Jeremy Corbyn Speaks out Against the WCA

"In response to figures released by the Department of Work and Pensions on the known number of deaths while claiming incapacity benefits, Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn said:

"It is clear that the work capability assessment has failed to adequately assess support needs, and has caused immense distress and suffering for thousands of disabled claimants.
"I voted against the legislation* that introduced the WCA and have campaigned alongside disabled people's organisations to scrap it ever since. The assessment process needs to be completely rebuilt in partnership with disabled people and health professionals."
*Welfare Reform Act 2007

The figures, published under freedom of information laws, show that more than 2,500 sick and disabled benefit claimants have died after being found 'fit for work' in just two years."

Though statistics, appeals and sadly untimely deaths, some by suicide, have shown the WCA to be a deeply flawed system I was frustrated that both Rachel Reeves and Kate Green kept insisting that it would be retained under a Labour government.

The system is broke. It is known to be broke. Yet it is kept in place as it fits in with the Tory ideology of removing people from higher paid benefit; or indeed taking them out of benefit altogether.

An independent and objective media, especially press, would of course have picked up on the criminal use of the flawed WCA years ago. A properly functioning opposition would have been pushing for Duncan-Smith to be forthcoming with the number of deaths associated with the system.

However, and because neither the media nor the opposition carried out their duties thousands of disabled and sick people lost their lives; scores of thousands more were placed in an impossible position that forced them to seek work that they were unable to get or carry out, many have been sanctioned as a result; while countless others simply fell off the statistical register.

At last we have a prominent MP in Jeremy Corbyn addressing the unfashionable issues such as the horrors of WCA. Now the issue is out in the 'mainstream' maybe it will attract some positive attention from both the opposition and media.  

Andy Burnham finally wakes up to the Tory infiltration of the Labour Party

It would appear that Andy Burnham and his campaign for the leadership of Labour is concerned that there has been a large scale Tory infiltration of the Party.

Tory infiltration into the Labour Party? Sounds like Progress.

You are correct Andy. However, the infiltration is not that difficult to pin down, they're known as Progress.

Progress progresses Party purges

As the Labour leadership election pushes towards its finale the Blairite/Progress faction within the party is carrying out a frenzied programme of purges. The three CLPs in Lambeth, Dulwich and West Norwood, Streatham and Vauxhall all came out for Liz Kendall. Given the composition and nature of these CLPs this is hardly surprising.

But when the MP for Vauxhall, Kate Hoey, heard that a former Labour leader of Lambeth Council, Joan Twelves, was denied a vote she commented:

“Joan Twelves, a former Labour Leader of Lambeth Council has been rejected even though for many years she has not been involved with another Party. Indeed she did some delivery of leaflets for me in the General Election.

Am I just being too suspicious that it seems anyone who is suspected of not being a Progress supported Liz Kendall fan is subject to instant rejection if they are known to leading Councillors?”

At the moment I’m unable to attend my CLP meetings because of the late hour they are held. Maybe that’s a blessing as I’m fairly sure my working class, pro trade union and anti-neoliberal values wouldn’t resonate with many in the Dulwich and West Norwood CLP.

Anyway, Kate was my MP up until last year. Though I disagreed with much of her politics she is a first class constituency MP; and she assisted me on a few occasions.

Just before the reselection process last year she called me to ask whether I was attending my Labour branch meeting. Mine was the last to meet and its result was purely academic as Kate was already reselected by the rest of the branches; but I guess she was looking for a clean sweep.

My old branch is full of political wannabees. The leadership is composed of councillors other halves and mates or Westminster spads associated trades in and around Parliament and Portcullis House.

On the evening in question there was a full house at the branch meeting, which had the appearance of a Progress breakout. The first few speakers stuck the knife well and truly into Hoey; and it looked as though she was sunk.

I piped up giving my support for Kate; stating that though we didn't always see eye-to-eye that I would far rather see Hoey in Parliament than yet another grey faced man in a grey suit pushing even greyer neo-lib policies - aiming my barbs at a particularly grey wannabee sitting beside me.

However the night was won by the contribution of a very elderly Afro-Caribbean woman who upbraided Councillor grey suit. She said, in a matter-of-fact way, that she had known A since he was a little boy; that she was most perturbed to hear him criticise Kate Hoey in such a way; and that he had changed from the polite little boy that she had watched grow up.

Brilliant! I could feel the embarrassment as it radiated from under his collar; and as for his colour, a delight to see. Her contribution encouraged others to come forward in support of Hoey; and the vote went in favour of reselection.

While Kate Hoey is not my political soulmate I would still rather her in Parliament with her maverick ways than another Blairite helping to push Labour out of the reach of ordinary people.

Placing a value on social profit

Labour was rejected at the ballot box a few months ago. The electorate didn't want the shoddy austerity-lite Labour was peddling. This left the Tories. Thus many floating voters voted Conservative; and around a third of the electorate did not exercise their right to vote.

Therefore it is very worrying that experienced politicians such as Andy Burnham show an inability to grasp the lessons of history – even that history they helped to create just a few weeks ago. Andy, trying to compete with the Conservatives on tuition fees by introducing a tuition tax is not a vote winner.  

Don’t you get it, Andy? The public expect a choice when voting. Labour’s manifesto at the last election did not offer enough of a difference to qualify as an alternative to the Tories. Austerity-lite policies are not a real alternative; they still pander to the neoliberal line.

