The Big Benefits Row

Or, 

The Mysterious Case of the Disappearing Disability Campaigners.

I'd been looking forward to seeing this debate ever since I'd first noticed it in Channel 5's schedule. They have managed, in the past, to produce programmes about the UK's minorities which were neither patronising nor sensationalist – in comparison to the tabloidesque offerings from some other television channels. I've seen a couple of pretty well-balanced debate programmes on Channel 5, too. So, as I said, I'd been looking forward to this debate and had tried but failed to find out how to get a place in the audience.

On the night, however, I checked the telly guide, spotted the dread name Katie Hopkins (right-wing, loud-mouthed, poor-hating, ex-Apprentice 'star') and, feeling somewhat under the weather, tired, and in pain, decided to go to bed instead. Now, I rather wish I'd watched it so will hunt it down on catch-up; but having read Sue Marsh's excellent article (see link) I'm rather glad that I couldn't find a way to get tickets. I'm a wheelie, too, and had I managed to get there, the building might have collapsed under the pressure of five entire wheelchairs, as you will understand, gentle reader, should you click on the link and, please, read on:

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-big-benefits-row.html

Ponies for All

“Ponies for all” could lead to a large-ish slump in forecourt petrol sales with knock-on effects on the oil industry but hay and stabling costs are pretty high. Current pony purchase prices range from second-hand-old-banger to mid-priced new family car, with a few in the super-car range, so the pony-sales economy would certainly enjoy a temporary stimulus. However, the vast majority of the ponies would have to come from overseas as there are only about 1.75 million horses and ponies in the UK and a large number of those are below working age. There are also costs to muck storage and disposal, 'though there should be an increase in the availability of manure-based composts and fertilisers.

Mind you, there would be an added stimulus in the cartwright, harness, vetinary and insurance industries. And riding schools, riding- and driving-instructors should see an upturn in business. In the short term, there would be an additional rise in ‘green jobs’ as bridleways and green-lanes are returned to service although introducing ‘pony-lanes’ to the roads might be a slight problem.

All in all, it should be a positive policy for the environment and the economy and I hope that a future Government will have the foresight to introduce this radical platform of measures.

Anyone who wants magic fairies can have them anyway: just close your eyes and say, “I believe in fairies, I believe in fairies,” etc.,

 Originally written and posted, by me, as a reply to comments on this blog at Liberal Conspiracy

P.S. 

I forgot to add in farriery as a trade that would see an upturn in business. They look after barefoot ponies as well as shod ones. 

I also forgot to mention that during the Second World War there was something of a renaissance in the use of horses and ponies for riding and driving - people keep comparing current economic conditions to those of WWII, so why not encourage a similar response now? ;)

Oh! And you might need to clap for the magic fairies thing to work...

xJ

Blame And Recrimination

Blame And Recrimination

(A Protest Song in a Reggae Style, inspired by Life, Aswad,  Benefits, Disabilities, Prejudice - and a new typeface called Syncopate, which doesn't copy over!)

*One-a, Two-a, Three-a*

(Nothing but) blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

They say no, no, we don’t wanna see you shirK

So pick up your broken body, take it to work

Nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

They say, you ain’t sick cause I seen you online

And that is the proof that you’re perfectly fine

They say no, no, we don’t wanna see you shirK

So pick up your broken body, take it to work

Nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

They say, I saw you went out on the town

Gonna report you so the judge sends you down

They say, you ain’t sick ‘cause I seen you online

and that is the proof that you’re perfectly fine

They say no, no, we don’t wanna see you shirK

So pick up your broken body, take it to work

Nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

But they don’t see how we crawl up the stair

The hour it took just to comb out our hair

How we don’t eat if there’s no-one to cook

The struggle to turn over the page of a book

That we need both hands just to pick up a glass

Have to ask for help to clean our own

Aah-ah-ah-aah,

Apparently the government gives us all a free car,

And electric wheelchairs and loads of money

The latest computer and a plasma TV

They send lots of people to do all our chores,

To cater every whim and to open doors

We take three holidays every year,

Expenses all paid, free wine and free running beer

And just to make sure that we never feel cold

They insulate our houses with 18carat gold! Hah!!!

Nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

Nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

Nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

No, nothing but blame and recrimination

On the disabled of our nation

Copyright (2011) vests in the writer here known as Rockhorse. The lyrics may be used for non-commercial purposes only but credit must always be given. For any other purpose, please request permission before use.

A Valentine's Gift to Current Welfare-To-Work Programme Contractors and Other Stories

Watching "Live Questions to The Work and Pensions Secretary and his Ministers" on BBC Parliament this afternoon I thought I heard Iain Duncan Smith say, in answer to a question from Dame Anne Begg MP, that the bidders for the new (future) Work Programme had been decided. In this I was mistaken as, according to Hansard, it was Chris Grayling speaking and he actually said that:

"...the Work programme bidding process closed this morning, and we have had a substantial number of bids, which is very encouraging. It looks as if the Work programme is going to go ahead according to plan, which is good news." (Question 18, Hansard: HoC 2.30pm 14.11.2011 )

Reading this relieved me of my belief that a decision had been made within hours of the bidding period closing; so, Good Times. Sort of. Since the new contracts for the new Work Programme were, I understood, due to start in April.

What shocked me was what he said next.

"I would also say to the hon. Lady that, shortly before the start of these parliamentary questions, I placed a written statement before the House, giving details of an extension to the welfare-to-work contracts under existing programmes through to next June." 

Shock and horror. That might sound dramatic (and might be so) but I know a few people who are currently making weekly or twice-weekly visits to the offices of at least two of the existing contractors. Those people are actually quite looking forward to the end of March, as the replacement contractors might actually have some idea how to help them find decent training or jobs. Or, indeed, any training or jobs...

And then there is the question of when, exactly, is 'next June'? I've tried but failed to find an online copy of the written statement so no help there. Is it 'the next June due' which would be this June, 2011. Or is it June 2012? I know not. But perhaps the existing staff will no longer be overheard on the telephone to employment agencies seeking new jobs for themselves. Or they'll go and be replaced by people who'll try harder to help those they are meant to be helping. It'd give me a break from a fair amount of the tear-drying, calming-down, making properly constructive suggestions and even setting up of interviews for training or work which I do for my friends and acquaintances. I don't mind doing it, when I have the spoons, but people and organizations are being paid vast sums of money for a "service" they appear incapable of providing. And they get their contracts extended...

In Other News

A great array of questions were asked of the Secretary and his Ministers regarding Work Capability Assessments, DLA, ESA, Universal Credit, the Mobility Component for people living in Residential Care Homes and Special Boarding Schools; all of which makes a full reading of today's report instructive and often jaw-dropping. 

In particular: during Topical Questions (at the end of the session's report) at "T:9" Atos rears its head:

"Yvonne Fovargue (Makerfield) (Lab): Recently, a constituent contacted me regarding his Atos Healthcare assessment. Three specialists had considered him to be unfit for work, yet it was suggested that he could be a bingo caller or a car park attendant. My local citizens advice bureau has identified many such cases which are resolved in favour of the claimant after an expensive review or appeal. Are there any plans to review Atos Healthcare’s delivery of medical assessments?"

Mr Grayling gave an answer but did not answer the question.

This did not surprise me.

Quotations are taken from the Hansard report on the proceedings in the House of Commons, Oral Questions, Work and Pensions at 2.30pm on Monday 14th February 2011 which can be read in full here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/01.htm

There are two pages and some of the questions do not relate to disability or sickness but all make interesting reading and there are some gems in there...

On Revolution

This post started as a quick reply to a contributor on a discussion board who, quite rightly, castigated another contributor for comparing the need for protest here with the situation of Algeria. Like I said, "a quick reply". It sort of got longer so I'm reposting it here (with a couple of minor corrections of spelling and grammar and a few additions which are italicised) because it poured from my heart...


You're correct in that the situation here does not compare to Algeria's current or recent experience. Our last official civil war was hundreds of years ago. But the oppression of vast swathes of the population continued and the struggles, protests and conflicts we've had since The Civil War have just never been officially called Civil War. But people died or were beaten and imprisoned and starved. Brother set against brother, sister against sister, parents, families, neighbours all divided and torn asunder.

