Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

People stripped of benefits could be charged for challenging decision

Paulie Tandoori

shut it you egg!
i am quite frankly stunned speechless for the moment. but if people don't start taking to the streets soon, i will be amazed. this is the most outrageous attack, on any kind, on natural justice imaginable. charging people who are, by the state's own definition, in need, extra money to get the state to put their wrong decisions right. fuck that, that isn't a world i want to live in, tell them to stick it up their hairy arse and take some action.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/20/people-stripped-benefits-charged-decision
 
images


Us or them.
 
it was only this year that they cut legal aid for welfare benefits, whereby ~£20m a year was spent advising about 600,000 people for free, who were basically being denied assistance that was usually theirs. these people weren't scroungers or skivers, cos they don't need to come and see people like me to put things right. the people i see have chronic schizophrenia, or severe learning difficulties with partial right-side body paralysis, or fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis all over their body - all found fit for work, so basically have their money stopped and told to sign on for JSA?! i mean what the fuck? you're seriously telling me that these fucks are now going to charge these people when their fucking puppets assess them or interview them or shove them in a room on "work training" or try and shove them into unpaid employment. fuck off.
 
This truly seems like a sick sick joke, not only kick and deprive the most needy but charge them to complain about it!
Whoever thinks this a good idea in the slightest should be terminated on the spot.
Especially with the article stating:

Earlier this week figures showed that in the past year nearly 900,000 people have had their benefits stopped, the highest figure for any 12-month period since jobseeker's allowance was introduced in 1996. In recent months, however, 58% of those who wanted to overturn DWP sanction decisions in independent tribunals have been successful. Before 2010, the success rate of appeals was 20% or less.

My bold, their disgrace.
 
and if people can't afford to challenge the false decision, then these muppets will imply that they were not entitled, or in some way scrounging.
as in the false negatives of people stopping claims - because challenging wrong decisions is to stressful - makes it look like those people shouldn't have claimed in the first place.
 
Tories. They like to tax everyone except themselves. They're already charging for employment tribunals and about to start charging for collecting child maintenance payments too. Squeeze the poor, every last drip.
 
This is just Mail-wooing, isn't it?

In other words I think it's more likely flying a kite than a disgusted leak, eatmorecheese

I've just been looking at the proposals for curtailing Judicial Review - which I said at the time would never pass Judicial Review - and they've been reined in because they'll never work.

But with this one there's the risk of dozens or hundreds dying before the Supreme Court or the European Court of Human Rights says "fuck off, Dacre" :mad:
 
I agree it's unlikely to happen - though who the fuck would have imagined they'd be able to take money off you for having an 'extra' bedroom even 5 years ago.

I could see this being discussed not even in a sneery or vindictive way at the DWP. More likely to have been some technical, cold, 'rational', policy option. In other words a sign of where the centre of gravity for day to day anti-working class politics has shifted to. Filthy, filthy stuff.
 
Ah, this is building nicely:

The policy proposal leak comes as the prime minister and senior religious leaders clash over the benefits system. In a letter to the Daily Mirror, 27 Anglican bishops blamed David Cameron for creating a "national crisis" in which hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to survive on the charity of food banks because of "punitive sanctions" and other DWP failures. It followed similar criticisms from Vincent Nichols, the highest ranking Catholic in England and Wales, that the government was stripping away the welfare safety net – a charge dismissed as "an exaggeration" by Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/20/people-stripped-benefits-charged-decision

Look, Cameron: GOD says you're a stupid fucker. Quit now. Else, thunderbolts...
 
Tories. They like to tax everyone except themselves. They're already charging for employment tribunals and about to start charging for collecting child maintenance payments too. Squeeze the poor, every last drip.
yep, that's exactly what she just said when i was getting all het up about it. fuckers.
 
There is a recession. Therefore lets do everything we can to hang onto our wealth. Lets take it away from the country and hide it in our country estates. Fuck everyone and their cries for help. Murder isn't so bad. There are plenty of obstacles we can set up which make the innocent poor peoples blood flow.
 
This is just Mail-wooing, isn't it?

In other words I think it's more likely flying a kite than a disgusted leak, eatmorecheese

I've just been looking at the proposals for curtailing Judicial Review - which I said at the time would never pass Judicial Review - and they've been reined in because they'll never work.

But with this one there's the risk of dozens or hundreds dying before the Supreme Court or the European Court of Human Rights says "fuck off, Dacre" :mad:
yesterday's Mail headline was lurid enough. Certainly, it is voting season.
 
Human rights next...


In a clear attack on the Tories - who want to scrap the Human Rights Act - Keir Starmer said that "those who advocate the repeal or replacement of the Human Rights Act should think long and hard about the effect that would have on victims".

Speaking to law students Cardiff University, Mr Starmer – who was Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 to 2013 - said: “It is often thought that civil liberties and human rights are two sides of the same coin.

"They are not. Civil liberties protect the individual from the state by restricting the circumstances in which the state can interfere in the affairs of its citizens.

“Human rights, in contrast, not only protect the individual from the state but also oblige the state, in carefully defined circumstances, to take positive steps to protect its citizens.”
 
When I first read the above, being half asleep I took it as they would be prosecuted for challenging decisions, wouldn't put it past them, don't know what we can do, TUC is useless, BBC is spiked, left non existent/emasculated, etc.
 
Human rights next...

In a clear attack on the Tories - who want to scrap the Human Rights Act - Keir Starmer said that "those who advocate the repeal or replacement of the Human Rights Act should think long and hard about the effect that would have on victims".

Speaking to law students Cardiff University, Mr Starmer – who was Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 to 2013 - said: “It is often thought that civil liberties and human rights are two sides of the same coin.

"They are not. Civil liberties protect the individual from the state by restricting the circumstances in which the state can interfere in the affairs of its citizens.

“Human rights, in contrast, not only protect the individual from the state but also oblige the state, in carefully defined circumstances, to take positive steps to protect its citizens.”

Er, wasn't it the former leftist Starmer who on leaving his post gave advice that benefit 'fraudsters' should receive a max sentence of 10 years!
 
Back
Top Bottom