After all his embarassing key rattling to get Tony Blair out of No.10, I was not surprised by GB's reluctance to quit it. I imagined him squatting like a large warty toad on the bottom stair while poor Sarah Brown wrung her hands and begged him for permission to pack. Well, now she can.
Fact. Our electoral system is broken, and needs reform and updating at the very least so people who want to vote can do so and are not denied it because their polling station can't cope with the numbers. My polling station, by the way was an oversized garden shed in a pub car park - at the most it would hold about 10 people apart from the two officials.
Fact. Labour got fewer seats and a lower share of the national vote
Fact. Nick Clegg said all through his campaign that he would follow the will of the British peoplle in the event of a hung Parliament. So, why is he looking like reneging on that promise?
This is not the result I would personally have wanted, but it is a far better prospect than another 5 years of Labour, regardless of who is at the helm. Whatever David Cameron continues to insist, is Conservative policy, I believe that many of the more progressive grassroots members of his party now see electoral reform as an inevitable and necessary procedure because the British people as a whole want it.
Over the weekend, the money markets were on tiptoe, waiting to see what happened in those meetings between the Lib-Dems and the Conservatives. If GB had shown any signs of doing a deal with Nick Clegg, I think they would have reacted very badly.
As I write, David Cameron has upped the stakes, promising a referendum on electoral reform, albeit in a rather watered down form. What will happen tomorrow - I really don't know.
Showing posts with label Gordon Brown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gordon Brown. Show all posts
Monday, May 10, 2010
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Never mind the b******* Gordon
One way and another, the media has played a far bigger part in this General Election campaign than any other in British history. Today's huge gaffe by Gordon Brown, calling Gillian Duffy, a lifelong Labour voter from Rochdale, Lancashire 'a bigoted woman' has the potential to totally destroy Labour's slim chances of winning on May 6th.
Mr Brown has not done well in the two leaders' debates to date. He has been notably the one leader who has argued, interrupted and tried to cut across the other two party leaders, and then called them bickering children. He has consistently said that this election is about substance and policies, not style, then comes today's outburst, not to mention previous accusations of bullying by Number 10 staff.
The Labour party have reportedly been responsible for leaflets being issued, telling the most outrageous lies about supposed policies that appear nowhere in either Conservative or Liberal Democrat manifestoes.
Only this week, Mr Brown said on a BBC Radio 4 programme that both the other parties planned to cut child tax credits as if this was a policy directed at the poorest in our society. I can find no reference to removing this benefit totally.
With regard to benefits, I would like to hear something very specific from Mr Clegg. The Labour party were at one time working with the mental health charity Mind, to improve the process by which people with mental health issues apply for E.S.A., the benefit that is gradually replacing Incapacity Benefit. Recently they have come out with a new application form which is even LESS likely to result in someone with depression or anxiety being granted benefit, and MORE likely to start a very expensive and long-winded appeals process. The Conservatives think that work is a cure for such ailments and intend to put everyone back on Job Seekers Allowance. See this link for Mind's reaction to the planned changes.
Mr Clegg, to finally win my vote for the Liberal Democrats, please tell me that you are going to scrap the Government quango ATOS and return the decision of whether or not a person is fit to work to the NHS staff like GP's and mental health professionals who you are already paying to determine the appropriate diagnosis and the appropriate treatment. By doing so, and granting benefit to claimants on the basis of a written agreement that they are unfit to work, you will cut the work of tribunal staff and save claimants months of stress and worry which is hardly good for their condition in the first place.
My GP referred to ATOS original decision that I was fit to work as 'talking out of their backsides' - except she replaced 'backside' with a word beginning with 'a'. The eventual outcome appears in previous posts.
Mr Brown's indiscretion today will be a very clear warning to all other candidates of all colours that they are being watched 24/7 by all forms of media, and that bad news spreads virally via Twitter, Facebook and other social media. However, what is more worrying is that Mr Brown's attitude that anyone with the view that immigration should be cut, is bigoted. What I would expect that to mean after the election is that immigration issues will be shuffled under the carpet and talked down as less important than other issues on the agenda of a new Government if Labour have any part in it. Actually, Mr Brown it isn't less important, and I don't think I need to elucidate why.
BBC Report on 'the Rochdale incident'.
Mr Brown has not done well in the two leaders' debates to date. He has been notably the one leader who has argued, interrupted and tried to cut across the other two party leaders, and then called them bickering children. He has consistently said that this election is about substance and policies, not style, then comes today's outburst, not to mention previous accusations of bullying by Number 10 staff.
The Labour party have reportedly been responsible for leaflets being issued, telling the most outrageous lies about supposed policies that appear nowhere in either Conservative or Liberal Democrat manifestoes.
Only this week, Mr Brown said on a BBC Radio 4 programme that both the other parties planned to cut child tax credits as if this was a policy directed at the poorest in our society. I can find no reference to removing this benefit totally.
With regard to benefits, I would like to hear something very specific from Mr Clegg. The Labour party were at one time working with the mental health charity Mind, to improve the process by which people with mental health issues apply for E.S.A., the benefit that is gradually replacing Incapacity Benefit. Recently they have come out with a new application form which is even LESS likely to result in someone with depression or anxiety being granted benefit, and MORE likely to start a very expensive and long-winded appeals process. The Conservatives think that work is a cure for such ailments and intend to put everyone back on Job Seekers Allowance. See this link for Mind's reaction to the planned changes.
