are women in part-time jobs. Many have to suffer the indignity of claiming in-work benefits.

“How can it be that in 21st century Britain, public-service workers must rely on state handouts? We are talking about frontline workers who serve our communities day in, day out. They work as street sweepers, social workers, classroom assistants, housing officers, cleaners, and dinner ladies.

“All will be standing together on 4th February and demanding an answer to this question: why are we made scapegoats for a financial crisis we had nothing to do with? Because as Mervyn King admitted to the TUC a few years ago, not a single trade unionist contributed to the 2008 economic collapse. The fault lay entirely with greedy bankers cosseted by pathetic regulators.

Read more...

A4e fraud - first four plead guilty

The Daily Mail reports that the first four ex-A4e staff in the long drawn out fraud case pleaded guilty at court in Reading yesterday.  They admitted a total of 32 offences of fraud and forgery while working on a scheme called Inspire to Aspire, which ended in 2011.  (There's a fifth person who couldn't get to the court and will plead guilty later.)  The Mail claims credit for this case, but it was a whistle-blower who brought it all to light, and A4e has always claimed that it was their own audit processes which revealed the fraud, and they notified the police.  However it was revealed, it is embarrassing, to say the least.  Money was claimed for job outcomes which were fictitious.  The fact that this first batch has pleaded guilty means we won't get to hear the details, but it appears to have involved forging outcome forms or signatures.

Sentencing hasn't happened yet.  Eight more people are due for trial in October (!) so this drags on.

Watching A4e

Bedroom tax is “iniquitous and inhumane” – Welfare Reform Committee

The UK Government should abolish the so-called bedroom tax or give the Scottish Parliament the powers to do so, according to a Holyrood committee.
The Welfare Reform Committee has also concluded that the cost to tenants is “iniquitous and inhumane and may well breach their human rights”.

The committee published an interim report on the matter, following extensive research into the impact of the under-occupancy charge and wider welfare reforms.

It examines in detail the impact of the charge, the ongoing attempts at mitigating the impact by local authorities and Scottish Government and puts forward abolition as the solution to the “bad law”.

Committee convener Michael McMahon MSP said: “The bedroom tax remains bad law. Treating people’s homes only as bricks and mortar, homes of around 65,000 disabled people and 15,000 homes with children, is simply not acceptable in this day and age.

“Smaller properties just aren’t available because we spent years developing our housing stock to offer homes people could grow their families in, so they could set down roots and establish communities. The reality for many is they cannot pay, and they cannot move.

“And to make the situation even more frustrating, it is entirely possible it is costing the public purse more to implement than it is saving.

“The only conclusion the majority of the committee could come to, when faced with the evidence and research we have seen, is to call for the UK Government to abolish the bedroom tax with immediate effect. And if they won’t do that, to give the Scottish Parliament the powers and resources to do so.”

The report sets out the committee’s belief that the under-occupancy charge, also known as the bedroom tax is “iniquitous and inhumane and may well breach tenants’ human rights”.

Deputy committee convener Jamie Hepburn said the situation is a “farce”, with money taken with one hand from tenants for alleged spare rooms by the DWP.

“Meantime, the other hand is paying out public money to tenants from the Scottish Government and DWP through discretionary housing payments,” he added.

The report also sets out the essential case for the DWP to increase its current level of support and confirm its allocation of funds for DHP for the next two years

Holyrood

Ministers savage UN report calling for abolition of UK's bedroom tax

As Raquel Rolnik reiterates call to suspend policy, UN rapporteur's report is described as 'misleading Marxist diatribe'

A United Nations report on UK housing conditions calling for the suspension of the bedroom tax has been dismissed by the government as partisan, discredited and a "misleading Marxist diatribe".

The full report by the UN's special investigator on housing, Raquel Rolnik, who made a research trip to Britain last August and September to look at housing provision, was published by the UN on Monday.

In it, Rolnik reiterated her earlier call for the bedroom tax policy to be suspended and reviewed because it negatively "impacts on the right to adequate housing and general wellbeing of many vulnerable individuals and households".

The report said lack of investment in housing over several decades meant Britain now faces a crisis of housing affordability and availability. It called for increased protections for tenants in the rapidly growing private rented sector who find themselves with "very few rights and little security", and called for a series of welfare reforms to be re-assessed to ensure they do not impact disproportionately on the most vulnerable individuals.

