Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

campaign against welfare cuts and poverty

On Tuesday, the Tories refused to appear on what was for the BBC, a balanced discussion on benefits, etc on NewsNight. It featured a package about a guy who has worked all his life yet after being sanctioned is 'living' in what is basically a derelict flat. Will Hutton was visibly shaking with anger as he took the right wing commentator, Fraser Nelson, to task for his delusional support(he considers them beneficial!) for the changes. The right wing media and to an extent the broadcast media(including the BBC) has abdicated any responsibility for showing and recording the baleful effects of the welfare reforms and especially the considerable number of suicides that have occurred as a direct consequence of them.
 
Didn't see it.. but on that note, there's another load of incredible sanctions in this evidence put to Parliament by the Trussell Trust http://data.parliament.uk/writtenev...y-beyond-the-oakley-review/written/16465.html

1.4 Evidence from Trussell Trust foodbanks: Case studies


Trussell Trust foodbanks consistently report that more people are coming to them as a result of sanctioning, and that many of these sanctions appear to be unfair. We asked foodbanks to provide specific examples of this, a selection of which are listed here (see survey for more):


Client from Clay Cross Foodbank:


"Genuine mistake … I had two appointments booked in different places – work assessment and work capability assessment. I went to one and was immediately penalized for not attending the other. It is a Friday afternoon so I don’t know where else I can turn before the weekend.”


Suzanne, Renfrewshire foodbank:


Suzanne’s husband used to be a clinical nurse but suffered a nervous breakdown and couldn’t work, she was then made redundant whilst pregnant. They lost their house and car just before the baby was born.


Living on benefits with Suzanne caring for her children and her husband, her husband was then sent two dates for the same ESA appointment, so the family contacted the benefits office who told them to go to one and not the other. After attending the correct appointment and not attending the other, their benefits were sanctioned as he ‘hadn’t turned up’. They were reduced from £100 pw to £50 pw for their family of four. After 1.5 months, they had not had any contact about the status of their appeal or time frame for their sanction.


They had a 15 year old son and an 18month baby. They had also been hit by removal of the spare room subsidy, as they have 3 bedrooms (extra £40 to pay).


Suzanne’s mother had Parkinson’s, and Suzanne was her carer. She walked 4 miles every day to her house, which when she’d not had a meal in weeks was ‘exhausting’.


“I have gone without to feed my kids, and would go without again. It’s heartbreaking to open the kitchen cupboards and struggle to feed my boys. I never thought I’d be in this situation. I used to take people to foodbanks when I was a social worker. It is nice to have someone offering real help”


The couple appealed the sanction, and – after threatening legal action – the sanction was overturned and the payments backdated. The family had been through an incredibly difficult time and needed to use the foodbank whilst they appealed the decision. They lived on £50 per week for three months. It caused both parents to suffer high levels of stress and anxiety, and made simple tasks like paying for transport to take their son to school immensely difficult.


Further examples of sanctions from Renfrewshire Foodbank:


1. Gentleman who missed appointment due to being at hospital with his partner who had just had a still born child.

2. Gentleman who carried out 60 Jobsearches but missed one which matched his profile. Attention was given to that one and the other 60 ignored.

3. Young couple who had not received any letters regarding an appointment which was thus subsequently missed. Their address at DWP was wrongly recorded. They were left with no money for over a month.

4. Several cases of being a few minutes late due to bus delays. These people expressed to us how when they are on time they often are left waiting long periods before being dealt with. 5. Gentleman who had secured employment and due to start in three weeks. He was sanctioned in the interim period because JCP told him he was still duty bound to send CV to other companies. He was left without money for those 3 weeks.

6. Young man who was homeless and awaiting HGV driving documents told he had not done adequate Job search

7. Young man who only completed five searches when it should have been more. His words, 'It has totally broken my spirit'

8. Young man with learning difficulties wrote, 'My money keeps getting stopped for some reason and I don't know why'

9. Young man who secured employment but in the interim was sanctioned for not looking for work. The money he was denied prevented him from being able to pay travel to the job which he then lost. The system of sanctioning actually cost him the job instead of supporting him to maintain it.


York foodbank:

A gentleman had an appointment at the job centre on the Tuesday, was taken to hospital with a suspected heart attack that day, missed the appointment, sanctioned for 9 weeks.

Wokingham foodbank:

Mother of three in tears as she asked for food for her family. Sanctioned because she failed to attend an interview that the DWP had cancelled.

Durham Foodbank:

Sanctioned for failing to attend a course despite being there.

Sanctioned for failing to complete job search diary despite being present (confirmed by jobcentre) at jobcentre job search sessions.

Sanctioned for insufficient detail in job search reports - second JCP officer could see no problem with records.

Sanctioned for not applying for enough jobs online - library was limiting access to computers to 30 minutes a day due to cuts in their opening hours.