Mr Clegg, to finally win my vote for the Liberal Democrats, please tell me that you are going to scrap the Government quango ATOS and return the decision of whether or not a person is fit to work to the NHS staff like GP's and mental health professionals who you are already paying to determine the appropriate diagnosis and the appropriate treatment. By doing so, and granting benefit to claimants on the basis of a written agreement that they are unfit to work, you will cut the work of tribunal staff and save claimants months of stress and worry which is hardly good for their condition in the first place.
My GP referred to ATOS original decision that I was fit to work as 'talking out of their backsides' - except she replaced 'backside' with a word beginning with 'a'. The eventual outcome appears in previous posts.
Mr Brown's indiscretion today will be a very clear warning to all other candidates of all colours that they are being watched 24/7 by all forms of media, and that bad news spreads virally via Twitter, Facebook and other social media. However, what is more worrying is that Mr Brown's attitude that anyone with the view that immigration should be cut, is bigoted. What I would expect that to mean after the election is that immigration issues will be shuffled under the carpet and talked down as less important than other issues on the agenda of a new Government if Labour have any part in it. Actually, Mr Brown it isn't less important, and I don't think I need to elucidate why.
BBC Report on 'the Rochdale incident'.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
What are we voting for?
The long awaited announcement of the election date yesterday was about as exciting as a can of flat cola. Gordon appeared trying hard to look friendly and smiley, with his team of washed-out incompetents and pleaded incoherently for another term. In the one shot of Mrs Brown, I saw her scowling at the cameras and looking anything but happy at the thought of five more years at Number 10. I don't think she has to worry. Even if Labour were to get in again by a whisker, I cannot see him surviving as party leader and PM for very long. The knives will be out for sure if there is no overall majority or a thumping loss.
David Cameron and his wife were smiling and in the company of a group of young supporters. Point - what have his rivals done to tempt first-time voters to back them? Nothing Labour have said so far looks very inviting. Students have had a very rough ride under this Government, they are finishing their degrees in debt in many cases, and universities are seeing cutbacks. Is that fulfilling Tony Blair's education pledges? Don't think so.
Nick Clegg also appeared with his wife, both looking happy and confident. I wish I could predict that this election will see his party in power, but should there be a hung parliament, they may start to show their true skills. I think they may attract a strong protest vote in constituencies where the previous incumbent has been involved in the expenses scandal and that is no bad thing.
What did not really emerge yesterday were solid or exciting promises and policies. Both Cameron and Clegg have been rather woolly to date on what they stand for. The only solid electioneering I saw yesterday came from Plaid Cymru and the SNP, both of whom pledged their support for the parts of the UK they stand for. I think it's time for a little root around the manifestoes of the principal players to find out what we are likely to get from them, and more interestingly where there is convergence which may give a clue to what could happen without an overall majority.
Perhaps the parts of the UK the party leaders visited yesterday have a better idea of what to expect, but for the rest of us - many questions remain unanswered.
David Cameron and his wife were smiling and in the company of a group of young supporters. Point - what have his rivals done to tempt first-time voters to back them? Nothing Labour have said so far looks very inviting. Students have had a very rough ride under this Government, they are finishing their degrees in debt in many cases, and universities are seeing cutbacks. Is that fulfilling Tony Blair's education pledges? Don't think so.
Nick Clegg also appeared with his wife, both looking happy and confident. I wish I could predict that this election will see his party in power, but should there be a hung parliament, they may start to show their true skills. I think they may attract a strong protest vote in constituencies where the previous incumbent has been involved in the expenses scandal and that is no bad thing.
What did not really emerge yesterday were solid or exciting promises and policies. Both Cameron and Clegg have been rather woolly to date on what they stand for. The only solid electioneering I saw yesterday came from Plaid Cymru and the SNP, both of whom pledged their support for the parts of the UK they stand for. I think it's time for a little root around the manifestoes of the principal players to find out what we are likely to get from them, and more interestingly where there is convergence which may give a clue to what could happen without an overall majority.
Perhaps the parts of the UK the party leaders visited yesterday have a better idea of what to expect, but for the rest of us - many questions remain unanswered.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Poor old Gordon - not
I can imagine Gordon Brown at this moment is sitting locked in the loo somewhere in 10 Downing Street, biting his nails to the quick and squirming with embarassment in having made another gaffe.
As his party desperately try to say that the industrial dispute at BA isn't political, we hear that Unite, the union involved are the major bankroller of the coming General Election.
That is the election that Mr Brown has not yet announced and which the country awaits. Today he has also said that unless there is a clear majority against him (seats or votes is not clear) he intends to sit tight and not give up his position as our leader. One can imagine her Majesty screaming at the radio "Orf with his head" at the mere idea of not doing the decent thing and walking.
Face it Gordon, unless the country gives Labour a clear working majority, the position of PM that you pestered and harassed Tony Blair to get is not morally yours. I can see that there might well be a hung Parliament after the election, but a Labour majority? Surely, surely NO-ONE in the UK could be so stupid as to hand it to them. Vote Liberal for preference, Green, just not Labour.