Read more: Guardian

War on the old: IDS plans to batter OAPs with cuts

Iain Duncan Smith targets poor pensioners with plans to scrap free bus passes and winter fuel allowance

Iain Duncan Smith’s move flies in the face of David Cameron’s election pledge to rule out cuts to pensioner ­benefits

Iain Duncan Smith tonight stepped up the Tory war on the poor by turning his sights on society’s most vulnerable.

The penny-pinching Work and Pensions Secretary wants to slash winter fuel allowances for pensioners and scrap their free bus passes and TV licences in a move that would spell misery for millions of people.

His cruel cuts could mean OAPs having to choose between heating their homes or eating as they lose up to £300 in cold weather payments.

And the over-75s would also have to fork out £145 for TV licences.

Mr Duncan Smith’s move finally destroyed any claim the party had to being caring Conservatives.

And it flies in the face of David Cameron’s election pledge to rule out cuts to pensioner ­benefits.

Mr Duncan Smith, whose flagship Universal Credit policy is in chaos, said the Government was discussing whether to put OAP payments into a wider Whitehall cap on welfare spending.

Read more...

The mind of Iain Duncan Smith

Reblogged from Watching A4e:

The most remarkable item to pop up in the news feeds this week was in a regional paper, the Gloucestershire Echo.  It's the key to understanding the mind of Iain Duncan Smith and the battle which his opponents face.  I urge you to read it before going any further.

Okay?  You're surely bemused now.  Can this be what he really believes?  Let's take it a few sentences at a time.  He was asked if he accepted blame for the fact that the use of food banks has quadrupled in Cheltenham, according to the Trussell Trust.  IDS replied that he is "very much in support of people helping other people.  I don't even think there is a blame here."  So it's just a matter of mutual support, and not something anyone, least of all IDS, is at fault for.  Now we get the waffle:

"The reality is that first of all people who get involved with food banks, set them up, are doing what they feel is very community spirited and want to help out people who they think have got a particular issue or problem."

This is pretty meaningless, but implies that the Trussell Trust is doing what it wants to do, and so what?  Nothing to do with me.

"The reality is [that silly phrase again, which asserts rather than argues] that usage of food banks has been rising anyway and it was rising even during the time of growth under the last Government, continuing to rise over this, most of the period you are talking about anyway is pre-the impact of welfare reforms, most of them didn't come in until the early or middle part of last year."

Food banks started in a small way under the Labour government, but their numbers have soared since 2010.  That hasn't stopped the Tories making thoroughly dishonest statements.  And what is IDS arguing here?  That the growth is not down to "welfare reforms"?  So what is the reason?  He leaves that one hanging.

"I think it is a positive thing for people to use food banks and I think if they need it, local authorities sometimes refer to food banks now because they run the social funds and instead of actually just paying money out some of them refer across."

The first part of that is just grotesque.  Then he gets on to blaming local authorities.  They "run the social funds" so they save money by sending people to the food banks rather than giving them cash.  No mention, you notice, of jobcentres doing the same thing, or of his refusal to publish, or even collect, any data on this.

"There are complex reasons why people use food banks but I think it's excellent."

Dismissive, contemptuous and stupid just about sums up that sentence.  But he hasn't finished:

"We should put this in context.  In the UK the Trussell Trust has put some figures out that say about 60,000 people use them a week but in Germany, which has a more comprehensive welfare system, one and a half million people a week use them and in Canada which has a smaller population about 800,000 a week use them."

Notice the phrase "has put some figures out".  It drips with contempt for the Trust's propaganda, and then implies that the figures are tiny anyway in comparison with other countries.  I have no idea whether his figures for Germany and Canada are correct or whether direct comparisons are possible, but it's irrelevant to the argument.

The interviewer must have felt that it was like punching blancmange.  There is no sense at all that Duncan Smith understands what's going on or why.  He literally doesn't want to know.  He has a completely fixed idea of his mission, and filters out any inconvenient fact which doesn't fit.

Mr Duncan Smith is appearing before the Work & Pensions Select Committee on Monday to answer questions about Universal Credit.  Not the PAC, as I thought, which means he won't get the sort of grilling he would have got from Margaret Hodge.  It's at 4.30, I believe.  Let's hope it's televised.

