Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

campaign against welfare cuts and poverty

This whole area of how working class people are treated is an absolute scandal and I think does need to be taken up with links made with other areas of campaiging.

It would be good to hear more stories on this both the vicious reality and stories of effective collective resistance.
 
More from hardman Hain on Thursday when he (again)outlines the Gov't strategy on welfare, what we are seeing is is ultimately about the end of a rights based welfare system in the UK. He has got DWP research to back him up, apparently nearly 41% of the British public believe there is "very little" child poverty in Britain, and that 'a strong feeling emerges that the poor have themselves to blame.' This is not surprising considering that we have so many stories about 'benefit scroungers', etc and of course the relentless benefit fraud adverts/campaigns. It stinks, yet as i have said many times, from progressives there is silence, red pepper magazine for instance has never covered the issue once.

Research shows 41% of people believe there is very little child poverty

· Findings underline challenge for ministers
· Government faces struggle to meet targets

Patrick Wintour, political editor
Tuesday December 11, 2007
The Guardian

Nearly 41% of the British public believe there is "very little" child poverty in Britain, research undertaken for the Department for Work and Pensions shows, in contradiction of official statistics which suggest more than 3 million children are in poverty. The unpublished research suggests about 52% of people think there is quite a lot of poverty.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,2225496,00.html
 
So, what to do?

* Set up claimants unions to try to show the strength of feeling against the changes with demos, protests etc
* Use this to try to influence civil servants to refuse to implement the changes
* Demand quality training and socially useful job paid for by increasing taxes on the rich
 
of course, good ideas, but the momentum isn't there, have a look in your union journal and see if there is any mentions of all this, plenty in the bosses journals, human resourses journals, etc.


this is going to be a very long sticky...
 
Tories announce their plans for welfare reform, its not the US Winsonsin model, but its pretty brutal, every person claiming IB would be subject to interview by private companies(paid by results!) and if found able to work, kicked off IB and lose 30.00 a week Imo, this is the benefit integrity project writ large, this was massively contreversial in 1997 , why not now, why the change?


Cameron plans benefit system reform

Press Association
Sunday January 6, 2008 1:38 PM

Conservative plans to subject all Incapacity Benefit (IB) claimants to an assessment to see if they really are unfit for work have came under fire from disability groups.

The Tories say that as many as 200,000 people could immediately be moved off sickness benefit and into work, while others could be given personalised support to help them find jobs.

Labour dismissed the proposals as "spin", and accused Conservative leader David Cameron of simply copying policies announced by the Government before Christmas. But Tories insisted that their package would be more radical and effective because it will cover all 2.6 million existing IB claimants in the UK. The Government's plans initially target only new claims.

Under the plans outlined by Mr Cameron, all existing and new IB claimants in the UK would have to attend an "in-depth assessment" to decide if they are able to work. Those deemed fit to work would be taken off the £81-a-week IB and put onto Jobseekers' Allowance, with a £20 cut in benefits and a requirement to seek work immediately.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,,-7202665,00.html
 
treelover said:
Tories announce their plans for welfare reform, its not the US Winsonsin model, but its pretty brutal, every person claiming IB would be subject to interview by private companies(paid by results!) and if found able to work, kicked off IB and lose 30.00 a week Imo, this is the benefit integrity project writ large, this was massively contreversial in 1997 , why not now, why the change?


Heated thread about this in General.
 
Would people on here like to help fund/donate towards a national conference on the issues, it won't happen without funding, hire of venue, etc,


pm if you like..
 
Share concern

I too am particularly concerned at some of the fascist rhetoric and criminalisitic allegory emerging from both Labour and the Tories surrounding the welfare state, the unemployed, the sick and disabled and the poorest and most vulnerable in society. "Three strikes and your out" and so forth.

It seems as if we are now well and truly entering an era where policies whose potential impart is, in terms of it's potential effects, a form of heartless economic eugenics; publicly promoted even by leftist media and even worse, virtually unchallenged publicly. These policies are also being marketed as socially acceptable, reasonable and civilised in that time honoured 'bureacracy of evil' way that the establishment and civil service mandarins have mastered over centuries the world ore.

It reminds me a little of how the Nazis tried to wipe out myriad numbers of sick and disabled citizens, with the active consent of society, the medical profession and often even carers and family. How a society treats its most vulnerable citizens is a key yardstick and moral compass about the health and direction of that society. Any attacks against them need to be opposed swiftly and decisively. It should be treated as a serious warning sign. With no money to feed themselves, the permanent removal of benefits (that already fail to adequately reflect the true costs of living) from people if they decline to yield to pressure to apply or take jobs that they are not able to undertake, is in essence also a death sentence.