Conversely, Jeremy Corbyn’s agenda does look different. It feels different too. He is not afraid to talk about raising taxes on the rich; and clawing back the £120 billion cheated on taxes. He’ll seriously close tax loopholes; unlike this government who are afraid of upsetting their friends, the tax cheats. Corbyn would give benefit claimants more protection – imagine a politician who doesn’t feel a necessity to attack the welfare state; one who understands the importance of social profit; of how social profit adds value to the lives of millions.  

Whether it’s foreign policy, defence, education, housing, the NHS, transport, or energy, Jeremy’s policies are progressive giving people a distinct choice. His policies share the values of the majority. They do not serve to protect the rights and privileges of the few. 

Corbyn's Values Reflect those of Millions of Workers

The problem with the right-wing of the Labour Party is it has enjoyed ascendency for far too long. Forget the right’s whinge that Miliband was too far left. I don't consider Ed Miliband a truly left leader.

In its right-wing direction the Party has lost touch with the very people it set out to represent, the working classes and poor. Since Blair we have lost direction. Blair, and the right, latched on to a winning formula by tweaking around the edges of neo-liberalism and selling it as palatable economic system.

Since then Labour's objective has been win at any cost, even if winning meant a total abandonment of its core values. For instance, Rachel Reeves views just weeks before the General Election:

"We are not the party of people on benefits. We don’t want to be seen, and we're not, the party to represent those who are out of work. Labour are a party of working people, formed for and by working people."

These outrageous right-wing sentiments could have been voiced by Iain Duncan-Smith or George Osborne. They represent Conservative values. Yet here was a Labour Shadow Minister showing utter contempt towards benefit claimants. A sentiment also applied to disabled people.

Such inflammatory language served only one purpose. It was intended to ‘out nasty’ the Nasty Party. Labour had reached a point where it was willing to abandon its principles of fairness to pander to winning at any cost.

After the inevitable defeat came the recriminations. Labour’s right-wing sought blame figures. However, rather than looking at the bloody obvious, the fact that their policies offered little difference than those being flogged by the Tories, they turned their guns on Ed Miliband.

Too left-wing; in the unions pockets. Then their sights targeted the unions. In particular it turned on Len McCluskey of Unite. Not forgetting to throw some blame at the Scottish voters who had turned their backs on Labour in favour of the SNP.

The one redeeming thing to have come out of this election defeat is that Jeremy Corbyn put his hat into the ring for the Labour Party leadership fight. Yet at that point in time most of us were pleased that the Jeremy’s inclusion just might push the debate a few degrees to the left. That his presence and policies could just force the Burnham, Cooper and Kendall to make some concessions in areas such as welfare.

Instead Corbyn’s campaign has captured the imaginations of scores of thousands of natural Labour supporters. His honesty and his alternative agenda to that of tired and jaded austerity measures has enthused the political left. Corbyn is no longer the makeweight candidate; he is no longer the right wing’s concession to the left to make the leadership contest a balanced affair. No, Jeremy Corbyn is now the front runner with the rest of the field running to catch him up.

For the sake of the Labour Party and the future of our country let us hope that Jeremy Corbyn can keep the momentum going until the Labour Party Conference in September. 

Propagate the Corbyn Message to the Millions of Disenfranchised Poor

Jeremy Corbyn, whether by design or not, is creating a ‘Scottish’ moment within sections of the labour Party, and maybe beyond. Just as politics took on a new lease of life in Scotland last autumn Corbyn is reenergising political debate and discourse within, particularly though not exclusively, English politics.

Last week’s welfare reform vote has, even if inadvertently, brought about discussion within the Labour Party and most definitely beyond. People, other than political activists, are beginning to question Labour values; and the answers point unquestionably towards Jeremy Corbyn.

The prize now is to get this debate out into those areas where Westminster politics doesn’t reach. We must draw the working classes and those millions disenfranchised from politics back into the debate. We must get the Corbyn message out to them so they realise that at last they too have someone who is speaking for them.   

How Dare the Left Lead the Labour Leadership Race

Incredible. Corbyn gets onto the leadership ticket as a makeweight for the debate, in order to mollify the Left, but allowing for one of the right of centre, or blatant right-wing, contestants to win the leadership contest; and the future of Labour Party is in question.

If Cooper, Burnham and Kendall were making the front running we’d not hear rumblings of discontent about the direction of the leadership race; there wouldn’t be calls to stop the contest on the grounds that the wring candidate is in the lead.

The right is complaining that it suspects that many of the 140,000 newly joined members to the Labour Party may have only joined so they can vote for Corbyn. That’s like the management of the National Lottery complaining that people are only buying tickets because they want to win a lot of money.

Corbyn is being blamed for embarrassing the party in its recent voting performance on welfare reform. Heaven forfend that a Labour MP should ignore the whip and vote against a policy that only serves to impoverish millions of poor people.

Yes, the Labour Party is in crisis. And it’s a crisis created by the right wing of the party. It is not a situation created by the one leadership candidate who is adhering to what can only be described as traditional Labour values.

Corbyn has reignited a belief that Labour can and should resort to acting like a party of the workers. A party that gives succour to the disenfranchised and the poor. A party that looks to governing for the majority; not merely pandering to the banks and big business.