Why should we endure this disrespect from a public servant?

Reblogged from Vox Political:

Awkward indeed: Iain Duncan Smith spent today’s meeting with the man he tried to blame for the Universal Credit fiasco – DWP permanent secretary Robert Devereux – sitting next to him. When Debbie Abrahams laid into Mr… Smith with the words quoted in the article, Mr Devereux was staring directly at him with an enormous smile on his face. [Image: Political Scrapbook]

“I can say with the strongest feeling my concern about the hubris you have demonstrated and your tone to this committee. You haven’t explained – certainly to my own satisfaction, and I am sure anybody that has been watching will draw their own conclusions – you have not made any satisfactory explanation about how you have informed, and kept this committee informed, about the difficulties that the Department was experiencing. There has been obfuscation, smoke-and-mirrors, even up to a few weeks before the report from the National Audit Office. The memorandum that was released in August was clearly saying that everything was fine and dandy. It is, clearly, not. I’ll give you one more opportunity to answer, so you can explain to this committee why there is such poor information provided by your Department.”



These were the words of Commons Work and Pensions committee member Debbie Abrahams to Secretary of State Iain Duncan Smith, just a quarter of the way through today’s (Monday) clash over Universal Credit and his Department for Work and Pensions’ appalling book-keeping.

Mr… Smith’s response typified the attitude that she was decrying. He said: “Well, I just don’t agree with you, and I don’t agree that we have done anything else but be open and honest about what the issues are, as and when they have been identified, and what we would do about them, as and when we had made our decisions about that.”

Read more...

Tories' colour is blue but their hearts will always be black

Mirror columnist Paul Routledge says Iain Duncan Smith has come clean as pensioners are set to come under attack from the cuts

 
Targeted: OAPs face losing winter fuel allowance among other benefits

So, he finally tore off the mask and revealed the evil face of the nasty party.

For four years, the Tories have been conning the public with assurances that the NHS and the welfare state were safe in their hands.

It was always a lie, of course, but they had to stick to the script to maintain the illusion of “caring Conservatism” – a contradiction in terms if ever I heard one.

But now Iain Duncan Smith has come clean, with the boast that nothing is safe from the cuts. Not the health service, nor pensions, nor benefits for the poor, the jobless and the disabled, nor tax credits and housing benefit.

Everything is up for the axe in the IDS bonfire of the ringfences in public spending. He’s gone much further than David Cameron, who in the past ruled out such draconian measures. His strategic policy foray risks opening up a split at the top in the Coalition.

But even if the details are fuzzy, the direction of travel is plain. Prime targets for the chop are the winter fuel allowance for pensioners, free TV licences for the over-75s and old folks’ bus passes. The savings will be relatively small but the suffering immense.

And it just had to be IDS who did the biz – a well-off Cabinet minister who lives in a big house on £140,000 a year and all expenses paid. He’s all in favour of hair shirts, as long as the other fellow is wearing it.

At least we now see them in plain sight. No more pussy-footing around. No more pretence. This is what the Tories really want. We can’t say we haven’t been warned.

Mirror

The Scandal of DWP Silence

Reblogged from jaynelinney:

We know from  the official DWP report that between January & November 2011 10,600 disabled people either in receipt of or awaiting benefits died.

Since then the DWP have, despite numerous requests refused to release further updates; we can only speculate their reason why, as we can only surmise just how many more disabled people have since lost their lives?

Read more… 154 more words

110,000 people in hospital because they can't afford to heat homes

Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham will link the 10% rise in A&E circulation and respiratory cases with the failure to help people with the cost of living

Struggle: Cost of energy means people cannot afford to keep the heating on

Soaring energy costs are being blamed for a huge rise in the number of people going to hospital with illnesses caused by having to live in cold homes.

The total going to A&E with circulation problems or respiratory diseases has leapt by nearly 110,000 in the past three years.

And Andy Burnham, the Shadow Health Secretary, will today link this 10% rise with the Government’s failure to help people with the crippling cost of living.

In a “state of the NHS” speech in Birmingham today, he will say: “These new figures show for the first time the effect on A&E of the cost-of-living crisis and rising energy bills.

“This is the tragic human cost of David Cameron’s failure to stand up to the energy companies.”