It's such a pity that we no longer have the Monster Raving Loony Party any more. This has to be one election that they could win. Better still if we had a box on the polling form where we could vote for proportional representation along with the name of the party or candidate we support.
Please Gordon, get out of that toilet, flush away your doubts and tell us tomorrow when we may go and vote this Government into obscurity.
As his party desperately try to say that the industrial dispute at BA isn't political, we hear that Unite, the union involved are the major bankroller of the coming General Election.
That is the election that Mr Brown has not yet announced and which the country awaits. Today he has also said that unless there is a clear majority against him (seats or votes is not clear) he intends to sit tight and not give up his position as our leader. One can imagine her Majesty screaming at the radio "Orf with his head" at the mere idea of not doing the decent thing and walking.
Face it Gordon, unless the country gives Labour a clear working majority, the position of PM that you pestered and harassed Tony Blair to get is not morally yours. I can see that there might well be a hung Parliament after the election, but a Labour majority? Surely, surely NO-ONE in the UK could be so stupid as to hand it to them. Vote Liberal for preference, Green, just not Labour.
It's such a pity that we no longer have the Monster Raving Loony Party any more. This has to be one election that they could win. Better still if we had a box on the polling form where we could vote for proportional representation along with the name of the party or candidate we support.
Please Gordon, get out of that toilet, flush away your doubts and tell us tomorrow when we may go and vote this Government into obscurity.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
I'm laughing for a change
A bit of an ironic laugh, it's true, but I thought I would share it with you all.
At last Gordon Brown decided to throw the towel in and resign. His cabinet colleagues decided it would be a worthy gesture to name a railway locomotive after him.
So a senior 'Sir Humphrey' went from Whitehall to the National Railway Museum at York, to investigate the possibilities.
"They have a number of locomotives at the NRM without names," a specially-sought consultant told the top civil servant. "Mostly freight locomotives though."
"Oh dear, that's not very fitting for a prime minister," said Sir Humphrey. "How about that big green one, over there ?" he said, pointing to 4472 Flying Scotsman.
"That's already got a name" said the consultant. "It's called 'Flying Scotsman'."
"Oh. Couldn't it be renamed ?" asked Sir Humphrey. "This is a national museum after all, funded by the taxpayer."
"I suppose it might be considered," said the consultant. "After all the LNER renamed a number of their locomotives after directors of the company, and even renamed one of them Dwight D Eisenhower."
"That's excellent", said Sir Humphrey, "So that's settled then...let's look at renaming 4472. But how much will it cost ? We can't spend too much, given the expenses scandal !"
"Well", said the consultant, "Why don't we just paint out the 'F'?"
At last Gordon Brown decided to throw the towel in and resign. His cabinet colleagues decided it would be a worthy gesture to name a railway locomotive after him.
So a senior 'Sir Humphrey' went from Whitehall to the National Railway Museum at York, to investigate the possibilities.
"They have a number of locomotives at the NRM without names," a specially-sought consultant told the top civil servant. "Mostly freight locomotives though."
"Oh dear, that's not very fitting for a prime minister," said Sir Humphrey. "How about that big green one, over there ?" he said, pointing to 4472 Flying Scotsman.
"That's already got a name" said the consultant. "It's called 'Flying Scotsman'."
"Oh. Couldn't it be renamed ?" asked Sir Humphrey. "This is a national museum after all, funded by the taxpayer."
"I suppose it might be considered," said the consultant. "After all the LNER renamed a number of their locomotives after directors of the company, and even renamed one of them Dwight D Eisenhower."
"That's excellent", said Sir Humphrey, "So that's settled then...let's look at renaming 4472. But how much will it cost ? We can't spend too much, given the expenses scandal !"
"Well", said the consultant, "Why don't we just paint out the 'F'?"
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Weasel words to the front line
At this moment I have less respect for the British Government and our Prime Minister than I have ever had.
Gordon Brown's assurances that British troops in Afghanistan are adequately equipped stands starkly against statements of the most senior military personnel that have emerged in the last few days.
Mr Brown clearly realises that he is up against a wall here, and it would have been impossible for him to directly admit that he has ignored military pleas for more money and more equipment. However he could have at least said that he took on board what was said and would listen to the people who are in command in Afghanistan and also to the families who are bearing the grief of loss.
There are those too who wonder exactly what the conflict in Afghanistan is supposed to achieve. Some may even feel that this is a war by the 'Christian' western world on Islam especially since George Bush spoke of it in a term they find repugnant - as a crusade. I'm not hearing enough of what I would like to hear which is that the people of Afghanistan themselves want us to help them fight against extremists in their own country.
If Britain and America are to continue to have support for this conflict, they must clarify and publicise their aims and ensure that they are aims that are achievable and that the whole of our population can be comfortable with.
This is NOT expressing any lack of support for the troops themselves which is a very different thing. If our Government are going to ask our armed forces to go and engage in wars and conflicts for whatever reason, those troops have a total right to be properly equipped.
They also have the right to speak out if they believe that their comrades are dying unnecessarily because someone here wants to cut budgets, and so do the bereaved families. I salute those who have chosen to put their lives on the line for world peace and security.
I don't want to hear any more excuses and lies and face saving from our PM and members of the Government, I want to hear promises that they will do everything they can to ensure our armed forces in Afghanistan get the equipment THEY say they need.