Don't allow the NHS go the same way as British Rail

This government’s drip-feeding of bad news days in the NHS is the same game played by Thatcher and Major throughout the 80s and 90s with British Rail. Years of disinvestment to BR in conjunction with a negative press and media campaign of the service soon portrayed it as the sick man of British industry.

Eventually it became a laughing stock; synonymous with all that was considered wrong with public ownership of industry. In the view of the Tories only the private sector could efficiently run a national rail service.   

So by the mid-1990s BR had been set-up to fail through a combination of disinvestment and propaganda. This allowed Major to break up the service into hundreds of pieces and sell it off. A whole bunch of millionaires were created overnight as senior BR managers scooped up shares in the newly privatised industry.  

Today commuters pay three times more of their salary just to get to work and back compared to Germans, French and Spaniards making comparable commutes. Plus the tax payer is paying out more in subsidy to the private companies who own the railways than when the system was in the public domain.

Imagine an NHS alternative. A privately run health service paid for at the point of need yet still receiving a subsidy from the taxpayer. Such a service would disenfranchise millions of low paid workers as well as disabled and elderly people who could not afford to pay per GP visit, let alone for medical procedures in hospitals.  

The Tories and their predecessor coalition have and are doing exactly the same thing to the NHS as their counterparts in the 80s and 90s did with BR. That's why it is so important for us to support our NHS and propagate good news stories and successes that this service accomplishes every day.

London's Inaccessible Public Transport System

Some years ago the late Simon Hoggart wondered, in his Guardian column, why people were complaining about disability access on the London Underground when he saw so few wheelchair users actually using the system. Of course Simon was lambasted for his gaff.

The image below shows just how poor a service wheelchair users are offered by the London Underground service. Accessibility ranges from no access on the Waterloo & City Line to 3 out of 5 stations usable on the Jubilee Line.  

With such a pitiful underground system available to wheelchair users it is just as well we have an excellent bus service to fall back on. Except, this isn't always the case.

While London buses are undoubtedly more accessible that they've ever been, there are still major issues with the system. The endless feud between buggies and wheelchairs continues; and of course the judgement made that states parents don't need to vacate the 'designated' wheelchair space on a bus in favour of a wheelchair user doesn't help.

Yet the buggy is not the biggest problem faced by wheelchair users in Central or Inner London. As a wheelchair user I would not attempt to board a bus say in Brixton or the Elephant and Castle during rush hours; Oxford Street's another place I'd avoid.

As a wheelie trying to board a bus at a busy stop is problematic, especially if you're alone. In the first instance you must rely on the kindness of other travellers to allow you to indicate to the driver you wish to board. Sometimes a kind stranger will inform the driver for you; at other times it's the luck of the draw.

Even when the ramp is deployed and you're on the bus, trying to get to the designated wheelchair space can be very difficult. You'd be surprised just how many people can occupy such a small space; and attempting to displace them and manoeuvre the chair through a throng of bodies is no fun.

Passengers seem to think that by moving an inch or two they have performed their civic duty for the month. Good grace is furthest from people's minds as their routine of inching along the bus a bit to accommodate another passenger is massively compromised by a git in a wheelchair expecting them to actually get out of the fucking way!

Thus, until other bus users learn to understand the needs of wheelchair users I can't see any solution to the problem of wheelchair users accessing buses in busy traffic locations.

ILF

A PA to help bathe

To toilet and dress;

But there’s more to living

Than just personal care.

Through access to work

I hold down a job;

Earn some corn

And, pay my way.

Thus social care

Maintains the body;

While access to work

Supports me in my job.

But what of life itself;

Of social interaction?

Without support,

How do I exercise my soul?

ILF bridges

The empty shadowland

Of social exclusion

And, the sunshine of independence.

So, give me bread

To feed my body;

But allow me roses

To satisfy my soul.

Get Harry Leslie Smith Speaking to the Undecided

Like countless other Labour Party members I have great respect for Harry Leslie Smith. Harry is inspirational, a veritable crucible keeping the flame of the true Labour Party and its values alight. Were it that there were more people of his mettle leading our party.

However, on reading the piece in the OP, I felt the need to question the sense of sending an ambassador of Harry’s standing on such an election mission. Harry visited some 50 cities, towns and villages speaking at what appear to be a wide range of gigs.

http://labourlist.org/2015/05/you-cant-replace-the-experiences-of-millions-of-workers-with-aspirational-politics/

Yet, Harry, follow link above to article, appears to have been preaching to the converted, existing Labour supporters:

“Everyone I talked to had a different life experience but each person I spoke with held similar beliefs when it came to what type of government they wanted to lead Britain. They wanted a Labour government that could help maintain a strong and diverse economy but protected the rights of workers.”

He appears to have been addressing Labour supporters, which in my view is not the best use of someone of Harry’s very real campaigning skills. He goes on to expand on the concerns he encountered from Labour supporters:

“Not one person I spoke with, during the election, thought Labour was being led astray by trade unions or that they had a negative influence on its policies. The concerns of those diverse but ordinary Labour supporters were about the real threats Britain’s economy and society faces from unbridled corporations’ intent on earning profit for their shareholders but refusing to contribute to the upkeep of British society by paying fair taxation to the Treasury.”

Harry would have been better deployed speaking to the undecided, those uncommitted.