Some rights and freedoms were granted 160 years ago because those in power here were terrified that we'd launch a revolution like the French were having just across The Channel  - it's only 26 miles to France by sea... we can see it on a clear day and the refugees and the instigators and the exiles all alike came here and told their stories. And some encouraged the (massive) underclasses here to rebel against the land- and factory- and mine-owners. And some warned the ruling class that they'd better make some improvements and quickly...

It is less than a hundred years since ALL men over the age of 21 were given the right to vote and women over the age of 30... women over 21 didn't get the vote until 1928. My grandparents and great-grandparents took part in the campaigns that helped achieve those rights. They, and then my parents, campaigned and marched and demonstrated for workers' rights. Life as a pacifist during the first and second world wars was hardly a stroll in the park! Then for a proper National Health Service and welfare system. I was taken as a babe-in-arms and then in a push-chair to protest against nuclear weapons and have since joined campaigns and marches against erosions of civil liberties and against wars and discrimination and racism and religious intolerance and so many other wrongs and short-sighted government policies.

We have laws now on equal rights and equal pay but there is still inequality and discrimination. And we see the things that were fought for in our own lifetimes, even very recently, being eroded, smashed, removed. We are being set one-against-the-other, yet again, to try to protect the things that make this country civilised, a safe and secure place to live.

A government 30 years ago took away many of our rights to protest, to congregate! We got those rights back - watered down but back. The freedoms our forebears risked their lives for still have to be protected and fought for again and again and again. Many of the assets and institutions that had been created through struggle were dismantled, sold off, industries decimated, jobs lost. Some few, through struggle and a change of political colour and policy, were revived but most? Lost. Seemingly forever. Many, many people thrown on the scrapheap remained there. Their scrapheap was cushioned, slightly; but many continued to argue, to protest to campaign whether for themselves or for their compatriots.

This continuing struggle for fair and equal treatment and opportunity is why so many of us support and hope for the peoples of Algeria, of Egypt, of Palestine, of Russia yesterday, of everywhere that people are standing up and saying, "WE matter. WE have a right to freedom. WE have a right to self-determination."

We don't know what it's like to live under a "State of Emergency" for thirty years. Under curfews, martial law etc., But we DO know that freedoms and rights won ALWAYS have then to be defended against encroachment. Always have to be protected against those who rise to power. Because even freely-elected representatives of the people STILL lose touch with the 'ordinary' lives and experience of the people they're supposed to represent. ALL the people. Not just their friends. Or people 'like them'.

And because the peoples of so many countries are standing up against MUCH more oppression than we feel, it gives us the strength and the will to remember that it is only when we unite, rather than fracture over save-the-NHS vs. protect the pensions of disabled people vs. save-the-libraries vs. no-university-tuition-fee-rises vs. everything else that is currently being 'reformed' and cut in such heedless, mindless haste, that we will TRULY succeed in saving or rescuing ANY of them.

Peace.

Edits to correct MORE 'misspronts' - blame the medication ;-)

The Long Answer

A comment on a social network site set me thinking. My response threatened, as so often, to turn into an essay so I hurriedly edited it down to a short answer and popped over here to inflict the long answer on my long-suffering readership. Ok, this is only my third post so you’re not literally ‘long-suffering’ (unless you know me personally) but stick around kids... ;-) Here goes:

“...I do not believe this govt can last much longer. They do not have a mandate to do all they are doing. At some point surely the majority of the Lib Dems will have to break away?...”

Oh I do most sincerely hope so! But, from what I see, the LibDems (the Parliamentary bit of the Party) seem to have wedged into their heads the idea that they DO have a mandate because "the country wanted more consensus politics" and that a coalition is exactly what we wanted because we didn't give either main party a clear majority. I don’t remember having the option to vote for “a coalition”, let alone define which parties would form one.

I must have missed the mass public meetings where we-the-voters all got together and worked out how to vote tactically across, what, 650 plus constituencies to ensure that there was no clear majority in the House of Commons. It could have been a secret meeting to which I was not invited :-( So, in spite of the chunterings* of pundits, when I placed my vote it was for the person and party wanted and I fondly hoped that most of the rest of the UK would vote the way I did. (Not for the same person, of course; that way lies dictatorship...)  