Gordon Brown's assurances that British troops in Afghanistan are adequately equipped stands starkly against statements of the most senior military personnel that have emerged in the last few days.
Mr Brown clearly realises that he is up against a wall here, and it would have been impossible for him to directly admit that he has ignored military pleas for more money and more equipment. However he could have at least said that he took on board what was said and would listen to the people who are in command in Afghanistan and also to the families who are bearing the grief of loss.
There are those too who wonder exactly what the conflict in Afghanistan is supposed to achieve. Some may even feel that this is a war by the 'Christian' western world on Islam especially since George Bush spoke of it in a term they find repugnant - as a crusade. I'm not hearing enough of what I would like to hear which is that the people of Afghanistan themselves want us to help them fight against extremists in their own country.
If Britain and America are to continue to have support for this conflict, they must clarify and publicise their aims and ensure that they are aims that are achievable and that the whole of our population can be comfortable with.
This is NOT expressing any lack of support for the troops themselves which is a very different thing. If our Government are going to ask our armed forces to go and engage in wars and conflicts for whatever reason, those troops have a total right to be properly equipped.
They also have the right to speak out if they believe that their comrades are dying unnecessarily because someone here wants to cut budgets, and so do the bereaved families. I salute those who have chosen to put their lives on the line for world peace and security.
I don't want to hear any more excuses and lies and face saving from our PM and members of the Government, I want to hear promises that they will do everything they can to ensure our armed forces in Afghanistan get the equipment THEY say they need.
Monday, July 06, 2009
Depressed? Don't expect help from the DWP
Six months ago, a series of personal and financial crises sent me even further into deep depression than I already was. The illness behind it all is hypothyroidism, a condition which, if not adequately treated leaves you exhausted, mentally and physically and unable to deal with life at its best let alone its worst.
If some idiot at my local Job Centre had not given me incorrect information, I might have already been claiming the benefits to which I was entitled and had my previous GP had not been so totally useless my condition might have been better treated and things would never have got that bad. At least I had the strength to go and demand a referral to an endocrinologist and then the energy to insist I saw someone fully trained who made a change in my medication.
When I did get the right information from the Citizens Advice Bureau, which was to apply for ESA, the benefit that has replaced Incapacity Benefit, I was still struggling to deal with daily life. Just applying for ESA is an unnecessarily stressful experience. As a result of the incorrect information I lost two months of benefit and help with my mortgage which could not be backdated because there is a limit to backdating any benefits regardless of the circumstances.
The main form that you are required to complete is designed with two situations in mind.
1. You are suffering from an illness that makes you physically unable to work. You have to describe in minute detail how this affects every aspect of your life and is quite intrusive and personal.
2. You are mentally incapacitated to the point that someone has to complete the form for you.
There is nothing in between. The form simply does not deal with the whole spectrum of mental illness around depression. I made some angry notes on the form to that effect, but they were just ignored.
At some time later two things will happen. You will get called for a medical interview and a 'job-related' interview. The medical interviews, in my area at least are subcontracted to a company called ATOS who employ so-called health professionals to conduct an assessment partially based on what you wrote on the form.
The remainder of the assessment is anything but personal. They have a computerised system with a series of check boxes which they complete without showing you which boxes they ticked. They do ask you questions and also add some detail based on what you say. The outcome is simple. The boxes result in a score. If you don't score high enough, you are disqualified from ESA. I would advise anyone going to one of these medicals to get help from anyone you can, and know what they are supposed to do. Then, if they don't conduct the medical assessment properly, make a formal complaint to ATOS themselves and to the DWP.
More of what to do in a moment if you are scored too low to stay on ESA.
The other interview is aimed at trying to get you back into a job if you don't have one. The Job Centre gave me a leaflet for an organisation called the Shaw Trust. The leaflet claimed that they could 'get you access to training' by which most people would assume that they actually had funds to do this. Wrong. They have lists of other organisations which may or may not be able to fund the training you need, but it is very limited. What I would need, IF I was well enough to return to work is some very specialised very focussed training in specific software languages that have become the lingua franca of website development in the last few years. The Job Centre had already denied me this, so I'm not hopeful.
Now you would think that you would get the medical interview out of the way to establish whether or not you really were fit for work rather than putting more stress on you by forcing you to attend the job related one. No, the system is arse about face, a situation even admitted by the Shaw Trust.
At one of the job-related sessions the interviewer told me fairly bluntly that people with depression frequently did not tick enough boxes to stay on ESA. Therefore the sessions that I went through with them are now pretty well pointless, because once you are on JSA (the current name for unemployment benefit) a whole load of different conditions apply as to what training you can get. And of course you are then required to start a new claim for JSA with a whole load of new forms, no getting away with just going from one benefit to the other.
Moreover, you are then taken away from the people who were just getting to know about you and what you needed to get back to work and shoved back into the JSA system which is so overloaded at present it can't cope anyway.
I wrote a few months ago about the farcical situation of the Government announcing 'training initiatives' which just don't materialise at the delivery point. I can tell you that, according to a friend trying to get appropriate training from the Job Centre, those funds still are not available where and when they are needed. Still pie in the sky then. This was the previous blog post.
The alternative, which I found today that I am going to have to go through, is the appeals procedure for ESA. It is another stressful and upsetting situation which is anything but helpful for someone not properly recovered from depression and still getting their system back in balance on new hypothyroid medication.