Keep Doing That Thang DPAC

There have been complaints from a disability campaigner that DPAC devotes too much time speaking against certain political parties and is too involved in trade union politics. As for speaking against UKIP; I'm fully in favour and will always speak down this fascist bunch. On trade union politics...it's best I keep quiet on that one. 

DPAC is correct in lending support to progressive campaigns that aren't primarily disability based. We as disabled people are not one-dimensional beings. While disability informs our lives in many ways, it not alone our only identifying factor.

Our lives are also affected and shaped by a whole range of other concerns. Issues that impact on everyone. When I fight for equality it isn’t merely to break the chains of a disablism; no it is also to struggle against race, gender, sexual, age, and class inequality.

Inequality that hurts black people, gays and lesbians, elderly and young, women and poor people is a hurt we should all feel. Our strength is in the commonality of our cause.

It saddens me when allies decide to view things from a narrow perspective of the snapshot. The snapshot only serves to isolate our cause into single-issue politics. This ignores the larger canvass of the class struggle. More crucially it gives government free-rein to pick us off, one at a time.

We end up divided and fighting our battles alone; we scrabble around vying with our allies for such scarce resources as funding and most important the time activists lend to our struggle.

For these very reasons I salute DPAC’s class struggle approach to the cuts, austerity, corrupt government and the fight against inequality and injustice.

In a Country...

In a Country...

In a country of plenty we’ve got food banks

A parasitic royal family whose only thanks

Is to continue scrounging from the civil list

Poncing our hard earned taxes hand over fist.

In a country ranked sixth richest on earth

It’s a criminal shame to observe the dearth

Of facilities and services afforded the young

Yet corrupt City bankers still get their bung.

In a country where we see fabulous wealth

Ill-gotten by privilege, cheating and stealth

Where ordinary people are forced to pay tax

While rich tax dodgers live off their backs.

In a country that ignores the poor and needy

And instead makes life plush for the greedy

Thus allowing this class to rule with ease

As they push the working class to its knees.

In a country with such massive social divide

Don’t be surprised if there isn’t a nationwide

Uproar against all those who keep us down

The Tories, scum press, bankers and Crown.

In a country where all privilege is now dead

This is truly a place that sees we’re all fed

Where you head to work with a cheery smile

To a decent job that makes work worthwhile.

What did the ConDems Ever Do For Us?

What did the ConDems Ever Do For Us?

Before you vote

Here’re a few facts

Remember who gave us

The bedroom tax

Who continued the

WCA; and

Introduced PIP

To Replace DLA.

Jobless sanctioned

Benefits withdrawn

For turning up late;

With it a growth

In benefit claimant hate.

Asylum seekers

Woken up at dawn

By the UKBA

Breaking down the door

To drag them away.

Then there’s the poor

Who can only give thanks

For the existence

Of high street food banks

Paying social assistance.

So next week

Make your choice;

But, ask yourself

In whose voice

Your MP will speak.

Another Royal Joins the List

Another Royal Joins the List

Hip hip hooray a royal baby was born today

Another of the clan Windsor for us to feed

One more for whom we’re expected to pay

As the family business of privilege and greed

Continues amassing more riches and wealth

While millions of poor struggle to survive

In social conditions that eat away at their health

Not earning enough to keep body and soul alive.

Banks are thriving and bankers’ bonuses paid

The divide between rich and poor grows wide

When parents can’t even sufficiently provide

So their kids go hungry; are our priorities mislaid?

The birth of any baby should be cause to celebrate

The new born is an innocent not a figure of hate

Instead we should harness our energy and toils

In creating a republic and getting rid of the royals.

   

A Left-moving SNP

The Guardian brings up the SNP's role in bringing down Callaghan's Labour government in 1979. Of course as we know this heralded in Margaret Thatcher and her toxic brand of neo-liberal economics. 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/30/tory-labour-deals-will-shape-parliament-minnows-relegated?CMP=share_btn_fb

Come on people that was 36 years ago. Over that period we have seen the Labour Party move more and more to the right. Who would ever have thought a Labour government would act the aggressor and invade Iraq?

By 2014 SNP had moved further to the Left than the modern Labour Party. The SNP now back what are considered Socialist policies such as scrapping Trident. It has defended disabled people by promoting the very social policies that should be the preserve of Labour.

By moving to the Left the SNP has captured the Zeitgeist of the Scottish Referendum. Even if it political expediency; so what, it is working.

Pesky pixelations paint Farage as the Fuhrer

An appropriately-timed piece of pixilation failure took place in Salford yesterday. The UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, was appearing on the BBC Breakfast programme in Media City Salford when a technical glitch caused a black pixel to appear under Farage’s nose giving him a Hitler-style toothbrush moustache.

Politics imitating art - this could have

 come straight from a scene in Father Ted

Appositely the glitch took place just as Farage was denying revelations from one of his former teachers at Dulwich College that the young Nigel sang Nazi marching songs and was even then considered a ‘racist’ and ‘fascist’ by staff.

Herr Fuhrer Farage was reported to have no comment to make at this moment; and one of his SS press officers said a statement would be forthcoming from his bunker at a more appropriate time.

Legality, Democracy, Freedom and Charity can be Different Things to Different People

The Tweet below makes the point very well within the discipline of Twitter's 140 character rule.

Terms and ideas such as legality, charity, democracy, freedom, etc, are all in of themselves a force for good. Yet when we begin to break them down and apply contemporary definitions they take on a new, and sometimes opposite, meaning.

