Oh what fancies we conjure up...

"The point is to get enough votes for the petition for the mainstream media to take notice."

I don't share your optimism on the scum media taking notice. They've ignored our pleas in the past. Disabled people have killed themselves as a result of disgraceful ATOS assessments. Was there an outcry from the Fleet Street filth? No, there wasn't. hundreds upon hundreds have testified to the brutality of government policy against disabled people. Have the Fail, Sun or Express ever taken our side? No, they haven't.

Petitions don't usually achieve anything. Mostly they're used in campaigns to make people feel better about themselves. The best thing about petitions is not the getting of thousands upon thousands of signatures; no, it's the engaging with people in the street who stop and ask what the petition is for. In my experience, and I've ran scores of petitioning and leafleting events; and,  for every 20 signatures you receive or leaflets you distribute, a three-minute conversation with a passer-by is more beneficial.

"When some of the gutter press realise the "shop a cheat" hotline is costing a shedload of money for next to no result, they will squeal like stuck pigs about the waste of taxpayers money."

No they won't. To begin with, the government will not allow this to appear as a failure. They'll massage and manipulate data to show the venture a success; and by the time a decent newspaper has got to the truth it'll be yesterday's news. Remember the Benefits' Integrity Project (BIP)? This was going to expose disability benefits' cheats and save the country a fortune. It ended up bringing a handful of people to court, not all of whom were convicted. That particular exercise cost scores of millions of pounds. There was no outcry from the right-wing press or media.

If, as the Mail Online shows is true, that 84% of those who responded to their poll claim to support the strike, this is indeed an irony of ironies!

Such a thing certainly put a smile on my face; and I imagine it seriously pissed off the Mail management, staff and many of its rabid dog readership.

Make it a criminal offence to maliciously report someone for benefit fraud.

The whole idea of grass lines leaves me cold. People being encouraged to spy on friends, family or neighbours just in case someone is getting something for which they've no entitlement. This kind of Big Brother quasi-totalitarian tactic isn't fit for decent society; it breeds a culture of disharmony rather than one of civility.

But then, isn't that exactly what this junta we have in power wants. They'd prefer to see working class people at each other's throats as this averts attention away from the destruction of the Welfare State they're carrying out.

Curtain Twitcher's of the World Repent;
you've nothing to lose but your nets!

Rather than us pit ourselves against one and other by using grass lines, why aren't we attacking this rotten lot of Bullendon boys for protecting their mates when it comes to cheating the country out of scores of billions of pounds every year - not some piddling 0.45% of DLA fraud. We should be venting our anger at the Eton mess who are flushing this country down the toilet with their ideologically focused austerity measures.

Calling for scum who whisper false accusations down the line to a government official to be prosecuted if found to have maliciously misreported a situation isn't the answer. We need to reclaim our societies; we need to politically educate people as to the real meaning of right and wrong; we need to identify the real cheats, those billionaire vampires who sustain themselves by bleeding us dry.

Stop fighting each other; it's costly a distraction. 

What's the TUC Doing in the Fight to Protect Disability Rights?

The TUC is already engaged in the struggle against this government's austerity measures, including those directed, most viciously in my view, against disabled people.

Indeed, the 26^th March demonstration, which drew over half-a-million people into one of the largest ever protests ever seen on the streets of London was a TUC initiative. On that day, it's estimated that there were probably 20,000 to 25,000 disabled people on the march or at the rally. Someone also spoke on behalf of disabled people at the Hyde Park rally.

On the 11^th May, the TUC supported the Hardest Hit march in London; and, again a message of support from Brendan Barber, speaking for the TUC, was sent to the Hardest Hit marches and rallies a few weeks ago on October 22^nd.

The TUC is also active in other areas of disability rights; as expected we, with the support of affiliate unions, are pushing for the government to keep open the Remploy factories; we're arguing for an increase in the Access-to-Work budget, pointing out to the government the positive benefits this resource creates; we're strenuously promoting initiatives on the relationship between workplace stress and mental illness, and ways to counter these conditions.

The TUC also promotes Disability Workplace Champions. We're striving for this group of reps to gain the same industrial recognition as shop stewards, H&S reps and ULRs. Reasonable adjustments in the workplace is another area in which we assist our reps.

However, much of our energy is directed at opposing this government's cuts and their plans to dismantle both the NHS and our Welfare System. 

