The Labour Welfare-Rollercoaster - Ed, Liam and Frank.

Well, those politicians put us through our paces yesterday didn't they?

The tension surrounding the much trailed speech from Ed Miliband on "scroungers" had us all on tenterhooks for hours. Twitter was frothing with Labour tweeters, sick and disabled tweeters, and journos all debating the merits of even going down the scrounger route to begin with.

As the transcript was posted on Twitter, I think there was a collective gasp of horror. Not from all, but from the sick and disabled. Those of us hoping to hear a different tone on sick and disabled people were in for a shock. We were the scroungers, the "irresponsible" society Mr Miliband wants to root out. Of just two examples he gave that "summed up" how society had failed under Labour (the other was sickening abuse and torture!!) was "a man on incapacity benefit with a real injury who cared for his children" who, nonetheless, Ed somehow knew could be working. He then went on to use this example as someone "not showing responsibility" "shirking his duties" "abusing the system because he could work but didn't" "ripping off our society" he was not a "good citizen" he was "abusing the trust of his neighbours"......

He then went on to say ""We should not demonise people anywhere in society" which seemed as though it had fallen onto the page from another speech. "I'll say no more" as Ed seemed to like to say.

From the moment Ed took the leadership, this was the one policy he felt he could support the coalition on unquestioningly. http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2010/11/take-time-to-listen-and-learn-douglas.html I shouldn't be surprised that despite months of carefully and constructively trying to point out why ESA is failing, how it needed to be changed, why talking about sickness scroungers would only make it harder for those who were unwell or disabled to get work; yesterday we got our answer. Of all the scroungers, drug dealers, scallies and cheats Ed could have used as an example, he used us. From the very first paragraph. Wow.

But I didn't have time to rant and rage (which was probably just as well!) because I'd booked a place at the Progress event in London with Liam Byrne and Frank Field. I wanted to roll up in a ball and feel miserable. I wanted to lick my Labour-inflicted-wounds and give up, but I got on the train trying desperately to keep my mascara on my eyelashes, not dripping miserably down my cheeks.

I got to Victoria, bought a homeless crip a Pret sandwich in an act of defiance against Westminster council and wandered towards Parliament in the sunshine.

The meeting was in Portcullis House, that macho glass symbol of political opulence guarding the Thames. Slick suits and teeny weeny microphones and testosterone filled the small room. The panel, including Liam Byrne and Frank Field assembled and each spoke about the challenges of welfare reform. Responsibility was again the theme and to me, it felt like they were trapped in a nightmare of indecision. Must be tough but not quite sure why. Must reduce the welfare bill but not quite sure how. Must make the system fairer but little understanding of what "fair" might look like. It was depressing, safe, tinkering. I can't actually remember much of it, though the idea of re-enforcing the contributory principle was by far the most thought out and developed theme.

When the talks were over, questions were invited from the audience and I was primed with injustice and ready to go.

"Sue Marsh. I write the Diary of a Benefit Scrounger Blog and I'm Political Strategist for the Broken of Britain campaign group.

(Byrne grinned in sudden recognition and nodded)

"Employment Support Allowance is an abject failure. And it's a Labour failure. It's a failure because you took a work programme for able bodied people and tried to fit it to the sick and disabled. They are just 8-12% effective. You didn't engage business and explain why we could be an asset to them. You didn't look at flexible working schemes or business co-operatives. You simply asked how a business place might be modified for a physical disability, never how a working life might be. My question is : Will Labour admit that ESA is an abject failure and work on policies to change it?"

Byrne was genuinely listening. He asked me if I thought sick or disabled people would have liked support to set up their own businesses, and I referred to some of the suggestions that came up most when you all took part in our consultation http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2011/05/welfare-for-people-by-people.html

-Genuine Flexible Working
-Help to set up micro businesses
-Re-Training or Further Education
-Support in work - for employers and employees that really works with our independent needs and acknowledges the extra time off we might need.

He answered that "it was probably a fair critique". He said Labour came too late to realise any of that and though they started to put a fund together, it was too late and they lost power. I don't know anything about that, but I genuinely got the impression that he knew about this stuff. He passionately and personally opposed the Time Limit and he repeated the line that "We should be pushing the unemployed into work, not pushing the sick and disabled into poverty."