Legality. Well, the Tweet above has succinctly exposed that the concept of legality can apply conveniently to anything the powers-that-be so desire.

Democracy. Another grand ideal. Yet when held up to the light of deeper scrutiny, like for instance how political parties are in the thrall of the corporations, the edifice of democracy begins to crumble.

Freedom. Thatcher packaged this one up and sold it as choice. The choice to own your council home. Though more than one third of those 'right-to-buy' homes are today part of property portfolios of private landlords. The choice to buy shares in state owned utilities such as gas and telecommunications, things that were yours anyway.

Charity. This is the practice of giving something voluntarily. Indeed the very act of charity is its own reward. That however is not what charity has become. Today charity is as much about gaining social status. Corporations appearing on primetime TV brandishing cheques the size of billboards emblazoned with corporate branding. This is actually the antithesis of a charitable act as it is performed in order to profit from personal publicity.

Swearing gets the thumbs up!

Whether swearing, the use of expletives, profanity, cursing, cussing, dirty language, using bad language, swearing like a trooper, or being a toilet mouth is generally frowned upon. People who express themselves through swear-words are often considered loutish; they can't articulate beyond the profane or are not very bright.

Not so it would appear. Some studies recently completed argue that swearing can actually be healthy and in addition stimulate emotional strength. Which flies in the face of the commonly held belief that swearing is the preserve of the ignorant or 'lower classes'.

http://distractify.com/beth-buczynski/dont-you-wish-your-girlfriend-could-curse-like-me/

In all honesty I have never held with the notion that cursing is somehow indicative of a narrow vocabulary; that people who swear because their access is limited to a but small pool of words. A friend of mine who is a fairly accomplished writer literally swears like a trooper. He uses the word 'fuck' as a means of emphasizing; and the fact he has a fairly 'posh' accent gives greater weight to his use of expletives.

The part of the article that tickles my fancy is its claim that firing off a mouthful of foul language can actually assist with pain management. As someone who makes regular use of profanity in its multifarious forms and who effusively expresses himself via execration and expletive, I have to own to not finding this form of verbal communication assistive in pain relief. Except during the tirade itself there is an unspoken suspension of pain. However, on completion of the volley of abuse services return to normal as pain takes up its rightful place - in my brain.    

Let Justice Hold Forth in the Janner Case

This Lord Janner affair is fast becoming a travesty of the justice system.

Last week I defended the position of people who lacked mental capacity being forced to stand trial. Indeed I included Lord Janner in this category. Nothing has occurred to change my mind in his area; I still firmly believe that in order to answer to criminal charges in a court of law the defendant must have mental capacity.

It is alleged that Janner, between 1969 and 1988, carried out at least 22 sex offences against children. Despite having strong evidence against the peer, the Crown Prosecution Service has made a ruling not to pursue the case any further. Their decision based on medical evidence pointing to Janner’s mental incapacity due to Alzheimer’s disease. The medical argument being that the dementia he was suffering from would stop him understanding any charges laid against him or questions put to him.

Ever since the CPS decision not to charge Lord Janner a number of disturbing incidents have been brought to the public’s attention. It would appear that despite his diagnosis of Alzheimer’s in 2009 that Janner has been claiming expenses from the House of Lords. More surprisingly in April this year he had the capacity to sign a letter declaring his wish to remain in the Lords.

More disturbing is the story that Lord Janner signed over the deeds to a £2 m property to his children last year. This transaction was carried out during the height of the police investigations into child sex offences by Janner.

Liz Dux, a solicitor from Slater and Gordon representing several of the peer’s alleged victims, said: “They will be asking how a man who lacks the mental capacity to stand trial has sufficient capacity to give valid instructions to transfer his assets.

“It will be of great concern to them to see what may be their last opportunity to achieve any sort of justice deliberately obstructed.

“The court would be asked to look at any transactions undertaken in recent months which could constitute efforts to defraud potential creditors.”

As I stated at the beginning of this piece. I still stand by my views on people without mental capacity not being forced to face a trial in which they cannot participate. However, Janner, his family and his lawyer’s appear to be complicit in actions that are highly irregular, if not unlawful. A man who has the protection of the law to stop the state prosecuting him on the grounds of incapacity should not at the same time be able to carry out legal transactions that call for mental capacity.

Janner should not be able to have it both ways. He is either incapable on capacity grounds to face criminal charges, in which case the same capacity tests must apply when it comes to all other legal decisions made in his name.

For the sake of justice I hope that these infringements are dealt with in the correct manner; and that Janner, if he lacks capacity, is not allowed to flout the law in the future.  

Poor people still clinging to life-warns iain duncan smith

http://newsthump.com/2012/12/31/poor-people-still-clinging-to-life-warns-iain-duncan-smith/

While it is so obviously a spoof (it's on NEWSTHUMP.COM!) as you read the piece it becomes very apparent that there is a thin line separating the truth from the spoof. Very cleverly written; and though IDS didn't actually utter those very words, we know he meant to.

More Tory Hypocrisy

The DUP helped prop up John Major’s Conservative government during the 1990s. In 2015 David Cameron is wooing the DUP in order to form a government. This is hardly news or ground-breaking politics. After all the full name of the party we call the Tories is: The Conservative and Unionist Party. And the DUP’s 6-or so seats may tip the balance in a few weeks.