A number of members of the TUC Disability Committee, including its Chair, are supportive of many of the disability organisations and initiatives currently fighting against draconian government policy. They support Hardest Hit, Black Triangle, Disabled People Against the Cuts, as well as being closely associated in fighting against Disability Hate Crime and promoting Disability History Month.

A Sense of Duty, to Whom?

The photograph below speaks volumes. That unholy link between majesty and military. The commemorations at the Cenotaph somehow cementing a common bond between fallen soldiers and the royals on display in their regimental regalia.

Rally to the colours

And die for your queen

Life ain't worth living

And death is obscene... 

The monarch in grave black her face a stony mask of duty for duties sake. Princes, princesses and dukes adorned in their uniforms of death.  

They're telling us to carry on answering the call to colours and they'll with dignity tread respectfully over our memories every November 11^th. For there is no greater sacrifice than the surrendering of one's life in order to uphold an anachronistic social system, such as royalty.

Watching the choreography played out at the cenotaph every November brings home to me the real dignity that I have witnessed at small war memorials in different parts of London over the years. Some years ago I attended one such ceremony in Kennington Park. The small crowd, mainly of elderly men, was quite and dignified.

Afterwards we went for a pint. Naturally, the talk was about the war; yet there was no recrimination, lots of sadness tempered by laughter at the good times. Almost to a man, these old soldiers held firm to their Socialist ideals. They spoke most disparagingly of the likes of Churchill and Montgomery, who according to one ex-desert rat, "Would 'ave 'ad our fuckin' fag ration if 'e 'ad 'is way!"

A couple of my uncles who came to England in the 1930s and served in N Africa and Italy rarely spoke of their war experiences. But, there was one thing they couldn't stomach and that was the idea that they, or indeed many of their British Comrades, had fought for king and country. No, they were fighting the Nazis and what Nazism stood for. Thus, they regarded the ceremony at the cenotaph as an insult to the memory of all those who died fighting fascism. 

Why do we need the Poppy Appeal?

Why the necessity for a 'poppy appeal'? I looked at the Royal British Legion site for clarification and found that the monies collected from poppy sales go to help ex-service personnel with:

• purchasing Electrically Powered Vehicles or scooters to give elderly or disabled veterans back mobility and a independent lives.

• providing severely disabled people and their carers with much needed welfare break.

• arranging bathroom adaptations which assist disabled people to perform basic functions in their home such as showering or washing safely.

Nobody, neither disabled soldier nor civilian, should have to depend on charity for such necessities. As a Socialist I believe the state should provide both medical and personal care at the point of need; and this should include any equipment and services needed to ensure full medical and care provision.

On the news yesterday there was a 'feel good' story about a little girl with quadriplegic cerebral palsy whose parents had raised the £40,000 needed to send her to the USA for an operation that would greatly improve her mobility. Of course her parents were grateful to those kind people who had contributed to their cause.

But why are disabled soldiers and children depending on charity for that which the state should fund.

In my work I see the state moving further and further away from its responsibilities for providing medical and personal care. There is a seismic shift coming in health care; and we are heading for massive changes in the provision of personal care and support for disabled and elderly infirm people.

This winter may well be a cold one; but for scores of thousands of disabled and elderly next spring will really bring a chill to their lives.

Get Off Your Knees Motability

"Although it is disappointing that these changes will mean disabled people will have less choice, we know that the longevity of the scheme is the most important thing."

Motability is a registered charity, a scheme open to some recipients of Disability Living Allowance that allows, amongst other things, disabled people to lease cars. Recipients of the Higher Rate Mobility Component of DLA may (usually people given a three-year, or longer, award) spend this money on leasing a car.

People can lease a vehicle by giving up the mobility component of DLA. Sometimes there is a down payment on larger or higher spec cars. The lease tem is three-years, after which you 'swap' the old car for a new one (unless you wish to keep the three-year-old vehicle for a further term, thus dispensing with an up-front payment for a new car).

As a user of Motability, now on my second vehicle, I see a scheme that is working for the end-user, namely disabled people; and yes, its continuance should be a priority.

For quite a while now, the British media, in particular the paper side, has been running a hate campaign against disabled people, more so those of us receiving benefits, often DLA. Sensationalist stories of 'scrounging, lead-swinging unemployed disabled people driving around in brand-new £30,000 cars provided by the state' populate the pages of the scum press. The country's going to the dogs and disabled people are bleeding it dry!