What concerns me most is that processing these forms will result in a lapse of my benefits and even if they are re-instated and backdated pending the appeal, I may be without any income at all for weeks.
When I saw my new GP a week ago, she said that it could take another six months before I get my medication levels completely right and really start to feel well again. At least she is prepared to listen to me and not just rely on blood tests - more box ticking which led to the decline in my health in the first place.
There are very severe shortcomings in the way that ESA is being administered and my fear is that people who have been treated for depressive illnesses are being thrown into this back-to-work system far too soon and may relapse, possibly dangerously.
Before the latest economic decline, we were told that Incapacity Benefit was being replaced by ESA with the aim of getting more people back into work. Well Ms Cooper (Yvette Cooper is the new Minister for Work and Pensions) Mr Brown, there are even fewer jobs now and even less resources to help you get one.
Perhaps you had better just quietly adjust those tick-box scores and let a few more people stay on ESA where they should be anyway.
If some idiot at my local Job Centre had not given me incorrect information, I might have already been claiming the benefits to which I was entitled and had my previous GP had not been so totally useless my condition might have been better treated and things would never have got that bad. At least I had the strength to go and demand a referral to an endocrinologist and then the energy to insist I saw someone fully trained who made a change in my medication.
When I did get the right information from the Citizens Advice Bureau, which was to apply for ESA, the benefit that has replaced Incapacity Benefit, I was still struggling to deal with daily life. Just applying for ESA is an unnecessarily stressful experience. As a result of the incorrect information I lost two months of benefit and help with my mortgage which could not be backdated because there is a limit to backdating any benefits regardless of the circumstances.
The main form that you are required to complete is designed with two situations in mind.
1. You are suffering from an illness that makes you physically unable to work. You have to describe in minute detail how this affects every aspect of your life and is quite intrusive and personal.
2. You are mentally incapacitated to the point that someone has to complete the form for you.
There is nothing in between. The form simply does not deal with the whole spectrum of mental illness around depression. I made some angry notes on the form to that effect, but they were just ignored.
At some time later two things will happen. You will get called for a medical interview and a 'job-related' interview. The medical interviews, in my area at least are subcontracted to a company called ATOS who employ so-called health professionals to conduct an assessment partially based on what you wrote on the form.
The remainder of the assessment is anything but personal. They have a computerised system with a series of check boxes which they complete without showing you which boxes they ticked. They do ask you questions and also add some detail based on what you say. The outcome is simple. The boxes result in a score. If you don't score high enough, you are disqualified from ESA. I would advise anyone going to one of these medicals to get help from anyone you can, and know what they are supposed to do. Then, if they don't conduct the medical assessment properly, make a formal complaint to ATOS themselves and to the DWP.
More of what to do in a moment if you are scored too low to stay on ESA.
The other interview is aimed at trying to get you back into a job if you don't have one. The Job Centre gave me a leaflet for an organisation called the Shaw Trust. The leaflet claimed that they could 'get you access to training' by which most people would assume that they actually had funds to do this. Wrong. They have lists of other organisations which may or may not be able to fund the training you need, but it is very limited. What I would need, IF I was well enough to return to work is some very specialised very focussed training in specific software languages that have become the lingua franca of website development in the last few years. The Job Centre had already denied me this, so I'm not hopeful.
Now you would think that you would get the medical interview out of the way to establish whether or not you really were fit for work rather than putting more stress on you by forcing you to attend the job related one. No, the system is arse about face, a situation even admitted by the Shaw Trust.
At one of the job-related sessions the interviewer told me fairly bluntly that people with depression frequently did not tick enough boxes to stay on ESA. Therefore the sessions that I went through with them are now pretty well pointless, because once you are on JSA (the current name for unemployment benefit) a whole load of different conditions apply as to what training you can get. And of course you are then required to start a new claim for JSA with a whole load of new forms, no getting away with just going from one benefit to the other.
Moreover, you are then taken away from the people who were just getting to know about you and what you needed to get back to work and shoved back into the JSA system which is so overloaded at present it can't cope anyway.
I wrote a few months ago about the farcical situation of the Government announcing 'training initiatives' which just don't materialise at the delivery point. I can tell you that, according to a friend trying to get appropriate training from the Job Centre, those funds still are not available where and when they are needed. Still pie in the sky then. This was the previous blog post.
The alternative, which I found today that I am going to have to go through, is the appeals procedure for ESA. It is another stressful and upsetting situation which is anything but helpful for someone not properly recovered from depression and still getting their system back in balance on new hypothyroid medication.
What concerns me most is that processing these forms will result in a lapse of my benefits and even if they are re-instated and backdated pending the appeal, I may be without any income at all for weeks.
When I saw my new GP a week ago, she said that it could take another six months before I get my medication levels completely right and really start to feel well again. At least she is prepared to listen to me and not just rely on blood tests - more box ticking which led to the decline in my health in the first place.
There are very severe shortcomings in the way that ESA is being administered and my fear is that people who have been treated for depressive illnesses are being thrown into this back-to-work system far too soon and may relapse, possibly dangerously.
Before the latest economic decline, we were told that Incapacity Benefit was being replaced by ESA with the aim of getting more people back into work. Well Ms Cooper (Yvette Cooper is the new Minister for Work and Pensions) Mr Brown, there are even fewer jobs now and even less resources to help you get one.