But it’s Cameron’s rank hypocrisy that needles.

“The prospect of a Labour government propped up by the SNP is a "match made in hell", David Cameron has warned.”

The Tory Party, or to afford it its correct handle the Conservative and Unionist Party, is crying foul at the prospect of a Labour/SNP coalition. Was it really just over 6-months ago that the same PM was campaigning hell-for-leather to keep the Scots within the union? The same politician who made promise after promise, assurance upon assurance that our Caledonian cousins would fare better within GB than outside?

Well, he got his wish. Despite the fact many Scots are unhappy over the referendum result they remain part of the UK. However, Cameron is now complaining that even though Scotland remains an integral component of the union it doesn’t somehow deserve the right to be part of any government running the country.

Where were the wails of ‘Foul!’ when the DUP helped to prop up John Major’s moribund government in the mid-90s? Perfectly OK for a bunch of right-wing sectarian bigots (spot the difference) to have an influence on English politics; indeed to give sustenance to what was almost a corpse. But when the SNP look as though they may get to have influence in Westminster Cameron’s bottom lip begins to quiver.

My hope is that on May 7^th this Tory junta is well and truly trounced at the ballot box and that the oleaginous Cameron slides back under the rock he inhabited pre-2010.

Pain Tells You That You’re Still Alive

Pain Tells You That You’re Still Alive

It’s quarter to three,
In the morning,

Yet persistently

Pain carries on;

And on.

Relentlessly stabbing me

With its fiery blades.

Whichever way I try to turn

It beats me to the punch

Getting there first

To claim its right of tenure.

Like a squatter,

But, without good cause,

Pain thumbs its nose

At the authority

Of my ownership

To the muscle,

Bone and nerves

It has taken

Deep residence within.

A common truism

States that pain,

Though a pain,

Tells you:

“You’re alive!”

“Great”, I growl,

“It’s now 3 am,

I know I’m alive,

As you’ve been

Telling me

All day long.

Now go,

And come back later,

If you feel the need

To further remind me

That I’m still alive!”

Haiku aimed at tax cheats

Drowning in your wealth;

Unburden your bulging purse;

And pay your taxes.

Police Arrest Mom Accused Of Abandoning Severely Disabled Son In Woods In Cobbs Creek

A mother of a severely disabled 21 year-old with cerebral palsy has been arrested for abandoning her son in a wood for five days. The man who is tetraplegic and without speech was left with a blanket and a copy of the Bible. He was left without food or water. Fortunately he was discovered and hospitalised; and it is reported no lasting damage was sustained. 

Of course this is an awful situation. The mother will be arrested and charged with an interesting range of crimes, including kidnapping? What's galling is the indignation from the authorities. We hear 'Why didn't she look for help?' or 'If she couldn't look after her child she should have given him to someone who would'.

Very laudable sentiments. Yet in the real world meaningless. In my job I come across parents and people who care for disabled people. During the past few years social care and support has felt the cold hand of austerity cuts (and I'm sure the US is no different).

Increasingly parents of disabled children are expected to take up more of the support and care. Similarly with family and friends who care for relatives and friends. Care and support packages are reduced while the share of the carer’s work is increased. A lot of the time respite is difficult to access as social workers are compelled to find ways of cutting expenditure.

None of us yet know the full story of the severely disabled young man abandoned in the Cobbs Creek Parkway, Pennsylvania. But even without the full facts we know this was the wrong thing to do. Yet we should be slow to judge. None of us know what help the mother was receiving from the state, if any; was she being pressurised to find work? What was her mental health state? Had her needs as a carer been assessed?

We are all aware of the social exclusion disabled people endure. This same exclusion can be visited upon those who care for disabled people. The idea that if she didn’t want to take care of her son all she needed to do was pass him onto someone who dis wish to take care of him is a very simplistic view.

I hope the young man recovers from any mental scars often left from this kind of experience. I also hope that instead of the knee-jerk reaction of charging the mother with anything they can lay their hands on the authorities look deeper into the causes of the breakdown in the relationship between son and mother that led to this very sad situation.

Californian Sheriff Deputies Violently Attack an Unarmed Incapacitated Man

A helicopter captures on video a mounted man who is trying to evade the police. According to police sources, Francis Pusok, 30, had stolen the horse, according to the police, to assist in avoiding arrest for identify theft.

Footage from a helicopter camera clearly shows Pusok, in red, falling from the horse. Two law enforcement officers then come into view. Each officer is pointing a taser gun. Which explains Pusok’s fall from the horse.

The video shows us Pusok picking himself up and running away. He stumbles; and falling again remains face down on the ground. This does not stop one officer tasering him from a distance of about 5 feet. Tasered Puzok then places his hands behind his back. This in any language is a sign of surrender. Pusok knows the game’s up; it’s a fair cop, guvnor.

Not so for these brave boys in blue. No, instead they begin a savage attack. First one beats him about the head with the taser gun; then both proceed to punch and kick the defenceless runaway.

During a period lasting more than two minutes 11 law enforcement officers join the game. The scene resembles a pack of animals finishing off their prey. The assaulters deliver 37 punches, 17 kicks, 4 baton strikes and 11 blows to the head – no mention of initial attacks where taser guns were used as bludgeons.