They rarely report that for every 'free car' provided by the state, a disabled person pays £51.40 per week; or, that sometimes we may have to contribute hundreds, or thousands up-front payments in order to get vehicles that suit our impairments. Many disabled people can't simply take the cheapest car on offer; no, they often need extremely complex and complicated adjustments to their vehicles which up the price.

So, the scum press has pushed the government into making the following negative changes to the Motability Scheme:

1.     Limiting the range of vehicles available to cars with an Advance Payment of £2,000 or less, approximating to a Recommended Retail Price limit of circa £25,000. The changes to car selection take place immediately, although Motability will honour all existing orders and commitments, changes will be fully implemented in December 2011.

2.     Limiting the nominated drivers to those who live within 5 miles of the customer in order to minimise the risk of the car being used other than for the benefit of the disabled person

3.     Piloting new vehicle technologies to monitor how cars are used where the greatest risk of abuse is perceived.

4.     Requiring a Statement of Responsibilities to be signed at the beginning of each lease by the customer and nominated drivers together with the supplying motor dealer to ensure that the key responsibilities of each party have been communicated and are clearly understood.

5.     No longer accepting nominated drivers under the age of 21 on the Scheme from January 2012, unless they reside with the disabled customer. 

6.      Restricting young drivers under the age of 25 to cars in ABI Insurance Group 16 or lower which also have a power output of 115 BHP or less.

The first change smacks of pure vindictiveness. A means to mollify the rabid readership of the Daily Hate. Some disabled will need vehicles whose spec goes over the £25,000 limit. Indeed, some will be able to afford dearer cars, remember this benefit is non-means tested.

As for the second in the list, the government has cannot have thought this through, unless they really are as nasty as they're beginning to appear. For me the 5-mile rule is not a particular problem; my PAs, who drive me everywhere I go, all live within walking distance of my home. Not so for people living outside big cities. Why, for cities such as Sheffield a 5-mile+ journey are not out of the ordinary. If you happened to live in the Yorkshire Dales, or pretty much any rural part of the UK, 5-miles is not considered a great distance.

With youth unemployment a national disgrace, and with no sign of improvement, PA and care work is one area that would attract this age demographic. Young disabled people don't want middle-age PAs and carers, especially when out and about, going out at night, that kind of thing.

What about children who look after disabled parents or siblings? They often surrender their childhood to care for disabled family members. Many undergo great hardship balancing school and caring duties, sadly with little or no help from the state.

Well, this government is now going to disallow people under 21 from becoming a nominated driver on the Scheme. So, an 18-year-old disabled recipient of DPs and ILF cannot employ a PA of her own age to drive her to and from university, go shopping with, or take her to a club or pub.

Similarly, a young man who has cared for a disabled mother since he was 10; fetching, carrying, cooking, etc, etc cannot, though he has passed a driving test and has a full driving licence, be nominated as his mother's driver on the Scheme because he is only 18 and has moved away from home.

Motability, why didn't you get off your knees? Why didn't you approach your clientele, us the disabled people and ask for our advice. We would have backed you against a vicious bunch of thugs that masquerades as a government. Are you so gutless that you allow the best interests of your customers, us disabled people, to be overridden by the baying of a few scummy media hounds.

Motability needs disabled people. We also need the service you provide. This government has stared you straight in the eyes; and, you blinked! When they introduce PIP within the next couple of years, prepare for a massive drop in your customer-base. As has been shown with ESA where they were hoping to see a third on ESA, a third on ESA WRAG and a further third going over to JSA; this hasn't happened.

No, thanks to their tame poodles, ATOS, they're pushing far greater numbers of disabled claimants onto JSA, thus making massive savings. ATOS will also carry out the reviews from DLA to PIP. So Motability, it won't be the 20% figure the government touted when it announced the introduction of PIP; no, it could be 30, 40, or 50%, maybe even more.

Could Motability survive a halving of its business? We'd be looking at thousands of job losses across the Scheme itself, the dealerships, carmakers, insurance providers, etc. Not to forget those hundreds of thousands of disabled people who will be left abandoned; many will be resigned to a prison-like existence locked away by distance from family friends and loved ones.