And he will argue that when people cannot afford to heat their homes, they are more likely to suffer from high blood pressure, heart attacks strokes and asthma and other breathing difficulties.

Mr Burnham will cite figures showing cases at A&E in England where the “primary diagnoses” were for circulatory disease or respiratory disease rose from 1,067,134 in 2009/10 to 1,176,353 last year.

Read more...

Exploding the Myths Around Benefit Levels and the European Committee of Social Rights

Wednesday saw Iain Duncan Smith expressing outrage about the findings of the European Committee of Social Rights on the UK’s recent report to that body.

Reacting to the Committee’s conclusion that the UK had not satisfied its European social security rights obligations, Mr Duncan Smith stated that it was ‘lunacy for the Council of Europe to suggest welfare payments need to increase when we paid out £204bn in benefits and pensions last year alone.’

So what is the all the fuss about? Who is this Committee that has raised the hackles of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions? The European Committee of Social Right is a human rights monitoring body established under the European Social Charter. This is a treaty established by the Council of Europe, an inter-governmental organisation established in 1949 which promotes co-operation between all countries of Europe in the area of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. It has 47 member states, one of which is the UK.

The Committee’s function is to make findings (or ‘conclusions’) on the conformity of the situation of all the countries that have volunteered to be bound by the European Social Charter (which the UK signed up to in 1962). The report that resulted in the findings that have so enraged Mr Duncan Smith was submitted by the UK in November 2012.

The Committee’s findings highlighted a number of problems with the UK’s welfare system in terms of the European Social Charter. Specifically, it found that the UK was not in conformity with its duty to establish or maintain a system of social security in terms of Article 12(1) of that instrument ‘on the grounds that: ‘the minimum level of short-term and long-term incapacity benefit is manifestly inadequate; the minimum level of state pension is manifestly inadequate; the minimum level of job seeker’s allowance is manifestly inadequate.’

The Committee did not pick these conclusions out of the air – rather, it based its findings on the fact that the benefits in question fall below 40% of the Eurostat median equivalised income. This is the same approach to that it adopts to assessing social security systems in all states that are bound by Article 12(1) the European Social Charter – including the Nordic countries, Germany and France. The information on benefits levels were provided by the UK in its report – it was not the product of a cunning European or civil society plot to shame the UK in front of its peers.

Nor did the Committee fail to acknowledge the extent to which the UK is in compliance with the Charter. It specifically stated that the UK was satisfying its obligations in relation to the right to safe and healthy working conditions, the right to protection of health, the right to social and medical assistance, the right to benefit from social welfare services and the right of elderly persons to social protection. Where the UK had not provided all the information that the Committee needed to fully evaluate compliance, it found the state to be in conformity pending receipt of the requested information. In other words, far from victimising the UK, where there was any doubt, the Committee operated on the basis of a presumption in favour of state compliance. The only area in which the UK’s performance was criticised is the one that has been seized on by Mr Duncan Smith and his party colleagues. In doing so, they provide an incomplete and distorted picture of the Committee’s findings.

What Wednesday’s story has done is to throw into sharp relief, the significant ignorance of some of our political representatives about human rights and Europe. Priti Patel, MP, is reported as having stated that, ‘the unaccountable and unelected Council of Europe has clearly failed to properly research and understand the system in Britain. This institution should instead focus its attention on other countries where there are serious problems rather than attempt to meddle in our country.’

n doing so, she appears to confuse the Committee and the Council of Europe and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the role of both. In this instance, the Committee has carried out its function in terms of the European Social Charter appropriately. The fact that this has resulted in conclusions that the coalition government do not like does not mean that the Committee (or indeed the Council of Europe) has in any way deviated from the role it is required to play. Nor does it suggest that the Committee is unilaterally attempting to ‘meddle’ in UK affairs.

Confusion about European bodies and human rights standards was also evident on the part of Philip Davies, MP, who said: ‘The Government can no longer stand by. They have got to say, “We’re sick to the back teeth of this interference, we’re going to withdraw from the European Convention of Human Rights”.’ 

Unfortunately for Mr Davies, the European Convention on Human Rights has absolutely nothing to do with yesterday’s finding by the Committee. It is an entirely different instrument to the European Social Charter.