Frank Field answered that "if job seekers spend just 8 minutes a day looking for work they don't have the intelligence to set up their own businesses. You might say we're kicking the wrong target but they just don't have the intelligence."

Earlier I'd tweeted "Field talking now, I feel dirty" and with that answer he confirmed my disdain in a blaze of glory. I imagine he either misheard me and thought I was talking about the unemployed or he entirely links those "on the sick" with "the feckless work-shy." Either way he's a plum.

A ripple of "Huh?" went round the room and Byrne seemed to give him a "Huh?" frown too. Or it could have been an interested frown. Or indigestion. Who knows?

After the meeting Byrne said he read my blog. I'm sure he doesn't. But I think he almost left me with the impression that he might have. Or even that he might actually realise that some of us exist. Or maybe he's just got a nice twinkly veneer over a scrounger kicking soul, it's so hard to say isn't it? He did ask if I'd send him our consultation and ideas though, so I will.

We're used to being ignored by politicians so nothing ventured nothing gained eh?



A Plum.

**Update : I met the charming Dan McCurry on the way in who looked after me, got me a glass of water, said nice things about my blog, bought my drink in the pub after and smoked with me in solidarity outside. Not only that, but he sent the pictures through of Frank "plum" Field. All of that and I forgot to thank him. 

http://www.danmccurry.co.uk  Photography & Film
http://www.danmccurry.org Political Blog

Shame on me, *blush*

Welfare Scroungers

Here's the full transcript of Ed Miliband's speech about "scroungers"

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2011/06/13/ed-miliband-responsibility-speech-in-full

I'm off to London to hear what Liam Byrne and Frank Field have to say.

I'll blog about this tomorrow when I can stop crying long enough.

My God! Have you Seen Bob?

"Oh, I forgot to say! I saw Bob last week!

You remember Allotment-Bob? Big bloke, red face? Got his own plumbing business? You know, the guy who's really into cycling?

I tell you what, he looked awful! I couldn't believe it.

He's so skinny now, I didn't recognise him at first. His face was really grey and bony and he sort of shuffled over to say hello. Weirdest thing was his voice!! D'you remember how loud he used to be? He was sooo funny, always taking the mick and teasing the bar staff. Well, once I'd realised it was him and we were chatting, I couldn't quite work out what else was different, then I sussed it - I could barely hear a word he said! His voice was all quiet and he looked down at the table most of the time we were talking!

Of course, I asked him what on earth had happened, trying not to seem too shocked by the way he looked. Mind you, it was hard not to stare at this weird tube thing he had in his throat! It was like something out of Frankenstein!

He told me the most awful story, but It seems a bit far-fetched. Perhaps he's cracking up, a bit paranoid or something, you know?

Poor bloke says he crashed his car last year. It was a pretty nasty accident, apparently. He was out one night during all that snow we had a Xmas or two ago and his car span into a ditch. The steering wheel column crushed into his ribcage and trapped one of his legs.

Once they'd cut him out of the car, they freed up the leg and rushed both to hospital, leg packed in ice. They couldn't save it though, so now he's got a false one.

On top of that, he says (This bit's really bad...) that he got pneumonia in hospital but no-one diagnosed it for weeks! The doctor told him it's damaged his lungs now, and they won't get better. He reckoned that's why he looks so grey.

Honestly, he could hardly breath enough to talk to me! I felt crap! What can you say? It's really hard not to stare, too. I bet he knew how awful I thought he looked. I was squirming! Apparently That's why he needs the tube in his neck - a trachy-something, I forget what he called it. Helps him breath I think.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, he was in hospital for months trying to get over losing the leg. They had to teach him to walk all over again - can you imagine? Said it made him feel like a baby. Then, what with the pneumonia as well, he needed loads of physio and counselling to get over things.

Of course, he had to stop working and the plumbing business went bust! Mary (you remember Mary, his wife? She's a teacher or something isn't she?) did her best to keep it going, but she couldn't be in two places at once. She ran herself ragged trying to be with him at the hospital day in and day out, then going home and trying to do the books and send out invoices and schedule in all the jobs, but it was just impossible. Her work were amazing apparently, so that was something. She can't have any more time off now though, so Bob says he just has to sit at home all day waiting for her to get back.