Finally, if you, Motability, believe that by meekly accepting the government's changes to the Motability Scheme you'll somehow draw away the scum media's attention from 'free cars to disabled people', then you're woefully mistaken; and, I'd say don't understand the motives of either the gutter press or this government.   

Royal involvement in the disability movement is a sop to the masses

Oh dear. Why do so many people fall for the old three-card-trick. The one that has royals championing disability causes, thus suddenly becoming part of the movement.

I see the existence of royalty as part of the problem, not part of the solution. There is no room in a modern democracy for such anachronisms. The royal family perpetuate the culture of privilege in this country.

The fact they are so heavily involved in charity is a kind of pay back; it's a sop. But, more sinister than that it also breathes life into the charity culture. Cameron and the Tories are trying to sell this idea in their Big Society spiel. If we're not careful our very Welfare State, and NHS, could be displaced by charity.

Things are bad enough now with cuts; with benefits qualifying criteria tightening. However, benefits and services are still available to disabled people. Imagine having to rely upon the whim of a charity for benefits and services. We'll end up like the tramps of old who were forced by the Sally Army to sing hymns for their bread and dripping; or worse, like the poor of Ireland, not so many years ago, who had to undergo a virtual inquisition from the Society of St Vincent de Paul in return for the very basics of living.

Disabled people must join in with all the other anti-cuts movements. Bit by bit events such as Saturdays are beginning to stir people into action. Let's throw our support behind the strikes on 30^th November; as it isn't just service providers that are losing out, we, the service users are also being hit.

Royals and charities are not the solution to what this government plans for us, the demolition of the Welfare State, and along with it the NHS. Royals and charities are actually part of the problem. For as long as we have these kinds of systems in place we, as disabled people dependent on services and equipment that the state is no longer willing to fund, are going to beholden to organisations that are only answerable to their trustees.

What message does royal patronage send?

"If it takes a royal or a celebrity to highlight the difficulties disabled people face, than that's not ideal, but at least the message is getting out.."

The thread isn't about royalty highlighting the plight of osteoporosis it is about the Daily Hate's willingness to on the one hand demean disabled people on benefits while on the other promote a disabling condition because it has royal backing. The point is about the hypocrisy of this particular paper.

As for 'the message is getting out' argument, yes it's true. The message is saying if you have osteoporosis you're genuinely disabled, therefore worthy of consideration by the Daily Heil and its readership; but, woe to the rest of you with so-called disabilities, because we're on your case and will continue to run our campaign of hate until the government gets the message!

As an afterthought to the OP and to comments made, this isn't about a royal or a celebrity highlighting the difficulties encountered by disabled people. This is about an individual using her position to focus on a particular condition because it's close to her heart. This is about individuals, maybe inadvertently, creating hierarchies of disability and conditions. This is about what conditions are acceptable to people of influence and editorial boards of newspapers.

We shouldn't be running our medical services on the whim of a royals personal connection to an illness or condition; nor should we be depending on a charity that taken the fancy of some celebrity to dole out equipment or services to disabled people. And, we certainly shouldn't be applauding the Daily Heil for jumping on a royal bandwagon.  

Changes to Motability

Under PIP manual wheelchair users who can self-propel 50 meters or more will be deemed as having no mobility needs. Now the authorities are placing a 5-mile barrier on nominated Motability vehicle drivers. The idea that this Conservative regime has any interest or concern for disabled people speaks volumes with these two proposals.

At the moment I have a Motability car; for now, I also have a support package that allows me to employ PAs - this could all change when my DLA is reviewed. So, for the time being I'm able to employ carers who happen to live close by - that is they all live within a five-minute drive of my home.

But then, I live in Inner London; where time and distance are measured differently than in suburban or rural locations. There is no way I'd employ a PA who lived 5 miles away, due to the time it'd take for her to reach me in an 'emergency'.

 On the 50 meter self-propulsion issue. Whoever came up with that idea is obviously believes in the Eastenders Model of day-to-day living. You know, that model that has everyone living, working and socialising within the confines of Albert Square. In some ways I'm supportive of such a way of living, it'd cut down on travelling time to work; save us money; be environmentally beneficial; and give us more leisure time. The down side would be that disabled wheelchair users wouldn't qualify for the mobility element of PIP; and, we'd be bored witless in no time!