Insidious targets and profit incenctives for doctors and corporate personal development flunkies to do whatever it takes to reduce claimant numbers, while lining their own pockets in the process. A government able to play the innocent and wash their hands and claim that everything is above board and there has been fair and due process by "independent" organisations. What is so fair and civilised about that?

I am hearing shocking stories from a number of quarters from people, some of them quite seriously ill, being ejected from incapacity benefit and then facing a cruel and barbaric fight on their hand to overturn these decisions. It is fascinating to observe the hoops that the disabled and incapicitated are being made to jump through to obtain a relative pittance, compared to the champagne swigging ease in which countless billions are thrown at the mega-rich in state welfare in the form of corporate grants, tax cuts and concesions etc.

The withdrawal of housing, state support, medical care and already meagre benefit payments from refugees whose asylum applications have been turned down, is but yet another example of this.

It seems to me to be the philosophy of Scrooge being enshrined in global geopolitics - "decrease the surplus population".

Were Dickens writing today, Scrooges retort about relief and charity for the poor - "are there not workhouses?" - might well indeed be "are there not public private partnership organisations?".

I applaud these moves to set up some sort of union for disability claimants. It is essential that claimaints organise and unite and are assisted in that process.
 
Good post, one of the new proposals is to integrate disabled people into the normal welfare system, to some that is admirable, but think on, there would be no specialist disability advisers for claimants and they would then be subject to all the rigour of the New Deal, queing up at the job centre, etc. So what happens when a disabled claimant fall over, wets themseoves, has amajor panic attack, etc, barbarism, I see many court cases ahead.

http://www.disabilityalliance.org/help2.htm
 
So what happens when a disabled claimant fall over, wets themseoves, has amajor panic attack, etc, barbarism, I see many court cases ahead.


Not one JobCentre Plus where I live complies with a Disabiliy Access and Facilities Audit. (none of them even have customer toilets.)
 
Not one JobCentre Plus where I live complies with a Disabiliy Access and Facilities Audit. (none of them even have customer toilets.)


Do any job centres have toilets for that matter? It wasn't a JCP but before it was just the DSS office I had to take a kid who had shat himself with diaorreah running down his leg out into the street because they wouldn't let us use their staff loos.

Basically they think everyone's a junkie who's gonna shoot up - there were loads of pregnant mums and OAPs who might have really been in need of a loo there (especially given the waiting times)
 
Typical Govt behaviour make cock-ups then take it out on the poorest in society, as they have no direct access to the media so can't be media darlings.
 
Unemployed tenants in city won’t face eviction

Unemployed tenants in city won’t face eviction

by Gordon Thomson
JOBLESS tenants in Glasgow won't face being evicted from their homes under a controversial scheme.
The Scottish Government has condemned the idea which came from Caroline Flint, the Westminster Government's new Housing Minister.
She wants to evict jobless council and social housing tenants who make no attempt to find work...

"Stewart Maxwell, Scotland's Communities Minister who has responsibility for housing, said: "Scotland controls its own housing policies and we have no intention of copying the UK government's headline-grabbing, draconian approach."


(story continue below).

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...ployed_tenants_in_city_wont_face_eviction.php
 
a good summary of the welfare reforms here, though I reckon paulie t will be able to fillet it a bit!

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/02/391945.html
i've been busy with things but i wouldn't add much to your summary, it covers things pretty well i reckon. cheers :)

there's so much detail as well as so much bluster that its sometimes difficult to keep up with it all tbf. someone i spoke to this week reckons its a deliberate tactic to just exhaust people. purnell admitted this week that introduction of ESA is primarily about getting people off IB rather than into work i.e cutting the benefits bill simply, as well as denying that himself or the government used pejorative terms towards claimants. its classic iron fist in velvet glove bullshit basically. they're introducing workfare by not calling it workfare and denying that it is workfare, even tho it is workfare essenttially.
 
One of the things the labour left and the disability groups is asking is for people to get behind John McDonnell's EDM, 'attack poverty, not the poor' (see thread) and publicise it and lobby M.P's, there wasn't much we could do for a while, but now there is this and there is a Trades Council Motion which could be adapted.


btw, Paulie, praise indeed,


phew!...;)
 
PT, do you have a source for that?