Demonstrating a somewhat higher level of knowledge, Jacob Rees-Mogg stated that, ‘the UK has not signed the additional protocol providing for a system of collective complaints nor is the Charter applicable in domestic law. Therefore, the opinion it has expressed is of limited effect.’ Mr Rees-Mogg is correct that the UK has not signed the additional protocol – but it has undertaken reporting obligations on its progress on the rights. He is also correct that the Charter is not applicable in domestic law (and that therefore reports that the Committee’s findings potentially open the door for claimants to take the Government to court ‘to get more money’ are inaccurate) – but that does not mean it does not impose binding international law obligations. 

Strikingly, Mr Rees-Mogg’s statement that the Committee ‘overstates its case as the level of benefits is a matter of political debate not of being “manifestly inadequate”‘ demonstrates a failure to appreciate that simply because something is subject to political debate (and it is hard to find a human rights issue that is not!) does not mean that it is immune to consideration by human rights bodies such as the Committee.

The bad news for Mr Duncan Smith and others decrying the Committee’s conclusions is that it is certainly not being lunatic. UK welfare ‘reform’ raises a wide range of human rights concerns – whether in terms of international, European or domestic human rights law. This is simply the most recent example of an international human rights body criticising the impacts on the most vulnerable of changes to the UK’s social protection framework. It almost certainly won’t be the last.

Professor Aiofe Nolan
Huffingtomn Post

Chilling Truth About Universal Credit: Bosses To Be The Gate-Keepers Of Benefits

Reblogged from the void:

Employers failing to provide tax information on time or going out of business could lead to vital in-work benefits going unpaid Lord Fraud confirmed in a speech this week.

When Universal Credit is finally introduced (stop laughing) it will replace almost all current in-work benefits including Child and Working Tax Credits, along with Housing Benefits.

Unlike the current system, benefit rates will be calculated monthly based on tax information sent to the DWP by employers.

Read more… 524 more words

Royal Family’s Former Caterer Loses DLA Appeal

Reblogged from samedifference1:

A CANCER patient has lost an appeal against a cut to his disability benefit the same month he learned he could have his prostate removed.

Barton resident Paul Marlow — who has suffered from bladder cancer for 10 years — has lost his monthly £218 Disability Living Allowance.

The 56-year-old, a former caterer who served the Queen, was told last summer that he would no longer receive the benefit after a medical assessment.

He appealed the decision, but an independent tribunal hearing in Botley on January 23, found he did not qualify for the money for mobility and care needs.

Mr Marlow said: “It is absolutely disgusting. This cancer is not going to go away.”

He said he felt intimidated at the tribunal in front of the three judges, adding: “It felt as if I was sat there begging.”

The Stowford Road resident, who says he relies on the benefit, has had about 40 operations for tumours in his bladder since his diagnosis in 2003.

His next operation at the John Radcliffe will be to take away part, or all of his, prostate after it became inflamed because of the problems caused by the cancer.

He said: “All this stress I think has caused the prostate problem.”

Mr Marlow also suffers from arthritis, the lung disease chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma.

He says he uses a mobility scooter and walking stick to get around.

But his income from benefits has now fallen from £990 to £772 a month – in fortnightly £386 income support payments.

Read more...

No protection from Bedroom Tax for the vulnerable as it would cause 'political embarrassment'

Reblogged from Vox Political:

Vulnerable children and adults with disabilities or high support needs may be forced to pay the Bedroom Tax, despite protestations to the contrary by Lord Freud, after it was revealed that creating more protections would cause 'political embarrassment'.

Current rules mean some supported housing is protected from the Bedroom Tax, benefit cap and the effects of Universal Credit (if a working version ever arrives) - but this accommodation is not exempted if the landlord is not the care provider or when the landlord is a local authority.

Read more… 347 more words

Beyond Benefits Street: Ghettos with 70% unemployment and no future

‘In some, more than two thirds of working-age adults pick up a benefit cheque instead of a pay packet, while even those in work are often banking other handouts.

A detailed analysis of every street in England and Wales broke down neighbourhoods into areas of about 1,500 people.

These 35,000 areas were then cross-referenced with benefit claim statistics to identify the nation’s most “workless” areas.

While Winson Green in Birmingham, which features in the TV documentary, ranked only 1,357th on the list, the real benefits blackspots were found in Liverpool, Middlesbrough, Rochdale and Thanet, Kent.

