Saturday, 11 June 2011

Ed Miliband and the "Cheats" and "Shirkers"

Quotes from

"Ed Miliband will tomorrow attempt to stem growing doubts about his leadership with an assault on Britain's "take what you can" culture which is open to exploitation by benefit cheats and unscrupulous bankers."

Oh dear lord, really? Him too? *Heavy, heavy sigh*

"Labour strategists are worried that Miliband will be further criticised for lacking hard ideas on how to cut the welfare bill when the party votes against the coalition's changes in the Commons this week. To counter such concerns Miliband will use tomorrow's speech to claim that in government his party would pursue a more radical reform of the welfare state than the coalition."

We've got alternatives Ed. We've been trying to tell you about them for years. At least it seems Labour will vote against the Welfare Reform Bill next week. 

"Rather than seeking mere cuts, he will say that Labour would look to restore the link between people's contribution and their eligibility for assistance from the welfare state."

What about those who were born sick or disabled or became so after just a  few years of working? I'm not sure the words "We will protect the most vulnerable" will carry much weight any more.....

"It is not just financial contributions we are talking about but contributions to the society they live in"

That sounds a little more promising.....

"The hardest truth is that too many people feel we became the party of those at the top and bottom who were not showing responsibility and shirking this duty: from bankers who caused the global financial crisis to some of those on benefit who were abusing the system because they could work – but didn't."

I wonder if the people who "feel" that have any facts to back up their "feelings"? Will language like that do anything to knock down the "scrounger wall" built up around sick or disabled people by the current government, the previous government or the media? Sounds worryingly like a consensus that will build it even higher to me. 

"A 'take what you can' culture which began in the 1980s was allowed to continue, unchecked, under the last government."
Ouch!!! That kick hurt!
Careful, careful, Ed. Please be very, very careful what you say and how you say it. Millions of sick and disabled people will be listening to every word. Will you throw us in the pot with the scroungers? Or will you admit that ESA was wrong, is wrong and is killing people? Will you defend DLA? Will you use the same line as Liam Byrne, that :
"We should be forcing more unemployed people into work, not forcing more sick and disabled people into poverty" ?
Or will you abandon us? And our families? And our friends and our carers? 
But forget my special interest for a moment. At a time when the global financial system has gambled away trillions of our money, am I happy to see a Labour Party that concludes that "scroungers" must be made to pay? Am I happy with a speech that splits the "deserving poor" from the "undeserving"? Is that the only policy my party can put forward? In a country being torn apart, Labour has decided it's all because of "benefit cheats?"
I'm sure the Daily Mail will be thrilled. Labour voters? Not so much. Compassionate voters with an inch of integrity? Not so much. Intelligent voters? God I hope not. 
I'll wait to see the speech tomorrow. Perhaps the Guardian have put a spin all of their own on it but I don't like what I read so far....

A little reminder before tomorrow Ed :


  1. Ed looks like he's just following the conservative line in going round and round in circles and trying his best to punish the sick and disabled. We on the other hand are also going around in circles in trying to get justice for the sick and disabled and failing miserably i may add

    The facts are very simple there are over two million fit unemployed people in this country who need the very highest amount of help in getting a job by adding the sick and disabled to the two million is just to daft for words

    This country is to small and it's population to large and therefore it is not viable in the Future in going forward

    Throughout the last 50 years this position has remained unchanged and what should be debated never is which is how to get the population number down and how to increase education

    We have a very severe housing shortage that to has never been addressed and never will be how could it with such a large population getting larger ?

    I don't have the answers as i truly believe the UK is finished as it stands as it is at the present time. I believe the damage is done and the sick and disabled will have to pay the price as that's my belief in what both labour and the conservatives wont to happen IN ORDER TO SAFEGUARD THE REST OF SOCIETY

    Now some of you may think I'm wrong but i very much doubt it i very rarely am wrong and I'm first to hold my hand up when i am which has always been one of my strong points

    I'm so much like lord sugar we both come from similar areas and like in the programme the apprentice all these so called graduates with degrees they all turn out like the politicians in other words they haven't got a bloody clue all they have got the gift of is speaking a load of bull and trying to convince the viewing public they know what there doing well they don't fall lord sugar and they don't fall me and if i had my way I'd fire the bloody lot of them including the politicians

    They cant even get the basics right none of these politicians are fit for purpose even in the lords there half a sleep at best the politicians are just glorified citizens advice workers but getting paid a darn sight more then you or i who does it for free

    As a country we need to wise up and stop acting the fool and get some proper mp's elected who do know what there doing if we are ever going to get out of this mess and for the persecution of the sick and disabled to be stopped

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. Sue:

    Very interesting illustration. I'd like to use it. Can you tell me where you sourced it please?