Next up pops San Bernardino County Sheriff McMahon who confesses he hasn’t watched all the footage. Why not Sheriff? This is a piece of footage under five minutes long. Why call a press conference if you can’t discuss the issues critical to this situation, namely the viciousness of your officers.

However, McMahon does find the video ‘disturbing’. He goes on to say: “If any sheriff went too far in this arrest they will be held accountable.” His failure to watch the complete video of the incident allows the Sheriff McMahon to couch his responses in such away. For the rest of the world who took the trouble to sit through the entire five-minute footage, there is no ‘if’.

These officers confronted a fugitive. The use of taser gun/s on the fugitive ensured he was debilitated enough to be restrained and arrested. The man even brought his hand behind his back inviting restraint. The violence meted out to Francis Pusok from this point on was gratuitous and sadistic. The perpetrators of this violent attack should have the full force of the law brought upon them. Rather than custodians of the law they have taken the law into their own hands and in a two minute frenzy of violence tried and judged Pusok.

Despite the vicious attack, Pusok is still alive. The same can’t be said for all too many African Americans who, with a sickening regularly, we see being executed by US law enforcement officers.

Sadly this is a trend that is creeping across the Atlantic as we saw with Mark Duggan a few years ago; and with the assassination of Jean Charles de Menendez and the Robocop who murdered newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson.

US Unhappy as 'Back-Yard' Countries Refuse to Place Sanctions on Venezuela

The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, or CELAC, is a regional bloc of Latin SAmerican and Caribbean states created in December 2011. In 2010 President Evo Morales of Bolivia stated that CELAC was: "A union of Latin American countries is the weapon against imperialism. It is necessary to create a regional body that excludes the United States and Canada… it is the best time for prime ministers of Latin America and the Caribbean to gestate this great new organization without the United States to free our peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean."

Given the, often bloody, history of this region and the often unwanted attention foisted upon many of the CELAC states by the USA it is hardly surprising that such a body has been formed.

Yet, the USA refuses to accept it neither has the authority or the muscle to walk into these countries and dictate terms. This was illustrated this week when the US sub-secretary for Latin America Roberta Jacobson voiced her ‘disappointment’ “that there were not more countries to defend (the sanctions). They were not made to harm Venezuelans or the Venezuelan government.”

Roberta Jackson, US Sub-Secretary for Latin America is miffed because the
entire CELAC membership of 33 states refuses to agree to sanctions for Venezuela

In criticism of the solidarity expressed by Latin American countries for Venezuela Jacobson uttered that, “The tone that Latin American leaders are using demonizes the United States as if it were the source of Venezuela's problems, and this makes it hard for us to proceed pragmatically.”

Demonizes? Whoa, slow down for a minute. Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Chile, etc, etc. Come on USA you’ve stamped your military power across this region demonising and vilifying any and every progressive movement that has attempted to break the strangulating chains of your blood-sucking corporations.

If you want proof of the USA bully-boy tactics in the region just listen to what Smedley Butler an ex-United States Marine Corps major general had to say about America’s actions in the 1930s:

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

These kind of actions continued decade after decade; and having the misfortune of living in the USA’s ‘back-yard’ Central American and Caribbean states have felt the full force of having the world bully as a close neighbour.

Back to the present. The USA is now attempting to impose economic sanctions on Venezuela mainly because this state has for most of this century been governed by Leftist socialist governments who have pushed a progressive programme with policies that include nationalization, social welfare programs and opposition to neoliberalism policies favoured by the IMF and the World Bank.

Indeed Chavez was striving to create with the Bolivarian State of Venezuela a communal state, whose main idea is to build self-government institutions like communal councils, communes, and communal cities.

On the death of Hugo Chavez in 2013 Nicolas Maduro took office as the democratically elected president of Venezuela. Since then the US has been running a negative campaign against both Maduro and the Bolivarian Stsate of Venezuela. However, their attempts at imposing sanctions are being met with resistance from CELAC.

Highly respected politicians such as the former Uruguayan president, Jose Mujica are vocally supporting Venezuela and its president. More so in March 2015 all 33 CELAC member states came out in opposition to the US’s demand for sanctions. This action provoked some 5 million Tweets across 105 countries protesting against President Obama’s attempts at sanctions.

A word to the wise USA, sort out your own home. Put roofs over the heads of your millions who are homeless. Give to the 40+ million Americans who do not have medical insurance. Stop the corporations bleeding their workers dry as they squeeze every cent of profit. Cease giving tax breaks to the rich while the real wealth creators work for starvation wages. Stop your wars and stop arming every would-be tyrant on the basis of my enemies enemy is my friend; it hasn’t ever worked and won’t in the future.

Instead look to your Latin American and Caribbean neighbours for political and democratic guidance. Because they’re the future…you’re yesterday’s news.

Don't block me in!

The picture shows a small area opposite the wheelchair allocated area on trains. This area is leads to the automatic carriage door that leads to the vestibule and toilet; and is the only exit wheelchair users can access.

If blocked with luggage it traps the wheelchair user within the carriage. Thus we’re unable to access the toilet. Or even get off the train if our stop is earlier than the train’s termination.

On countless occasions I have politely requested that passengers don’t leave their buggies, suitcases, rucksacks, Tesco’s weekly shop, double bass, and various indeterminate objects in these spaces.

