Sunday, 9 March 2014

Don't bother asking IDS

You probably watched it.  That awful interview with Iain Duncan Smith on the Sunday Politics programme.  If so, your blood pressure might have settled down by now.
The producers had specifically asked for questions.  Of course, the majority were probably abusive and couldn't be used.  But plenty would not have been.  However, only one or two were used.  This was, as expected, more to do with Andrew Neil's questions.  It was too wide-ranging and there was no one on hand with the knowledge to challenge the torrent of lies and evasions.  Everybody is wrong except IDS.  The head of his church, Archbishop Nicholls, was wrong and should have called IDS before expressing an opinion.  I could go on, but what's the point?


  1. It reminded me of the CH4 interview with Emma Harrison "I do not recognise those numbers" they are wrong and I am right,deluded would be putting it mildly..My partner,who is sick and tired of my rantings of IDS even watched and her only comment was "What a To££er"

    1. Yeah, but at least that was funny.

      This is just a nightmare. This lying scheming capitalist maniac is the sword of damocles over our heads.

  2. Was there ever any doubt that it was going to turn out that way? I didn't watch it as I knew it would be the same old IDS spouting the same old stuff. He can spout his nonsense as much as he likes as far as I'm concerned. Ignorance is bliss. :D

  3. It wasn't as comically hopeless as I'd expected, but essentially, almost every assertion made by IDS was incorrect.

    There needs to be a hierarchy of IDS cobblers though - e.g. 'workless households increased under Labour' is a flat-out lie, whilst 'millions of people will be better off under Universal Credit' is true, but omits that millions will be worse off. As articulated by IDS, the claim that it only applies to single mothers (which is itself untrue) appeared to pass muster, which is peculiar, as I really had thought that the Tories had largely got over their single mother fixation a decade or so ago.

    The concluding part about child poverty was just a mess. There's a fair amount of evidence out there, but managing and understanding numerous variables makes its interpretation difficult. That doesn't bother IDS though - he's wants to mix causes, consequences, correlates and incredibly complex relationships into a more abstract measure that, above financial resources, blames the poor person for being poor.

    He's probably swimming with the tide here - recent BSA studies suggest that most people are kidding themselves that things like hard work, attitude and so on are the most important factors. In a country with exceptionally low and still decreasing social mobility, that seems less than persuasive, but if that's what the public thinks, IDS and the neoliberal agenda in general will always have an easy audience.

  4. The thing we would all like to see if IDS and Mcvey sat in front of an unmuzzled Paxman for a solid hour with Paxo blasting holes in their iceberg of deception until there are no lies or misinformation left for them to cling onto. Chloe Smith, I'm looking at you...

    Instead, IDS was allowed to pull his usual act... "I am right, morally and factually- all who dare challenge me are scroungers or in league with them."

    It's actually quite frightening how unflinching he is to criticism and how willing he is to spit venom at anyone who throws up a fact or opinion that might derail the rhetoric. The kid-gloves approach is perhaps not surprising though- there were a raft of articles over the weekend about how the Conservatives are considering downgrading BBC licence-fee-evasion from the criminal courts to the civil. This would mean no threat of jail or a criminal record for those who refuse to pay and the BBC estimate such a change in the law would increase non-payment massively.

    It's suggested in several of the articles, including the one below, that the Conservatives are considering this partly as revenge for the 'unjust and biased' way the BBC have covered several of their key policies... welfare reform being the biggest 'injustice.'

    Whatever you think of the licence fee, it's a pretty dirty move by the party 'For Hard Working People'

  5. My apologies- this is the correct article for my previous anon comment-

    It's been a long day

  6. It appears that IDS is losing touch with reality not that he had much to begin with. Remember when he said it didnt matter the facts he Believes it to be true therefore it is true..

  7. So as CH4 News reveals, the DWP sat on a 300 page report detailing the WP's continued failings:

    This from the Ch4 News site:

    "A survey of work programme providers makes horrible reading for the government. -
    It (the report) suggests that only 5.3 per cent think the work programme is “very effective.” Of those surveyed, 22.5 per cent thought it was “somewhat ineffective” and 25.4 per cent thought it “very ineffective.” 10.1 per cent thought it was “neither effective nor ineffective.”

    Thus it appears that just a little over 5% of WP providers have total faith in the program they're charged with delivering. An absolute disgrace!!!!!

    The very fact this report has been supressed for six months can only lead to the conclusion that the DWP is a rouge department.

    Smith needs to do three things. Explain why he has allowed a succession of failures and spouted downright lies under his tenureship. Publically apologise. Resign.

    1. Thanks for both posters about the latest WP scandal. I will be examining this later.
      iMatt, I love the idea of the DWP being a "rouge department". They should certainly be red-faced. But I think you meant "rogue".

    2. Ha! This is what happens when trying to type on a laptop keyboard late at night!


Keep it clean, please. No abusive comments will be approved, so don't indulge in insults. If you wish to contact me, post a comment beginning with "not for publication".