They don’t seem to have given any thought to the fact that perhaps there was an even more secret meeting of the electorate at which it was decided that a minority Conservative Government was just the ticket. Properly strong opposition leading to consensus, perhaps? Thus by entering into a coalition they’ve actually upset everyone.           

I think that what a lot of us meant by ‘consensus politics’ was more along the lines of having almost everything decided by free votes rather than under one, two or three line whips. Maybe, say, spending longer debating issues in order to come to a greater understanding and consensus. It would slow down the pace of legislative change but that would not necessarily be a bad thing. Add in ‘all Public Consultations to be widely and fully publicised and then opened for an absolute minimum of thirteen weeks’ so that the we-the-public felt that we were a part of the debate more often than once in a blue moon! Look them up, blue moons, they’re more frequent than you might think... Certainly more frequent than general elections.

Some LibDems probably still fondly imagine that they're preventing, or can prevent, “the worst excesses” of “pure Tory policies”. Most must surely know that if they cause a fresh General Election they'll (a) lose their seats or (b) retain them but lose the trust of the Conservatives and have to work pretty damned hard to regain much trust from Labour.

So, it’s too early to bail out yet. ‘Have to give things a fair chance’. ‘It’s early days yet’. ‘We’re working hard to push our agenda through’. Et cetera. That’ll probably prevail for another fifteen months. Then they can start having ‘some cause for concern’ about ‘the direction our coalition partners are moving in’ before changing it to ‘stance . . . are taking’ later in that year. Before we know it, there’ll be less than two years before the Fixed Term is up and moving to an early election would involve votes of no confidence and untold/unspoken threats to the ‘green shoots of economic recovery’ so better to ‘see it through’ and hope.

Of course, two and a half years from now there might just really be some green shoots for some sectors of the economy and/or the population. By three-and-a-half years into this Parliament an economic boom/bubble might have got underway by some miracle or sleight of hand - again, for some business sectors and selected parts of the population. And they’ll be on such a high that they wo’n’t notice the people who got left behind and will happily vote the Conservatives back in as long as the election happens before the bubble bursts. (Loadsamoney, anyone?)

The LibDems? Ah, well. They were very much the junior partners in the coalition, weren’t they? No real major policies. Bit of tinkering around the edges. Some of it was quite good. Some of them are all right, the ones who didn’t defect. Or implode. Or get erased when the boundaries were redrawn. Or get kicked ‘upstairs’**.

If, though, we’re still in recession/stagflation/depression then, barring a sea-change/coup in the LibDem Party as a whole, they’ve probably had it anyway.

So, unless Cameron, Osborne et al., Inc., steam-roll something though that shocks the Parliamentary Liberal Democrats to their very cores (and I find it hard to imagine quite what that might be) I’m sorry to say that I think we’re stuck for the next four-and-a-quarter years. Not what I’d wish for. Not what I voted for. But my preferred candidate came second. And my party came second but ended up third... Hope they’re ready for next time!

* * * * * * * *

* this can’t be the correct word but it’s the one my brain instructed my fingers to type and I can’t think for the life of me what word it was I was hoping for***...

** or wherever you get kicked ‘up’ to when you’d decided that it was a good idea to rush things through so that a fully elected second chamber would take the place of the House of Lords at the 2015 election...

*** I am ‘enjoying’ some interesting side-effects from a medication which has recently been released into the wild (been approved for a new use). Combined with existing meds it’s, um, very interesting and sometimes highly amusing. To me. Some of the effects are on very short-term memory and co-ordination, such that what I intend is often not what comes out. ‘Neckst’ for ‘next’ is a particular favourite. Proof-reading and correcting this has taken a number of attempts interspersed with randomly falling (‘fawlign’!) asleep - or getting totally distracted - on top of my usual needing to rest, move around, re-groddle my joints etc., But, yay, I finished it!

A Modest Proposal: Walking a mile in disabling shoes.

This is what I hope will be the first of many blogs. I'm launching it today in support of the One Month Before Heartbreak blogswarm.

A Modest Proposal: Walking a mile in disabling shoes.