  4. That charmless, incompetent, deceitful, insipid weasel is throwing us to the wolves in a cynical attempt to try and bolster his weak ineffectual performance as leader.

    It wont work, you'll still be incapable of inspiring anyone you fucking bastard.

    The media has a license to lie, and all three main parties are right-wing neo-liberal and utterly corrupt.

    This is no democracy it's a Kleptocracy.

  5. definatelycharlie11 June 2011 at 23:49

    I remember something in Ed Miliband's first speech as leader about not taking too much notice of what the papers will say.That didn't last long.He should learn from the past;when in government,New Labour kept trying to please the Daily Mail.But it is a monster that is never sattisfied.You can be as nasty to the misunderstood or the different or to the vulnerable as you like,but it's never nasty enough for it.
    I doubt if such nastiness ever won over any of it's readers,who have a natural affiliation to the Tories.Meanwhile,these sort of attacks weaken the core Labour support and the activists get to wonder what the hell they are fighting for.
    Perhaps he's just doing this in order to look tough.I've known school bullies like that.

    That is a great graphic comparing benefit fraud and the tax gap etc.But,have you posted up graphics showing changing debt levels over the years?This is all to bring down the debt,right?
    Our current debt looks triffling compared to the mountainous levels of the past,including when the empire was being built and so on.Debt is not the problem they are pretending it to be.

  6. definatelycharlie - have you got a source for graphics that show the debt levels? If you can, please psot it here so it can be used as a resource for campaigning. thanks

  7. This is exactly the kind of unforgivable situation that led me to leave to Labour Party. Or at least a big part of the problem. Unfortunately, just like David Cameron, Ed Miliband is focused on sophistry, spin and ambition, not on integrity, honesty and the values and philosophy of a modern democracy.

  8. definatelycharlie12 June 2011 at 16:12

    Thankyou for asking,Anonymous,regarding Graphics for historical debt levels.You can find some on:
    Once there,from the list accross the top of the page,click on 'debt'
    Once there,look down from the heading'Uk National Debt Charts'and then,under the sub-heading 'Three Centuries of the National Debt'you will find charts 1 to 3.
    No2.and No 3.are,I think,particularly stunning.

  9. The graph makes the point wonderfully. I find it really confusing how both Labour and the Conservatives are approaching this funding problem; they both just assume they have to cut back on public services, without even looking to see whether those services can be made more cost-efficient. I work in the civil service, and have seen how the cumbersome legislation meant to protect the company and its contracts slows processes (and time is money) and damages outcomes; the hoops we jump through are in desperate need of redefinition, but it will not happen. You make excellent points about sickness/disability benefits and ATOS assessments. Things like that could be cleared up without anyone suffering. Why aren't the government treating the upkeep of the welfare state as a responsibility, not as an optional extra, and looking at how they can adapt to fulfil it?

  10. definatelycharlie13 June 2011 at 15:02

    Cost-efficiency,Anonymous,does not seem to be uppermost in the minds of the government,and I'm sure it would be the same with Labour.Well,it was!I remember how they were happily sacking Inland Revenue staff by the thousand,even though they pay for their salleries many times over from the tax evasion they uncover.Thus a cut becomes a cost.
    It is so indiscriminate and careless.
    I suppose it gets better headlines if you announce a'crackdown'on something easily identifiable to the tabloids,such as'scroungers',
    or quangos(which we are lead to believe are automatically a costly joke)etc..,than to thoughtfully and systematically assess what are often very complex arrangements.
    But I would use any savings to increase the workforce(but make sure they are doing useful things).Sacking large numbers is a false economy.It reduces demand for goods and services,which is already very weak because of our enormous private sector debt.This in turn reduces growth and increases debt.
    This is already happening.
    I think the government are in denial about it,and they also believe that welfare robs people of their responsibility for themselves.I'm sure that when they have 'liberated' me of all support,I will magically regain my health and independence!

  11. It goes deeper than the massive amounts of household, corporate and private bank debt piled up back to the systematic running of the economy at below full labour and capital employment capacity weakening real wage growth slower than labour productivity then the profits are creamed off as part of wealthfare rentier crony capitalism, increasing income/wealth inequalities mean higher levels of net private saving and lower spending so increasing un/der-employment.

    Other forms of wealthfare are interest payments on completely unnecessary government debt, bank bailouts, tax cuts for un-earned income/capital gains etc...the list goes on.

    Suffice it to say that profit share of national income has gone from 8% in 1975 to 21% and wages share of income has fallen similarly; profit share is strongly correlated with incomes of the 1% and the previous time it was this high was just before the 1930s depression.

    A good place to learn more about it is here;

  12. As Caroline Lucas said on Question Time, the last thing we need (but we've got) is a third Tory party.

    I think what she means is another shade of neo-liberalism, but wth!