'purnell admitted this week that introduction of ESA is primarily about getting people off IB rather than into work i.e cutting the benefits bill simply'
 
This

As Kevin Maguire noted in the Daily Mirror, all parties seem to be presenting ever harsher reforms with a seemingly endless 'race to the bottom'. The new ambitious Works and Pensions Secretary, James Purnell will certainly push through with zeal even the harshest of reforms. All these proposals seem rushed and ill thought out, never mind the sheer nastiness and invasiveness of the US style 'blame the poor' nature of them. Indeed, a whole new ‘welfare industry’ is being created on the strength of 13 weeks research! Of course, it won’t end there: there is also talk of tagging of certain disabled groups which would clearly have an effect on their benefits and plans for ending specialist disability employment services. Much of the ideology behind these reforms is based on the neo-liberal notion of the 'active citizen' which is sweeping the world. Only by working or training or studying can a person be 'good' but what about those who just cannot work?
 
Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, has stated he would like all IB to be abolished completely.

And replaced with what? quietly bung them onto income support? or have people starving on the street?

Btw Why demonise incapacity benefit and not income support? People have actually had to pay in to claim IB as I understand it. :confused:The mantra of 'WORK WORK WORK! I work why should I pay for YOU!' doesn't quite fit when they're demonising claimants of a benefit who have had to pay NI contributions in order to qualify.
 
PT, do you have a source for that?


'purnell admitted this week that introduction of ESA is primarily about getting people off IB rather than into work i.e cutting the benefits bill simply'
i'm afraid not. his speech is on the SMF website but the questions weren't. there was a FT journo there who i hoped would report it but i haven't seen nowt to date. hence, its useful to know that what we always thought was the case but we need to continue to concentrate on arguing the demonstrable facts for now, however frustrating that may seem.
 
In case anybody's interested:
In the last decade the government has done everything it can to make it difficult to get benefits.

If you are denied benefits it's easy to find yourself facing homelessness and debt, with no help from local councils who'd rather we just disappeared altogether.

At the same time, the media pumps out stories about “dole scroungers” and “layabouts”, suggesting that benefit claimants are lazy and just can’t be bothered to work.

If you've ever been on benefits, you know what we’re talking about.
  • The Job Centre and local council produce forms that are too complicated.
  • They send you on pointless courses that do little to help you find work.
  • They make you apply for unsuitable jobs.
  • They send you for degrading medical tests.
  • They harass you at every turn.

Merseyside Claimants Action Group is an organisation of benefit claimants and supporters. We act to defend ourselves and others on benefits who have been failed by the normal appeal process.

If you’ve had trouble getting the benefits you’re entitled to, or you’d like to get involved, get in touch. Write to Merseyside Claimants Action Group, Next to Nowhere, 96 Bold Street, Liverpool, L1 4HY or e-mail merseyclaimants[at]yahoo.co.uk
We haven't got a website together yet, that'll come later, once we're functioning properly as a local group.
 
Hopefully, we may see more of this





352364.jpg
 
Good article about the cuts in this week's New Statesman:

The government's declared mission is to "liberate" claimants, to bring them into its "reformed, coherent welfare state for the 21st century". It seeks to overturn a culture based on the "medical model" of illness that allows them to "drift" on to long-term benefits without realising that "symptoms, feeling unwell, sickness and incapacity are not the same" - hence the appeal of cognitive behavioural therapy, which it understands as a treatment that will talk the sick into believing they can lead normal lives.

Doctors - so often the refuge of desperate people trying to find out what is wrong with them - should as far as possible be excluded from the process. Even those working for the DWP have opinions that are "unfounded, of limited value and counter-productive", while GPs are "unaware of the importance of work, the absence of which leads to depression, poor health, higher rates of suicide and mortality, poverty, and social exclusion". (The quotations are from a 2005 study from the Unum Provident Centre for Psychosocial and Disability Research at Cardiff University, whose ideas and rhetoric infuse the reform. Unum Provident is an American firm, the largest disability insurance company in the world, which is currently in litigation in different countries for refusing to pay out on some of its policies.) A private agency has now taken over the running of its first GP surgery here, and doctors dealing with disability living allowance are advised not to invite patients to explain how their condition affects them.

Features of the reform are familiar from other policy areas. First, a demonisation of a needy or vulnerable group, followed by a rebranding: so claimants become not even "clients" but "customers" (as in the just published "Commissioning Strategy" document); incapacity benefit becomes employment and support allowance; sick notes are redrafted for doctors to certify, not what patients can't but what they can do. Next come "partnerships", on an unchallenged assumption that the public sector has failed. The new system is farmed out to for-profit or non-profit-making agencies paid by results. This entails targets, and where targets are set, sanctions follow, for any who "fail to recover".

Full article: Is Labour abolishing illness?
 
Back
Top Bottom