The current government are keen to reduce spending on certain allowances and benefits, the current qualification for which depends upon the claimant having impairments, disabilities, diseases or conditions of such seriousness that they are prevented from leading a “normal” life. They must face considerable challenges in such areas as washing, dressing, eating, cooking, walking, working or taking part in “everyday social activities”. If you have a temporary back-ache or a bad day/week/month at work you would certainly NOT be able to get “free money” from The State.

If you are unfortunate enough to have a seriously limiting physical and/or mental condition you are expected to complete a series of extensive, in-depth forms and provide copious amounts of evidence (from doctors, specialists, physiotherapists, counsellors, carers and/or those who provide you with physical assistance) to support your claim. You are also, in most cases,  required to attend a face-to-face “independent assessment” with an approved assessor who may or may not have any understanding of the condition which causes you problems. All these forms, the evidence you’ve provided, the evidence your own medical practioners have provided and the assessor’s conclusion then go to a “Decision Maker” who decides whether or not you fit into their interpretations of the statutory guidelines. Then you’re told whether or not you can receive payments, at what level and for how long.

If you are turned down and feel you have a strong enough case (and have the energy to fight another battle), you can then launch into the appeals process. Most people win their appeals, if they have professional representation from, for example, the Citizens’ Advice Bureau.

So, as I said at the top, this government are taking steps to increase the qualifying criteria for all benefits in respect of long-term sickness or disability. They are also planning to abolish some allowances (DLA, ILF) and replace them them with one named (Personal Independence Payments) and (perhaps) one as yet un-named allowance. I honestly don’t think that the majority of MPs are anywhere near qualified to tinker around with these things, so I’ve got a suggestion to make.

For the next year every MP, Minister and Government Advisor should be fitted with equipment which mimics the effects of a disabling condition.

One day in the next couple of weeks they should all turn up at Westminster to be issued with their disability at random. The equipment exists. I’ve seen it used in programmes on television and in films. Splints which restrict movement in particular limbs to mimic the effect of physical impairments. Special glasses to replicate various sight impairments. Ear-plugs or intentionally-badly-adjusted hearing aids for hearing impairments. Thick gloves would cover loss of sensation or dexterity. All sorts of clever tricks! Electric shock generators set to random to give a hint of how some conditions plague suffers with pain. I don’t think that there’s anything which would safely replicate the “like a cold ice-pick” or “like a red-hot knitting needle” or “a burning, tearing sensation” that some musculo-skeletal or nerve-pressure conditions treat us to. We could just use ice-picks and knitting needles... perhaps better not! And I’m not sure how you’d replicate amnesia or lack of reasoning capability. (Pick your own joke here ;-))

The rules of the “game” would also include: no simply paying someone out of your generous public salary and expenses or your private wealth to carry things, cook for you, dress you, help you move around, drive, read, write or any other “normal everyday activity”. They only get to keep a free travel-pass if they qualify for a Local Authority one already for reasons of age or existing disability. And no cheating!

If they feel their “disability” limits their mobility so much that they need a wheelchair, white-stick, walking aid, special software etc., they should check the criteria for getting a Local Health Authority issue one or aids or adaptions courtesy of the Local Authority. Then, if they find they wouldn’t qualify or would have to wait too long for the assessment, buy (or hire) a suitable equipment out of their salary which could then be returned, sold or donated at the end of their participation.

When it all gets a bit too much for them they can ask for exemption, for which they qualify by: filling in the application forms for ESA, DLA, Access to Work and also being checking to see whether their “disability” would qualify them for any support according to the rules of their local authority. They would be given the forms to fill in there and then. A random small proportion of them would be given a copy of one of the free guides published by CAB, DIAL or other relevent advice organisation but not the detailed guides that HMSO publish. They are excused from attempting to claim Independent Living Fund support because that’s been closed to new claimants since June this year.

The decisions to grant or deny their claims should be made by DWP staff in training or competency testing. I’m sure they do competency testing... don’t they? If I could make our elected representatives carry out this experiment while living entirely on randomly assigned wage levels (including minimum wage or Jobseekers Allowance) in ratios proportionate to the sources of income of the general public then I would but that would be really wandering into a dream world!

I wonder how they’d feel about abolishing benefits and allowances or restricting their availability once they had some experience of attempting to walk a mile in disabling shoes?