Yet the most startling figures came from an area of Blackburn where 71.9 per cent of the working-age population claims benefits.’

Read more …

Poll tax mark II pushes Britain’s poorest into debt

‘Up to 70,000 low earners, single parents, and disabled people are being pursued by bailiffs over their failure to pay the “new poll tax”, according to figures revealed for the first time.

The country’s poorest people, who qualify for means-tested council tax benefit, have seen their annual bills rise after the Government imposed a 10 per cent reduction in funding for the handout last April.

New figures revealed by Freedom of Information requests show that 400,000 people have had liability orders imposed by the courts, while 70,000 of these have had letters from bailiffs. In Conservative-controlled Basildon council alone, 123 disabled people have received bailiff notices, some complaining of threatening letters that warn that firms will seize goods if they fail to pay. As a result, local disability groups report that those affected are handing televisions and jewellery to pawnbrokers, to pay bills.’

Read more: 'Poll tax mark II' pushes Britain's poorest into debt

Angry Lib Dems accuse Gove of bid to politicise education

‘The coalition government was engulfed in a vitriolic public row over education on Saturday as the Liberal Democrat schools minister accused his boss, Tory education secretary Michael Gove, of a “blatant” attempt to politicise the independent schools inspection body, Ofsted.

The intervention by David Laws, a close ally of Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg, came after it emerged that Gove had sacked Labour peer Baroness Sally Morgan as chair of the schools inspectorate.

A source close to Laws issued a statement expressing the minister’s fury at Gove’s move and making clear that the Lib Dems would do all in their power to block actions that they believed would jeopardise Ofsted’s independence.

The source said: “David is absolutely furious at the blatant attempts by the Tories to politicise Ofsted. The decision to get rid of Sally Morgan had absolutely nothing to do with her abilities, or even education policy, and everything to do with Michael Gove’s desire to get his own people on board.’

Read more: Angry Lib Dems accuse Michael Gove of bid to politicise education

Norman Tebbit and Edwina Currie remind us how heartless and shameless the Tories really are - by John Prescott

The former Deputy Prime Minister and Sunday Mirror columnist is not surprised by the latest rants from the one-time Thatcher ministers

They lied: The Tories secretly plotted to provoke the miners strike

Thank God we still have the likes of Norman Tebbit and Edwina Currie to remind us how heartless the Tories are.

We’ve had Tebbit slamming Labour’s call for an apology from the Tories for their senseless destruction of the mining industry by provoking a strike that decimated communities.

Recent Government papers revealed what we always thought at the time. Thatcher had plans to close 75 mines and bring in troops to break a strike.

But Tebbit – Thatcher’s cheerleader-in-chief – said of Labour’s demand: “Next they’ll want an apology for freeing the Falklands.”

What a cheap shot.

And Currie – a minister who was forced to resign after prompting a false salmonella scare that led to the unnecessary slaughter of four million hens and a 60 per cent drop in egg sales – said it’s not this Government’s senseless policies that make people poor.

It’s food banks.

She also said food-bank use has tripled in the past year because more people now want free food.

Read more...

Clegg’s pledges – what are they worth?

Reblogged from Vox Political:

[Image: The Independent]

We laugh because it’s funny and we laugh because it’s true.


Vox Political reader Simon Kirk pointed out this little gem from comedian Mark Steel, writing in The Independent.

At a time when the Liberal Democrats are desperately trying to claw back some credibility, he make the excellent point that, after the betrayals of the last few years, it is unrealistic to expect anyone to believe anything Nick Clegg and his yellow friends say in the future.

Worse still, there is evidence that teams representing the Tories and Liberal Democrats negotiated what would be in a coalition agreement before the May 2010 election – the document mentioned in The Guardian‘s article is dated March 16, 2010 – and abolishing student tuition fees, a principle Liberal Democrat pledge, was not part of the agreement.

In other words, Clegg campaigned for two months ahead of the election with a promise that he knew he was going to break. Apparently you can get the full details in a book entitled Five Days To Power by Rob Wilson, Conservative MP for Reading East.