But do you know what the weirdest bit of all was? He says it took him months to get any help from the DSS and when they finally said he'd get some sickness benefits, they reckoned he only had two months left to claim and then he'd get nothing!! He was actually trying to tell me that they'd made him go to "work interviews" or something to find him a job!!! As if!! What the bloody hell do they think poor old Bob could do now? With that tube thingy dangling out of his bloody neck and one leg? He can't breath for God's sake, anyone could see that??

He's 55! Started his apprenticeship at 15! 40 years he's worked and he's had that plumbing business for 30 of them! He's paid his taxes all that time, and now, after the couple of years he's had, he says he's not going to get any benefits at all!! Because Mary works or something, but she's only a teacher and she's had to go part time to look after Bob, so she only gets about 12k a year now. I said it couldn't be right mate, no-one could get by on 12k a year, but he says he definitely doesn't get any sickness benefits at all now. He's appealing it - on top of everything else, poor sod's got to go through a bloody tribunal now and plead for a few quid, but he says it takes about a year just to get to the tribunal.

D'you know what, looking at him, I'm not sure he'll even make it through the year!! He really did look shocking.

What d'you reckon? It can't be right can it? I know they say we've got to cut back, but anyone can see Bob can't work! Oh yeah and they lost the house too - do you remember the house? And the garden do you remember? He loved that bloody garden. He had it so crammed with fruit trees and veg and flowers he took on all that allotment and filled that up too! Course, he can't do any gardening now, so he's had to give it up, but you know, I reckon out of the whole story, that was the bit that upset him most. It was so embarrassing, I didn't know where to look, but he was crying when he told me about the apple trees - actually crying!!

Have you heard anything about this? Is it really true that someone like Bob could be just left to rot like that? No help, no benefits now until he retires after all those years of paying his taxes, he's just got to live off Mary? Can't be easy for a bloke like him.

Let's face it, he's not going to be working again. Anyone could see that.

Here, Pete! Pete! Over here! Alright mate! Hope you've got Insurance, have you heard about Bob........

Ed Miliband and the "Cheats" and "Shirkers"

Quotes from http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/11/ed-miliband-labour-leadership-problem


"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 :

http://sarahevanslabour.blogspot.com/2011/06/lobby-your-mp-to-vote-no-to-vicious.html#comment-form

Research http://www.l-r-c.org.uk/files/WRB2R_briefing_%20Mar11.pdf

Girl Talk - Spoonie Style Snippets

Girl Talk – Spoonie Style Snippets

By Kaliya Franklin and Sue Marsh

“How’s it going then, is he lovely?”

“Yeah, very”

“And did you manage the sex ok, not too many dislocations?”

“Yes - plenty. But it didn’t get in the way, which says a lot about him”

 “Excellent” 

“What are we going to wear for this posh London conference?”

“I dunno – something smart that won’t show the marks if poo my pants. What about you?”

“I dunno – something smart that won’t flash my knickers to the whole room if I dislocate my hips”

“Sweat pants and trainers then?”

“Yeah – do you think they make them in the style of a suit?”

“They must do - the jegging version of workwear”

“That’ll work…and hey, we’re not well anyway. They’ll expect us to be in our pyjamas”

“How did you know he was the right man for you?”

“ I tried to hide my condition from him, but he insisted if we were going to be together he had to know”

“Aww. He’s such a sweetheart”

“Yep. A couple of months after we got together I was really sick and in hospital. He slept outside in a camper van for weeks taking shifts with my dad while they both worked full time just so they could make sure I didn’t die of malnutrition in hospital.”

“Wow. No wonder you decided he’s a keeper!”

“I got dragoned by the receptionist”

“Didn’t you tell them the doctor put a note onto the screen so that this situation wouldn’t happen?”

“Yes, she just wouldn’t listen to me. Said it won’t be til 5pm and that’s that”

“That’s awful”

“Why, why does pain never matter ?  What if at 5pm I phone and he hasn’t written the prescription. It’s Friday. I’m living in fear now for the next 6 hours hoping that some benevolent doctor will put me out of my misery for the weekend.”

“That’s if the doctor even knows you need a script, did the receptionist say she’d pass it on?”

“Yeah, but she didn’t really listen to anything I said. I feel totally helpless now. I hate it when they do this. It’s really hard cos it’s a new surgery. I’m scared they’ll think I’m a rabid drug seeker and write me off. I’m just so scared now. I’m usually such a feisty chick and Dave’s role is to reel me in. But I so fall apart in these situations I just can’t deal with it and he has to. Because he hasn’t got the terror you see. There’s nothing you can do to keep the plea out of your voice, you can’t be the person you usually are because they hold your life in their hands completely. He can use logic and sense; I just get paralysed by fear like a little rabbit in the headlights.”