Cromer and District Foodbank:

A gentleman who requested permission to attend the funeral of his best friend; permission declined; sanctioned when he went anyway.

Two individuals in the past few months, both diabetics, sanctioned, unable to buy food - one became ill and sent by GP to hospital.

Two young men (unconnected) presented - both told of having no food because of sanctions; both were on treatment for mental health problems; both said their tablets had to be taken with food to be effective .....no food, no tablets ..... worsening mental health results.

Several sanctioned because allegedly had not sent in required forms - only to find after some weeks that they HAD been sent and received.

One man sanctioned for attending a job interview instead of Job Centre Plus - he eventually got the job so did not pursue grievance against the JCP.

Mid-Norfolk Foodbank:

One case where the claimants wife went into premature labour and had to go to hospital. This caused the claimant to miss an appointment. As we operate in a rural area claimants are reliant on buses which can be delayed. No leeway given.

Sparkhill Foodbank:

Examples: being ill; going to a funeral; childcare responsibilities - all of which they have let the Job Centre know in advance. A recent example: client being sent off for training but this coincides with their time/day to sign on so when client attends the training (after having confirmed with the JCP that this is ok), they are then sanctioned despite being told to attend training instead.

Farnsworth and Kearsley foodbank:

A more recent example is of someone who missed an appointment because he has learning difficulties and his advisor had written his appointments dates down in a random order instead of chronologically and he didn't realise.

Bridgend Foodbank:

A client recently told us that he failed to attend an interview as his father died in hospital that day...he was summoned to attend one week later...the day of his father's funeral. One week after that he was sanctioned for missing two appointments and was given a voucher to attend our Foodbank. He left saying "at least you people could see that my head was all over the place".

More in there too about general reasons rather than specific cases. Sparkhill is my local foodbank, and I have helped people sanctioned at sparkbrook JCP for shit like this, the place is so bad, by far and away the most common place for someone to come from when sanctioned.
 
http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...anifesto-why-are-disabled-people-afterthought

Decent piece by a colleague of mine on Labours disability mini-manifesto

It is decent, and representative of the views of disabled people I know.
The whole "support into work" schtick the author mentions has already been proven to be a big pot of scheisse under Labour, though (mostly Purnell's doing), so I have little hope that we'll see much more than what Labour offered back then, or the coalition have offered since - crappy make-work programs where you learn how to stack shelves, and the like. :(
 
Didn't see it.. but on that note, there's another load of incredible sanctions in this evidence put to Parliament by the Trussell Trust http://data.parliament.uk/writtenev...y-beyond-the-oakley-review/written/16465.html



More in there too about general reasons rather than specific cases. Sparkhill is my local foodbank, and I have helped people sanctioned at sparkbrook JCP for shit like this, the place is so bad, by far and away the most common place for someone to come from when sanctioned.
Renfrewshire is one of the food banks near me, I take food in as often as I can. It's heartbreaking that so many people are being sanctioned for stupid reasons that even a few years ago staff had discretion over. It's so depressing that there could be another five years of this shit.
 
Definitely will be another five years of this shit (would be under Labour too). I'm getting too far away from the benefits system to be use as advocate/advisor for the claimant's union, so thinking I'll start volunteering at my local foodbank.
 
one in five of claimant's deaths investigated by DWP linked to sanctions

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.co...related-deaths-involved-sanctions-admits-dwp/

Somewhat weak but only because they won't release full details of the 49 deaths they've secretly investigated, so we only know that 10 of them had been sanctioned at some point, but don't know if they died/killed themselves at the time or how deeply the sanction was connected to their death. Still pretty damning and another piece of evidence for IDS and rw idealogues to ignore.
 
Definitely will be another five years of this shit (would be under Labour too). I'm getting too far away from the benefits system to be use as advocate/advisor for the claimant's union, so thinking I'll start volunteering at my local foodbank.

Yeh me too, although I have a job and am training and have 2 kids so I'm not sure if it's possible for me.

I hate not being politically active. Is there anything else you do BigTom ? Blagsta and I went to predictably small depressing lefty meeting in town just after the election, think it was left unity, out of desperation.
 
Yeh me too, although I have a job and am training and have 2 kids so I'm not sure if it's possible for me.

I hate not being politically active. Is there anything else you do BigTom ? Blagsta and I went to predictably small depressing lefty meeting in town just after the election, think it was left unity, out of desperation.
Not really, Birmingham claimants union, iww rep (but not active in the branch), I've never cancelled my unite community union membership so I can still contribute financially to that.
Edit: I had fun with the local activist stuff but I'm not involved anymore, same reasons I dropped out of it after anti globalisation / Iraq war stuff, just got depressing and wanted to do more practical stuff
 
Last edited:
Not sure where to put this but this is very important!

Single mental/physical/general health condition Council refusing you help before or after you are made homeless? Judge say bollox!

http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2015/05/vulnerability-a-fresh-start/

Comments

This will take some time to consider and work through.

