There's been plenty of coverage today of the welfare "reforms" which have kicked in - together with big cuts in legal aid and huge changes in the NHS. Get it all over with in one go, I suppose the government said. I caught the interview with Iain Duncan Smith on the Today programme where he was trapped into saying that he could live on £53 a week if he had to, inspiring a petition on change.org for him to do just that for a year. And there's just been a civilised discussion on the late news programme on Radio 4. Labour has coined its sound-bite - "the brutal society". And tomorrow Osborne intends to keep it going. The Independent says he's making a speech in which he will claim that "vested interests", including churches and charities, which have condemned the cuts are reacting with "depressingly predictable outrage" to necessary reforms. The government is confident that the public, or that section of it which has no personal experience of living on benefits, is on their side.
If anything good could possibly come out of this, it will be the beginning of a genuine debate about what we want the welfare state to be.
I hate to say this, but I doubt £53 a week would pay for a complete outfit for an MP, if totalled over the year, eg, £2400, would this buy his coat, shoes, suit, shirt, tie, umberella, suitcase, and pay for his London bus rates to work weekly, and then pay for his dinners at work weekly; and if not working well it would no way pay for much £16 a week would be council tax contribution and water rates, then £10 for bus to sign on and look for work weekly, leaving him £27 per week, then if he had to pay for heating, food, clothing, well £27 a week for a year is about £1300 say only spent £500 on clothes, shoes, etc a year left with £800 then this is about £16 a week left, to feed, and keep himself warm. What if he had an interview for a job, and he would need a haircut, perhaps a new shirt, new toiletries - ooops more than he has left,and then he will be robbing from next week, and it goes on and on, goodness help anyone if they want a pint or a cigarette or a mobile phone or an internet connection or television licence or even food - figures are not perfect but you get the idea, Britain is not a cheap place to live in at any time £53 I think is about the going rate for board for a dependent at home still!! relying on parents to foot the home, food, bills, etc with them CONTRIBUTING towards their keep Like they say, anyone can do it for a week - but a YEAR OR A LIFETIME
ReplyDeleteWell it wouldn't even pay for a Bullingdon club Uniform:
ReplyDelete"Bullingdon Club Dress
The 'uniform' of the Bullingdon Club for their annual Club dinner is a traditional tailcoat in Oxford blue with ivory coloured silk lapel revers, brass monogrammed buttons, a mustard waistcoat, and a sky blue bow tie. In addition there is a sky blue striped with ivory Club tie. The full uniform costs in the region of £3,000". Just as well then that IDS didn't go to Oxford (or any other university in spite of what he put on his CV).
The petition is now up to 121,374. Make it even more:
https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/iain-duncan-smith-iain-duncan-smith-to-live-on-53-a-week
Well at £71 pw I feel like a King(sic) House sitting still has costs £15pw heat $15pw Electric £10.86 Water Phone/Internet £5pw (seems like a luxury,but UJM requires it) £2.40pw Bus fare £1.00pw to save for a haircut every 10 weeks Toiletries £3.00 week....Leaves about £20.00 per week for food,so it is possible.Of course as interview costs are not covered any more,actually going for a position is made harder.
ReplyDeleteI've just read that the rules have been changed so that before you can appeal against a DWP decision for ESA, PIP, or the Universal Credit, the decision will have to be considered for a second time by the DWP.
ReplyDeleteThere is no time limit on how long this reconsideration can take. It could take a week, a month, a year, five years who knows.
So if the government passes regulations unlawfully and a citizen successfully challenges them in court it changes the law retrospectively. If a citizen challenges a state decision that decision is then sent back to the same department for a second time to be reconsidered for an undetermined time.
I hesitate to use the word "fascist" but I am running out of vocabulary to describe the people currently running Britain.
And now Gidiot is challenged:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.change.org/en-GB/suggested?petition_id=1070813
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22006841
ReplyDeleteInstead of apologising for his remark yesterday, he has added insult to injury by saying he has been on the breadline before and knows what it is like!
Also a completely unsurprising arrogant dismissal of the 250,000 signatures to the online petition which he described as a "complete stunt" - Eh???
Hmmmmm! "complete stunt"?....... Nearly correct.
ReplyDelete322,478 and counting.
It's attracted loads of publicity, which is great (yes, I've signed it) but since he's not actually going to do it, I suppose it is a stunt. A good one, though.
DeleteSeeing as the money MP's use on a regular basis basically comes from tax payers, has anyone ever considered making a FOI to see just what MP's spend their money on? In doing so, people will be able to see just how the other half live. I know that many MP's spend hundreds, if not thoudands, on taxis each month, so they don't have to sit on a bus or train with the average Joe every day (heaven forbid!!). Personally, I think MP's in this country live too much of a spoilt life and even more so at the expense of the tax payer. What those on benefits live on is probably just a fraction of what MP's live on.
ReplyDeleteThis nonsense about IDS living on £53 a week is just silly. We all know that it will never happen. It's a pointless excercise in futility. All it will surve to do is make more publicity about someone, which is not what the people need or want. I would have thought that polls or countdowns would have been better (and possibly more productive) that have to do with certain people's downfalls or of their certain policies. What is needed is morale for the masses, not fuel for the ones causing all this trouble.
MPs'expenses are published.
DeleteOh right, I didn't realise. Is that in response to the scandals from the past few years or has it been done for many years now?
DeleteThe new system following the scandals.
DeleteThe more I think about what this govt is trying to do the more I am drawn towards a comparison with Britain in 2013 under the Tories and 1930's Britain under a Tory dominated National Government. Baldwin had little sympathy for the unemployed and used the depressed economy to force through benefit cuts (such as they were in the 1930's). This created great hardship in depressed areas and was highlighted by influential writers such as George Orwell. This actually created much sympathy for the unemployed throughout middle-class Britain, in contrast with todays apathetic Britain.
ReplyDeleteArmed with this knowledge and experience the public voted Churchill and the Tories out of govt in 1945. The public simply did not believe they would enact the Beveridge Report, drawn up to tackle poverty and hardship and as a reward to the working-classes who endured a war they did not want (hence Chamberlains triumphant return from Munich in 1939).
How right they were. The Tories and the right-wing media want nothing more than the abolition of the Welfare State and ALL its components (including the NHS). This will drive Britain back into an inter-war type depression and severe poverty.
Their ultimate goal is to separate the poor from the state and throw them back onto the streets. The money saved will be divied up between the rich and big business.
This may sound ominous but it is already happening!!