Perhaps you had better just quietly adjust those tick-box scores and let a few more people stay on ESA where they should be anyway.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Gordon vs Barack - I'm not looking forward to April
I am once again less than impressed with our Prime Ministers' performance and ideas about solving our economic ills and I would speculate that President Obama is not going to be any keener on boring Gordon's boring pronouncements when he visits the UK in April.
What we need now is a spark of creativity and enthusiasm to inspire business leaders and bring back at least a trace of 'feel good' to a British populace with a severe attack of winter blues.
Alas, what we are getting is more of the tired old-fashioned predictable ideas we have come to expect from this Government. You couldn't call them initiatives by any means. The word initiate suggests imagination and innovation and that is the last thing we are getting.
I'm not saying there is something wrong with the banks returning to a little more cautious approach to lending and spending. I've already written at length about the difficulties people are having in actually accessing supposed assistance funding and the news this weekend suggests it is not getting any better.
What really worries me is what effect the differences in approach to economic recovery will have on our 'special relationship' with the USA. Once again the would-be cartoonist in me pictures a scene with Barack Obama falling asleep while Gordon rabbits on about not a lot. This is the best picture. The worst one is a difference of opinion and daggers drawn that could seriously hold back OUR recovery if it is not in harmony with what is going on across the Atlantic.
Gordon Brown could be perceived as mean minded and narrow which could result in a distant and polite encounter rather than a friendly and cordial one. I don't think the world can expect a relationship in the vein of Thatcher and Reagan.
Already there are rumours of Labour snipers ganging up to remove Mr Brown. Will any of them succeed in taking his place in Number 10, or better still will we be looking forward to a General Election by the time of the Presidential visit and will Mr Obama also be seeking the views of Opposition leaders.
I worry and wait.
What we need now is a spark of creativity and enthusiasm to inspire business leaders and bring back at least a trace of 'feel good' to a British populace with a severe attack of winter blues.
Alas, what we are getting is more of the tired old-fashioned predictable ideas we have come to expect from this Government. You couldn't call them initiatives by any means. The word initiate suggests imagination and innovation and that is the last thing we are getting.
I'm not saying there is something wrong with the banks returning to a little more cautious approach to lending and spending. I've already written at length about the difficulties people are having in actually accessing supposed assistance funding and the news this weekend suggests it is not getting any better.
What really worries me is what effect the differences in approach to economic recovery will have on our 'special relationship' with the USA. Once again the would-be cartoonist in me pictures a scene with Barack Obama falling asleep while Gordon rabbits on about not a lot. This is the best picture. The worst one is a difference of opinion and daggers drawn that could seriously hold back OUR recovery if it is not in harmony with what is going on across the Atlantic.
Gordon Brown could be perceived as mean minded and narrow which could result in a distant and polite encounter rather than a friendly and cordial one. I don't think the world can expect a relationship in the vein of Thatcher and Reagan.
Already there are rumours of Labour snipers ganging up to remove Mr Brown. Will any of them succeed in taking his place in Number 10, or better still will we be looking forward to a General Election by the time of the Presidential visit and will Mr Obama also be seeking the views of Opposition leaders.
I worry and wait.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
British Government’s ‘Virtual’ funds
The UK Government recently made announcements about how they were going to help small business owners and also assist people made redundant, not just the unskilled, but executive and professional people as well.
What is in question is do those funds actually exist and are they ever going to reach the people who need them. From what I've seen in the last few days, the answer seems to be a big ‘NO’.
A few weeks ago I had a ‘mystery shop’ assignment that involved visiting my local JobCentre Plus. I hadn’t been there for a while, so wasn’t recognised while I was browsing around looking for posters and trying out the interactive terminals on which you can search for jobs. Later on the assignment required me to reveal who I was and what I was doing so it seems OK to refer to it here. The second part of my job that day involved talking to a manager and after the business I came for was done, I set aside my notebook as I wanted to ask some tough questions unrelated to my assignment.
The initiative to provide additional training for workers at all skill levels had just been announced. More than a year ago, when I WAS visiting the Job Centre regularly, I asked them for funding for some specific training that I felt would help me get back in the job market. I was refused, because they said there was no mechanism for funding in that way. The Government announcement seemed to indicate that this had all changed and I asked the JobCentre manager directly if this was the case.
“Oh yes” he said “We could almost certainly do that now”, “Things have changed since you were here last” I was assured. He went on “The way re-training can be funded is going to be much more flexible”. I also asked about age discrimination and he said that there were ‘initiatives to ensure it didn’t happen’ and this included local and central Government funded posts and education. I applied to Portsmouth City Council, Portsmouth University and Havant Borough Council, in some cases for more than one post, and was turned down each time.
Since then, Channel 4’s Dispatches program 'Too Old to Work' has exposed just how deeply age discrimination is embedded in employment practices and even enshrined in law. I recognised many of the weasel words used in interviews and in rejection letters I had received and encountered before I decided to try to earn a living outside of the wage slave economy.