The change to the Pereira test is very significant and potentially far reaching. Certainly, council’s decisions on vulnerability will have to be detailed, considered and taking all of the applicant’s particular circumstances into account in a composite way.

The old shibboleths of ‘well, the homeless are depressed/take drugs/are at more risk of sexual or physical abuse/self harm/have suicidal ideations’ are out of the window. The use of statistics about the actually homeless is likewise of no relevance to a decision on vulnerability. The Johnson/Ajilore route for councils of finding the already vulnerable amongst the actually homeless as the comparator for the applicant’s vulnerability is at an end.

The simple question is ‘Is the applicant more vulnerable than an ordinary person if made homeless?’

No doubt elements of this definition will be headed to the Court of Appeal before too long.

On third party support, while there is a clear logic and indeed some precedent to Lady Hale’s dissenting view, the judgment makes clear that the simple assumption that an able bodied third party in a household able to offer support to the applicant will overcome the applicant’s vulnerability is not adequate.

What must be considered, in detail, is the likely consistency and duration of the support on the one hand, and the adequacy of the support to overcome the vulnerability on the other. Any decision that does not address these issues will fall short, and will also likely fall short on the public sector equality duty also, give the complementary relation to Part VII duties.

The findings on the Equality Act are not a surprise to anyone who followed the hearings, but the findings at paras 78 and 79 are a useful indicator that the PSED must be in the decision maker’s mind and there must be a proper focus on the applicant’s disability (or other protected characteristic).

There will no doubt be much more on these decisions to follow. It is, I think, the most significant homelessness decision in many years and one which may have an impact on treatment of the group hitherto most hard hit by homelessness decisions, the single homeless.
 
Lee Irving’s murder is a chilling reminder that disability hate crime is rising

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...urder-disability-hate-crime-increase#comments

What would be your explanation for the explosion (I make no apologies for using this word - the increase is staggering) in disability hate crime since 2010? I have been challenged and abused on at least 10 separate occasions now since 2011 for daring to have a blue badge, park in a disabled bay, and suffer from an invisible illness (multiple sclerosis). Incidents prior to 2011? Not one single solitary incident. The abuse consisted of calling me things like "scrounger", "sponger", "fake", "fraud", "skiver". What does this suggest to you in light of government rhetoric and inability to recognise disability beyond missing limbs, crutches and wheelchairs.

Perhaps it is you that needs to look at your oh-so-typical of the Right disingenuous nonsense. It really isn't helpful.




the rise of hate crimes coincide with the increase in 'benefit porn' shows, the rise in govt announcements about, something for nothing' scroungers' fraudsters', etc, this post on CIF makes it explicit along with the above its horrendous.

where is the 'UAF' or similar for such victims?

having said that, it was New Labour including Blunkett who first led the attacks on disabled claimants.
 
Don't treat unemployment as a mental problem - report
Unemployment is being "rebranded" by the government as a psychological disorder, a new study claims.

Those that do not exhibit a "positive" outlook must undergo "reprogramming" or face having their benefits cut, says the Wellcome Trust-backed report.

This can be "humiliating" for job seekers and does not help them find suitable work, the researchers say.

But the Department for Work and Pensions said there was no evidence to back up the "highly misleading" claims.

The paper, published in the Medical Humanities journal, says benefit claimants are being forced to take part in positive thinking courses in an effort to change their personalities.

They are bombarded with motivational text messages - such as "success is the only option", "we're getting there" and "smile at life" - and have to take part in "pointless" team-building exercises such as building towers out of paper clips, it adds.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33060794
 
of course, all fits in with the neo-liberal / liberal idea that unemployment is a failing of the individual, not a failing of capitalism (obv in capital's terms it's not a failing, but from our perspective / the view of unemployment as a failing, it is).
They should just put all this into the NHS mental health services, which would go towards tackling the mental health problems, and focus unemployment policy on the economic and structural factors... as far as the individual goes, it should be directed by the person in question and have access to proper training courses with funding directed by studies showing where there are skills shortages / planning for future government infrastructure projects. But then that might actually help tackle unemployment which wouldn't be useful when you're trying to drive wages/conditions down as far as possible.
 
I think u summed it up quite perfectly well - thats all the mess and circles around, but u really think putting it all up in the NHS mental health system would do a favour?
 
I think u summed it up quite perfectly well - thats all the mess and circles around, but u really think putting it all up in the NHS mental health system would do a favour?
The nhs mental health system is vastly underfunded and pretty shit, but I think the health service is the right place for mental health service provision to be, definitely not as part of unemployment services anyway. Where would you see provision of mh services best placed?
 
The Peoples Assembly mass event against Austerity In London hardly mentions,benefits, poverty, Rees and German showing their 'workerist' bias, again.

yes, many workers are in poverty, etc,
 
Back
Top Bottom