Camilla: I watched in horror as Mama died slowly and in agony from osteoporosis

"Camilla: I watched in horror as Mama died slowly and in agony from osteoporosis"

This from Camilla, the woman married to the next in line for the throne. Which shows illness and disability can visit the richest as well as poorest - though if you have the means you can cushion yourself from the extra costs of disability.

"Research suggests that an astonishing 1,150 sufferers die needlessly each month...  Better care would save the NHS millions of pounds a day."

The Duchess makes a passionate plea for better diagnosis and treatment; and, immediately the "Daily Mail campaigns to spare other women the same fate!"

In the past I've been criticised on here for using the class card to underpin the cuts argument. Well here we have The Cripple-Finder-General of the press taking up the cudgels on behalf of sick and disabled people, pretty much at the bidding of royalty. This is a class issue. The whole cuts business is class based.

Disabled people and groups have been telling the likes of the Heil of the great hardship and poverty hundreds of thousands of people with, often life threatening, illnesses and disabilities are undergoing when they lose ESA or DLA. Not content with ignoring our stories, they go further and publicise and distort articles that paint us as cheats and scroungers.

It will be interesting to see how they treat a benefits claimant with osteoporosis who ATOS assess as fit for work. Can they be so crass as to make distinctions between illnesses, impairments and disability?

Of course they can; and they will.

Let's Boycott the Mail, Sun and Express!

Whatever happened to the British sense of 'fair play'? Where has the tolerance this country was once noted for gone? Whatever happened to journalists motivated by objectivity; whose job was to challenge the administration and report their failings.

Once-upon-a-time newspapers held governments to account. Today publications such as the Mail, Express and Sun are no more than an extension of political parties. They blithely do the government's bidding; they're briefed by the DWP and simply produce Tory propaganda. They're too lazy and tied-up with the Tory party to properly investigate government data. They, generally, ignore the voices of ordinary people, even when we approach them with corroborated evidence of wrong-doing by organisations such as ATOS, and even the government.

They play their readers like cheap fiddles; knowing exactly which strings to pluck in order to produce just the right discordant note, the one that leads to a chorus of howls from their baying readership.

Since these rags have declared war upon disabled people why don't we do what Liverpool did against the Sun after that particular rag told disgraceful lies that served to denigrate the reputation of football supporters who had watched family and friends die at Hillsborough. The people of Liverpool stopped buying the Sun; and, this ban still holds up in many parts of the city.

Let's stop buying this filth. Not only that, let's get our families and friends to do the same. Come on, let's get a campaign going against these purveyors of disablist propaganda; get our voices heard.   

Hardest Hit Saturday

I Attending the Hardest Hit event today in London. Our venue was the amphitheater adjoining the iconic GLA building on the Thames, near Tower Bridge. Though being in the 'pit' of the amphitheater it in no way felt like a 'lions versus Christians' event.

The day was bright and sunny; and, as though divined by architects, the surrounding glass buildings reflected the sun down, thus warming us against a chill wind gently whipping us from the river.

Claire Speaking at the Event with me Looking On

There was a good turnout, around 350, as I was informed. Forgive me for not recalling the names of all the speakers, there were about eight or nine in all - three of whom were politicians. Kirsten Hearn, Chair of Inclusion London, MC'd the event. Chivvying us along by urging us to chant a few, by now standard, slogans - so standard indeed, that I've forgotten the words. But reader, you'll guess the kind of thing: "No ifs, no buts, no benefits' cuts!"...

Sadly, the message from most speakers was the same as that on March 26^th, May 11^th and at the scores of cuts rallies, pickets and protests I've attended since this mob came into government 17 months ago.

My contribution was well received. First of all I delivered a message from Brendan Barber, TUC General Secretary; he'd sent a message of support from the TUC's General Council to all the cities that held events today.

Continuing from this I assured the crowd that the trade union movement was, as it proved in both March and May, 100% behind the Hardest Hit and campaigning against cuts in benefits and services for disabled people.

Remembering where I was I sent a message of warning to Mayor Johnson; telling him we were on his lawn and if necessary would be back on it again to protest against his party's vicious cuts if things didn't change.

Your's Truly Prepared for the Autumn Sun on 22 October
at the Hardest Hit Event by the Thames in London

The remainder of my speech touched on various areas of the cuts. At the end of the speech I gave a plug to the excellent document by Demos 'Coping with the Cuts, 2011', a title laced with irony, I hope! Incidentally, I'd recommend this to my reader; follow this link from Scope:

http://www.scope.org.uk/help-and-information/publications/coping-cuts-2011

This Tory Government Knows Exactly What It Is Doing!