Words such as ‘over-qualified’, ‘we feel you would not fit into our culture’, ‘you would be bored’, ‘this is a very young company’, and ‘would you have a problem working for a manager younger than you’. I had been told that I was being paranoid, that these words could not positively be proved as being ageist, but perhaps now it has been on national TV, if they are used against YOU, I suggest that you think very hard about whether it is actually your age that they have a problem with.
In the program, a young woman, not even fully qualified in accountancy and her father, a qualified and very experienced accountant applied through the same agencies. The young woman was offered a range of opportunities, interviews with agency consultants and with companies. Her 50+ father was told in several cases that the agency had ‘lost his CV’ and all the phrases above came out in relation to jobs he had seen advertised and felt he was well suited to.
On Friday I gave a friend a lift to his JobCentre benefits signon appointment. He has a similar number of years experience in IT as I do and is of similar age. Being male, he has a couple more years to work than I would before state retirement age. He asked the same questions I did, only a couple of weeks ago.
He was told that there was NO money for that purpose, it had been re-allocated to ‘new initiatives’ . So, instead of spending a couple of hundred pounds to spend on us teaching ourselves new software skills that would help fill IT vacancies that are still out there, the British Government would rather spend THOUSANDS on social security benefits until we reach retirement age, then additional retirement benefits to top up our income because we will have spent every penny of savings that we might still have. Very clever.
With reference to the business loans, I heard, on the radio, the sad story of a couple from Scotland who were looking for funding to expand their café and catering business. They visited several banks to ask about the much publicised Government guaranteed small business loans. No-one at any of the banks knew how these funds could be accessed and some of them had never even heard of the announcement. The people had been persistent and asked the banks to ask their head offices – still no information and no deals. The radio item featured an Opposition spokesperson asking how this could happen. Hadn’t the entire scheme been discussed with the banks at all?
In both cases it seems that there is an imaginary pie in the sky full of money floating over Westminster with a number of labels attached to it for what it might be spent on. No one can actually get to the cash, and as the priorities are seen to change for the reasons of keeping the press and their own back-benchers quiet, the PM, the Chancellor, Business Secretary and so on just re-earmark the funds for a new purpose.
Presumably that pot of money is now going to be used to prop up the marriage of Lloyds TSB and HBOS who the Treasury encouraged to get together only a month or two ago.
It just doesn’t add up does it.
I really wish I could draw cartoons. Along with Gordon Brown’s assurance that he knew nothing about the FSA hush-up that banks were over–exposed to toxic debts, the humbug flying around the Houses of Parliament this past couple of weeks would have given me endless subjects for my pen.
Maybe I could go into partnership with someone who CAN do the artwork.
Picture this. Gordon Brown is painting himself into the corner of a room. Written across the floor are the words "FSA incompetence" and "banks over exposed". I predict that he is going to regret saying he knew nothing about it.
Or this scenario - dear Gordon is pictured as a grouse with a bevy of guns pointing at him bearing labels of all the things he has said and are very likely to come back to haunt him at some future date. The guns are being fired by his own Cabinet Ministers as well as the Opposition, and somewhere in there you might just find the wonderful Jeremy Clarkson as well who aimed a few shots of his own at the PM recently.
What is in question is do those funds actually exist and are they ever going to reach the people who need them. From what I've seen in the last few days, the answer seems to be a big ‘NO’.
A few weeks ago I had a ‘mystery shop’ assignment that involved visiting my local JobCentre Plus. I hadn’t been there for a while, so wasn’t recognised while I was browsing around looking for posters and trying out the interactive terminals on which you can search for jobs. Later on the assignment required me to reveal who I was and what I was doing so it seems OK to refer to it here. The second part of my job that day involved talking to a manager and after the business I came for was done, I set aside my notebook as I wanted to ask some tough questions unrelated to my assignment.
The initiative to provide additional training for workers at all skill levels had just been announced. More than a year ago, when I WAS visiting the Job Centre regularly, I asked them for funding for some specific training that I felt would help me get back in the job market. I was refused, because they said there was no mechanism for funding in that way. The Government announcement seemed to indicate that this had all changed and I asked the JobCentre manager directly if this was the case.
“Oh yes” he said “We could almost certainly do that now”, “Things have changed since you were here last” I was assured. He went on “The way re-training can be funded is going to be much more flexible”. I also asked about age discrimination and he said that there were ‘initiatives to ensure it didn’t happen’ and this included local and central Government funded posts and education. I applied to Portsmouth City Council, Portsmouth University and Havant Borough Council, in some cases for more than one post, and was turned down each time.
Since then, Channel 4’s Dispatches program 'Too Old to Work' has exposed just how deeply age discrimination is embedded in employment practices and even enshrined in law. I recognised many of the weasel words used in interviews and in rejection letters I had received and encountered before I decided to try to earn a living outside of the wage slave economy.
Words such as ‘over-qualified’, ‘we feel you would not fit into our culture’, ‘you would be bored’, ‘this is a very young company’, and ‘would you have a problem working for a manager younger than you’. I had been told that I was being paranoid, that these words could not positively be proved as being ageist, but perhaps now it has been on national TV, if they are used against YOU, I suggest that you think very hard about whether it is actually your age that they have a problem with.
In the program, a young woman, not even fully qualified in accountancy and her father, a qualified and very experienced accountant applied through the same agencies. The young woman was offered a range of opportunities, interviews with agency consultants and with companies. Her 50+ father was told in several cases that the agency had ‘lost his CV’ and all the phrases above came out in relation to jobs he had seen advertised and felt he was well suited to.