The article states: “George Osborne, who had long feared the Tories would struggle to win an overall parliamentary majority, persuaded David Cameron to allow him to form the Tories’ own secret coalition negotiating team two weeks before the election. The Tory leader demanded total secrecy and asked only to be given the barest details for fear that he would blurt it out ‘unplanned in an interview’.” (Thanks go to Vox Political commenter ‘Florence’ for these details)

With hindsight, we know that Cameron had other matters he needed to keep secret, such as the fact that he was claiming he would protect the public National Health Service, when in fact his colleague Andrew Lansley had been working on a plan to privatise it for many years. Lansley had also been sworn to secrecy.

So both Coalition parties have a proven track record of dishonesty in the run-up to the 2010 election and there is no reason to believe the Liberal Democrats have changed now. In fact, as Mark Steel points out, Clegg has even gone on record, saying “we have to be grown-up” to excuse himself.

In response, Mr Steel asserts: “If the grown-up way is to ignore everything you said to get elected, why bother having an election campaign at all? For the televised debates at the next election, Clegg might as well bring in a guinea-pig, and when he’s asked about his plans for defence, he can ask David Dimbleby, “Would you like to stroke Oscar?”

Other possible campaigning choices listed in the article include “learning to play the piccolo or building a canoe” because “it’s like a junkie telling you how this time the £200 he wants off you really will be paid back on Thursday. The carefully costed details don’t determine your decision so much as how last week he robbed your kids’ teddies and sold them for £12″.


Read more...

Living near fracking sites increases infant birth defects – study

‘Although fracking already attracts controversy as an allegedly bio-hazardous industry, a new study takes it up a notch by showing that the practice can badly impact the health of unborn children.

Babies still in their mothers’ wombs living within a 10-mile range of fracking wells are in much greater danger of congenital heart defects (CHD) and neural tube defects (NTD). This was surmised in a recent study correlating birth data with geographical locations of gas wells and congenital conditions.

Hydraulic fracking is a process of fracturing rock with the use of pressurized liquid consisting of water, sand and chemicals. It drills deep underground, forming fractures that force gas and other chemicals to come out of rock and into the hole. Proponents believe it is a much more economical way of getting to the gas and oil. Environmental groups maintain the process can cause small earthquakes and badly contaminate water, leading to a myriad of problems.

The study, called “Birth Outcomes and Maternal Residential Proximity to Natural Gas Development in Rural Colorado” comes from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH) and Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), and explores three variations of birth defects, fetal growth and pre-term birth.’

Read more: Living near fracking sites increases infant birth defects – study

Ukraine and the Rebirth of Fascism in Europe

‘The violence on the streets of Ukraine is far more than an expression of popular anger against a government. Instead, it is merely the latest example of the rise of the most insidious form of fascism that Europe has seen since the fall of the Third Reich.

Recent months have seen regular protests by the Ukrainian political opposition and its supporters – protests ostensibly in response to Ukrainian President Yanukovich’s refusal to sign a trade agreement with the European Union that was seen by many political observers as the first step towards European integration. The protests remained largely peaceful until January 17th when protesters armed with clubs, helmets, and improvised bombs unleashed brutal violence on the police, storming government buildings, beating anyone suspected of pro-government sympathies, and generally wreaking havoc on the streets of Kiev. But who are these violent extremists and what is their ideology?’

Read more: Ukraine and the Rebirth of Fascism in Europe

Serco: Hidden Weaver of the Corporate Military Web

‘“All around the globe, our governments are busy outsourcing public-sector services like health, education, police, prisons, money delivery and military – to the esteemed private sector. It’s sold to the public as a solution to avoiding higher taxes, while retaining better services. But it’s simply an accountancy shell game, where the government kicks the can down the road by spreading the bill to the taxpayer over a longer period of time, in order to avoid any large upfront payments – all the while, allowing a private corporation to extend its influence over society. This, by definition, is fascism.

They are called SERCO, and they run countries…” source

So…let’s Muckety around Serco and see what we find…(gr8 tool!)’



Read more: Serco – Hidden Weaver of the Corporate Military Web

Tories drop from 1st place to last in council by-election

Reblogged from Pride's Purge:

(not satire - it's the Tories!)

A by-election was held for the Chadsmead ward of Lichfield District Council yesterday following the disqualification of Conservative Cllr Mike Fryers (for not attending any council meetings for six months!)

The Tories dropped to last place after their vote was split by a UKIP candidate:

Looks like this might be a good time for the Tories to start panicking.