“What happened last night love, are you ok?”

“Yeah. It was steroid rage. They quadrupled my dosage and even Ghandi would get mood swings on that high a dose of steroids.”

“Any my face looks like a football, it’s not me when I look in the mirror and I hate it”

“You are down aren’t you love?”

“Yeah, there’s nothing worse than this for me. If that receptionist had just said ‘no problems sweetheart I’ll make sure he does it, I would’ve been ok’. But now I feel like I’m undeserving and worthless”

“I’m so happy. I’ve got an outside tap. I know I’m sad, but really it’s the most exciting thing that’s happened in weeks”

“Did your landlord sort out the other issues”

“Yes! I’ve got a spacker plug for my sink. I’m so happy. I’ve been here nearly a year and now I can use the sink”

“I reckon the new government tactic on dumbing down our protests will be to make sure we both end up in the support group so we’ve got nothing to complain about”

“It’ll be like, ‘hey look everyone, the system does work fine, we were wrong, woops, sorry’”

“Yeah. That’d be good.”

“ Ain’t gonna happen though is it, you have to present your death certificate at the WCA to go in the support group"

“I actually managed to do some housework this week”

“Wow, that’s good. Well done”

“My bedroom’s still knee deep in clothes and my oven still has a year’s worth of pizza crust to scrape up. But hey, I washed up and at least it’s made me feel a bit less panicky that my entire life’s falling around my ears”

“Don’t worry love. There’s still bits of chilli plastered to my wine rack from chilligeddon”

“By time I left my old surgery I was really good friends with the receptionists and the pharmacists and that’s half the battle. Because if they don’t want to help me and trust my judgement it doesn’t happen. Sometimes even the pharmacists would go through to the doctor, they never judged me for using pethidine. But I haven’t got that trust at my new surgery yet. I haven’t shown them I can be trusted, that I don’t drug seek, that I won’t lose my prescriptions or do anything that makes them even think I might be drug seeking.”

“ Yeah, I know what you mean. I’m so fortunate that my GP keeps me set up for pain relief at home so I never have to go to A&E for pain. And the receptionists know my voice on the phone so they always ensure I get seen or prescribed for that day”

“How’re the kids doing at the moment?”

“6 yr old told me I needed to put on a tiny bit of weight. And then he said, not so you’ve got a tummy like daddies, but just so you don’t get so poorly mummy.  I told him, but darling, that’s kind of what Crohn’s is. Even when mummy eats a lot and you do see mummy eat lots don’t you. My tummy doesn’t get all the vitamins yours does, that’s why mummy gets to eat so many cakes but won’t let you”

“I got interviewed the other day about political aspirations”

*laughs*

“Oh sorry, I didn’t mean to laugh at you. But the thought of a spoonie with political aspirations. I mean the whole system’s against it. Remember our quadruple SpAd job share idea? We decided in equality terms it would take 4 spoonies for every Oxbridge SpAd. “

“And that’s before we even get on to the skeletons in our closets just from leading vaguely normal lives, there’s no way I could be an MP. “

“But…if you’ve got no skeletons in your closet you’re too weird to be a politician anyway”

“Yeah. Shame it’s not Italy where the more rakish you are the more successful you become in politics”

“Definitely. We could cover rakish. It’s just the fit for work bit we’re not so hot on”

“So what’s on the to-do list then?”

“Oh you know, the usual. Bringing down the government, radio shows, articles to write, threats of suicide emails to answer.”

“Then there’s that speech to write.”

“Which speech is that again?”

“The one for parliament that we’ve been planning for three weeks. Remember? The one we spent a whole day writing and at the end of it you asked me what it was about.”

“Oh yeah. What is it about then?”

“I can’t remember. Too much pain… Think I’d better go sit in a corner and rock”

“Yeah, deathwalk time. Then I’m gonna sit in a corner and rock too”

“Bye love”

"Me again! Lovely doctor just phoned me, asked how I was. Said she'd chase up my new chemo drugs and left a pain prescription at reception for me. Panic over"

"Yeay. Happy Ending!"

"Bye"

Really? This passes for Parliamentary Research?