Mostly my beseeching has been disregarded. On one occasion a rather nice elderly couple entered the carriage Mrs Nice Elderly Couple strolled along the aisle searching out their seat reservations while Mr Nice Elderly Couple began stowing away the half-a-house they had decided needed a holiday. On finding space for several rather large pieces of baggage Mr Nice Elderly Couple mopped the sweat he’d worked-up from his labours from his wet brow. All that remained was a suitcase about half the size of Hampshire.

“Phew, hot work!” this travelling, Mr Nice Elderly Couple wheezed at me, either grinning or struggling to ensure the breath he was trying to catch wasn’t his last. I couldn’t be too sure as he was looking decidedly doddery even before he took on the Herculean task of luggage storage.

I smiled weakly in return; not sure if getting into a conversation with someone potentially so close to his maker was wise.

Nodding to me, or at least think it was a nod, it could have been a trial-run at his last earthly movement, he then began to wobble along the carriage to where Mrs Nice Elderly Couple had expelled a squatter from her reserved seats.

“Excuse me!” I called after him. “You not supposed to leave luggage in that space” I stated. To which he, with disturbingly furrowed brow (where did he conjure up all that extra forehead to create what looked like a map of Clapham Junction?), asked: “Oh, why not?”

Not really wishing to engage in a big debate I pointed to the (admittedly not overly large and quite poorly located) sign telling people not to block area with luggage.

He looked a bit put out, so I reinforced the sign’s message by explaining that his piece of luggage, without reference to its incredibly large volume, blocked my access to the exit; and this meant I couldn’t move freely around the train, especially making it impossible for me to get to the toilet.

“Sorry, I’ll move it while you go to the toilet” he offered, missing the point by a distance not far short of his giant suitcase.

As he began to shift it I said: “I don’t need to use the toilet right now…”, at which he replaced the suitcase and toddled off to his seat.

“You have to move the luggage from this area” I called after him with all the authority I could muster, without making this into the in-train journey entertainment.

He, not bothering to stop, called over his shoulder, “Just let me know when you’re ready to use the toilet and I’ll come and move the case.”

Of course, why didn’t I think of that? The reasonable mind will always uncover a reasonable solution to everyone’s satisfaction. Now, had I the gift of levitation this might have been considered a reasonable solution. I don’t, so I pressed the button for the train manager and left it to him to explain to Mr Nice Elderly Couple why he wasn’t allowed to leave one half of his house in that particular space.

It's Labour's Move...

I totally agree that Cameron's government has a terrible record on pretty much every aspect of life. None more so than his record on disability issues. It is safe to say he has made life hell for a substantial portion of disabled people in the UK; and for those he hasn't managed to attack, he's coming for them if he regains power.

Now we, disabled people know this; our comrades who support us in our struggle also know this; even organisations such as Disability Rights UK, who sold their soul to this junta for a few measly grants, know this.

This being so, why hasn't Labour grasped the fact that sticking to Tory policies around disability issues is not a clever tactic? There are millions of disabled voters who on polling day most certainly will not vote Tory; as for the LibDems, the less said the better.

Many of this group are 'natural' Labour voters. However, Labour is not being seen as the party that will support disabled people. This is a massive error on the part of Labour. It would not take a seismic shift in policy for Labour to attract a lot of the disabled vote. A few changes in policy would suffice. For instance:

·       scrapping the Work Capability Assessment in favour of a fair and transparent test

·       ending the necessity to re-assess all DLA recipients on indefinite awards

·       making the PIP tests fairer

·       lifting the closure of ILF

·       making Access to Work easier to access and opening it out to more disabled people

Obviously those policy changes alone wouldn’t compel every disabled voter to place an ‘X’ in the Labour box. However, it would secure masses of votes that will instead go to the Greens, the SNP, or sadly not cast.

Come on Labour. It’s not too late to move to the Left.

The contradictory world of Universal Credit

In order that we don't all become deranged at everything, or indeed anything, that emanates from the DWP we should bear this in mind. Iain Duncan-Smith is ideologically driven, as are his cohorts in the Conservative Party. Common sense, human empathy, common decency and basic humanity are to all intents and purposes terra incognita to this crew. Duncan-Smith has created a parallel universe within the DWP where good is bad, day is night, right is wrong and light is dark. A world more suited to a Kafka novel.

The actions of the DWP over the past few years have had little or nothing to do with deficit reduction, despite the vicious cuts. Indeed ESA figures are on the rise while JSA figures are on the decline. Employment may be on the increase. Yet the number of people in work needing to claim housing benefit has increased – it has actually doubled since 2010.

By forcing people into non-jobs and increasing benefits’ sanctioning it is easy to show an increase in employment and a drop in unemployment. Yet when these figures are closely scrutinised it is discovered that many of the ‘jobs’ created are on zero hours contracts; that disabled people are being driven into bogus self-employment as this is said to be the only way we’ll work; and then there are the millions of workers who cannot find enough work to properly live, the underemployed.

This final group could also fall foul of Duncan-Smith’s new policy of in-work benefits’ recipients being sanctioned for not finding more hours work. The fact that they are strenuously seeking more employment is irrelevant. That they actually want to work more hours but cannot find work that isn’t there is beside the point.

Our punitive benefits system, and there will be none more so that universal credit when it is fully implemented, serves only to punish. There is no leeway, no slack offered within this miserly credit that would take into account the various, often conflicting, factors involved in job seeking.