On Friday I gave a friend a lift to his JobCentre benefits signon appointment. He has a similar number of years experience in IT as I do and is of similar age. Being male, he has a couple more years to work than I would before state retirement age. He asked the same questions I did, only a couple of weeks ago.
He was told that there was NO money for that purpose, it had been re-allocated to ‘new initiatives’ . So, instead of spending a couple of hundred pounds to spend on us teaching ourselves new software skills that would help fill IT vacancies that are still out there, the British Government would rather spend THOUSANDS on social security benefits until we reach retirement age, then additional retirement benefits to top up our income because we will have spent every penny of savings that we might still have. Very clever.
With reference to the business loans, I heard, on the radio, the sad story of a couple from Scotland who were looking for funding to expand their café and catering business. They visited several banks to ask about the much publicised Government guaranteed small business loans. No-one at any of the banks knew how these funds could be accessed and some of them had never even heard of the announcement. The people had been persistent and asked the banks to ask their head offices – still no information and no deals. The radio item featured an Opposition spokesperson asking how this could happen. Hadn’t the entire scheme been discussed with the banks at all?
In both cases it seems that there is an imaginary pie in the sky full of money floating over Westminster with a number of labels attached to it for what it might be spent on. No one can actually get to the cash, and as the priorities are seen to change for the reasons of keeping the press and their own back-benchers quiet, the PM, the Chancellor, Business Secretary and so on just re-earmark the funds for a new purpose.
Presumably that pot of money is now going to be used to prop up the marriage of Lloyds TSB and HBOS who the Treasury encouraged to get together only a month or two ago.
It just doesn’t add up does it.
I really wish I could draw cartoons. Along with Gordon Brown’s assurance that he knew nothing about the FSA hush-up that banks were over–exposed to toxic debts, the humbug flying around the Houses of Parliament this past couple of weeks would have given me endless subjects for my pen.
Maybe I could go into partnership with someone who CAN do the artwork.
Picture this. Gordon Brown is painting himself into the corner of a room. Written across the floor are the words "FSA incompetence" and "banks over exposed". I predict that he is going to regret saying he knew nothing about it.
Or this scenario - dear Gordon is pictured as a grouse with a bevy of guns pointing at him bearing labels of all the things he has said and are very likely to come back to haunt him at some future date. The guns are being fired by his own Cabinet Ministers as well as the Opposition, and somewhere in there you might just find the wonderful Jeremy Clarkson as well who aimed a few shots of his own at the PM recently.
Saturday, February 07, 2009
Too much PC at BBC
More rows and demands for BBC presenters heads to roll have had nearly as many column inches at the weather this week and I'm utterly fed up with it. It's just got totally out of proportion.
For me the essential difference between this, and the row about Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand is that what was said was not on air.
Millins of people my generation will have had golliwogs as much-loved childhood toys and remember them from the Robertsons Jam adverts. Personally I never even thought about them as representing human beings, there was a total disconnect. Carol Thatcher and I are only 4 years apart in age, and I'm sure its the same for her too.
I don't think her remark indicates that she is a racist in any way shape or form and I think we have all got excessively over sensitive.
Why is it that on one TV or radio programme we are allowed to laugh about racial and gender stereotypes and on others we have to tiptoe round in this ridiculous way.
As for Jeremy Clarkson, it doesn't surprise me one bit. I expect him to be outrageous and he hasn't disappointed this time. I won't deny that some of his more misogynous remarks (and his periodic rudeness about Caterham Se7ens) annoy me, but most of the time he makes me laugh.
He's just running true to form and I wouldn't want him to change one bit.
The One Show has unjustifiably lost a good presenter and the suggestions that Clarkson should be removed from Top Gear is nonsense.
I'd like to bet that Gordon Brown has also had a few regrets this week about his British jobs for British workers remark which I thought at the time might come back to haunt him. I haven't noticed anyone demanding an instant General Election about that faux pas.
Did someone mention the word sledging?
For me the essential difference between this, and the row about Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand is that what was said was not on air.
Millins of people my generation will have had golliwogs as much-loved childhood toys and remember them from the Robertsons Jam adverts. Personally I never even thought about them as representing human beings, there was a total disconnect. Carol Thatcher and I are only 4 years apart in age, and I'm sure its the same for her too.
I don't think her remark indicates that she is a racist in any way shape or form and I think we have all got excessively over sensitive.
Why is it that on one TV or radio programme we are allowed to laugh about racial and gender stereotypes and on others we have to tiptoe round in this ridiculous way.
As for Jeremy Clarkson, it doesn't surprise me one bit. I expect him to be outrageous and he hasn't disappointed this time. I won't deny that some of his more misogynous remarks (and his periodic rudeness about Caterham Se7ens) annoy me, but most of the time he makes me laugh.
He's just running true to form and I wouldn't want him to change one bit.
The One Show has unjustifiably lost a good presenter and the suggestions that Clarkson should be removed from Top Gear is nonsense.
I'd like to bet that Gordon Brown has also had a few regrets this week about his British jobs for British workers remark which I thought at the time might come back to haunt him. I haven't noticed anyone demanding an instant General Election about that faux pas.
Did someone mention the word sledging?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