Well, well, well, look what I've found!!

After weeks of asking and several Freedom Of Information requests, I've finally unearthed the "assessment" the DWP did into Time Limiting ESA!! Clearly I use the word assessment in much the way ATOS do. In other words, pick a policy and then write some stuff that proves what you want to say. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/esa-time-limit-wr2011-ia.pdf

Just in case, in the very unlikely event that you are not an uber-geek like me and you can't stay awake long enough to plough through 16 pages of fairy stories, here's a quick summary :

-It overwhelmingly affects the poorest most. The % impact falls from the highest in the 1st decile of earnings to the lowest in the 10th.
-It estimates that 60% will simply switch to income based ESA and not be affected. This is absolutely ridiculous, pie-in the sky rubbish. I have absolutely no idea how they can make this claim.
- The report concludes that over the term of the parliament 90% of those placed into the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) will be affected.
-ALL groups will lose income on average through this measure.
-It is based on an assumption that 50% of claims will be appealed!!! How are they able to go forward with a system this inaccurate?
-The report itself claims that 700,000 will be affected by the Time Limit - a figure previously hotly debated, ranging from 400,000 to 1 million. It is expected to cut benefits for those not fully fit for work by 1.2 billion per year.
- The report acknowledges, just as I've been warning, that this is a disincentive to work and may push couples into divorce or into giving up on work altogether. However, they admit that they have no idea how significant this will be.


Possibly the most astonishing part is the claim that the Social Impacts did not need to be investigated, neither under the categories of Health and Well-being, Human Rights or the Justice System. (It does go on to say that an equalities assessment was carried out, which I will do my best to unearth)

As far as I can tell, the research is deeply flawed, based on inaccurate assumptions, incomplete and surely, illegal. If you discount the assumption that 60% will simply move to income based ESA, which I believe is just not true, it is a damning look into what passes for parliamentary research in our so called democracy.

Chris Grayling - How do you Sleep at Night?

Here's Mr Grayling telling you that assessments used to determine whether or not someone is "fit for work" or not are "Not money driven," http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13695783 somehow, ignoring the "target" of saving £1 billion from the sickness benefits bill.

However, Here's Mr Grayling during a recent DWP committee meeting telling you that the decision to stop all contributory ESA benefits entirely after one year, whether the person is then fully recovered or fit for work or not was entirely based on cost cutting. When asked if after one year these vulnerable sick or disabled people would have found work or even be fit for work he replied it

"is not about recovery times. It is not about a decision that 12 months is an appropriate time for recovery. These are people who have other means of financial support, so what we have sought to do in difficult times financially, and by taking tough decisions,...is hold the line on this difficult issue and do not accept the right hon. Gentleman’s amendments. We do not believe that financially we can do so. [Full transcript here : http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/welfare/110503/am/110503s01.htm ]

How much is this financial support that people have to fall back on? Well, the means test is set at just £7500 per year. Any working partner who earns more than this will become totally financially responsible for a sick or disabled partner!

Next, here's Mr Grayling telling you that he's 

"bemused" over being criticised for saying people should not be judged as "scroungers" ... He said he had advised "a number of media outlets" about the need for careful language but said some stories the department considered insignificant had shot to the top of the tabloid news agenda.
"Sometimes stories run in a way that completely bemuse me," he said.. [Full article here : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13695440]

However, here's FullFact.org, the independent media checking site, and the four pages of misleading headlines that have been questioned and upheld on their site. http://fullfact.org/search/node/Incapacity%20Benefit

All of the stories quote the DWP's own press releases and most refer to "government sources" using the most colourful language. As a result, the Press Complaints Commission has demanded retractions from the Telegraph, the Sun, The Mail and the Express. Mr Grayling has twice been reported to the Cabinet Office for breaking the ministerial code on politicised press releases. Last month, the minister for disabilities herself, Maria Miller, made misleading claims that more alcoholics claimed higher rate DLA than those who were blind. She was wrong. Or she lied.

So, you know, I just thought I'd link to some actual fact thingies. I know they get in the way Mr Grayling, but we can't have you all "bemused" now can we? We can't have a government minister who has no idea of the effect of his own press releases. We can't have a minister who happily admits that the very worst of his policies are purely financial and totally unresearched, whilst trying to persuade us that others are caring, compassionate and all for our own good now can we?

This shouldn't be legal let alone ignored.