On a forum one of the posters made a few, what I regard as either naïve or misguided, comments about this government and its treatment of disabled people. In a letter to his local Tory MP, he stated:

"Instead, I believe that you are simply not aware of the potential affects of this bill on the lives of disabled people."

That the above was true. Sadly, this government is on an ideological crusade, along the same lines as Thatcher's regimes; which is to finally rid the UK of its Welfare State, including the NHS.

Thousands of disabled people have spoken and written, by now, billions of words on the dangers of ESA examinations, the changeover to PIP, cutting vital disability services and medical provision. This government has had ample opportunity to listen to and heed the warnings heralded by a combination of disabled individuals, disability charities, people working in the public sector and in the voluntary sector.

"One cannot help but think that someone has decided how much less they want to spend and are now moving the goalposts to make that happen." That's a sound analyses of this government's policy on disability benefits.

This government is aware of the affects their draconian policies are having and will continue to have on disabled people. When a government puts in train a framework of fiscal policies that purposely set out to target some of the poorest people in the country; when it continues with policies that are pushing the country deeper into economic meltdown; when it practices austerity measures that are a complete failure, as demonstrated in other countries such as Greece, Ireland, and the US amongst others; when a government becomes complicit in failing its own people, then we can only assume they are operating on ideological grounds.

Thatcher knew exactly what she was doing when she ripped the heart and soul out of the UK's heavy industry. She driven by an ideology that openly admitted that mass unemployment was a price worth paying in order to defeat inflation. Thatcher's children are adopting the same measures, for different reasons, yet the end result will be similar - except this time it'll be our Welfare State and NHS that is destroyed.

Ironically, the Tories are still pinning their hopes on the private sector pulling the economy around; finding jobs here for the millions unemployed through their public sector cuts. The trouble is that much of the private sector is made up of finance and service industries. The finance sector is still haemorrhaging jobs; and, the many areas within the service industry rely on government contracts, as does the manufacturing sector - the train builders Bombardier a good case in point.

Yes, we have a financial deficit; though by no means the largest we've been faced with. Yes, it does have to be reduced; but, this can't happen with unemployment rising and economic growth falling. All this will create is a larger deficit as fewer people pay tax and NI whilst mass unemployment puts a greater burden on the state.

Another indicator that these Tories are pushing an ideological agenda and know exactly the affects of their actions is who they're targeting in order to reduce the deficit. As has been pointed out mass unemployment will not speed up the rate of deficit reduction; no, it'll have the opposite effect. Yet there are ways in which the deficit could be reduced over a five to six year period, without the wholesale wiping out of public services and sell-off of the NHS.

Rather than writing off taxes for their billionaire friends in business the government should commit its resources to tackling the real criminals in our society, those rich tax dodgers and cheats. Every year they're costing the country anything as much as £120 billion!

Just think of the decent schools, hospitals, homes and social services we could have if these parasites paid their way. But what hope for this from a government who engage billionaire tax cheats to advise them on economic policies; and whose chancellor refuses to pay his fair share of taxes.    

Sparks in struggle look to your own ranks for your leaders

Construction has always produced its own leaders, who in a time of struggle come to the fore. Jerry Hicks' support of the sparks is laudable, as is the support and solidarity coming from all quarters of the movement.

Construction Workers at Network Rail’s Thameslink
site in Blackfriars Protest Against Enforced Pay Cuts

The danger with this situation is that it becomes about Jerry Hicks and not about a group of workers being savagely squeezed by bosses in an industry that has a long shameful history of turning over its workers.

To the sparks in struggle I say look to yourselves for the leadership and steering of your own dispute, while we, the movement, take our instructions from you as to where and when you want our support. 

Hardest Hit Event 22 October 2011

London

Saturday 22 October, 2011
Rally 11am – 1pm
Outside the GLA Building (City Hall), Queen’s Walk

Disabled people in London, along with their families and friends, are taking to the streets in London to protest against Government cuts to disability benefits and services.  Join us and help to make sure all our voices are heard.

The rally is taking place outside London’s iconic GLA building (City Hall) on Queen’s Walk.  There will be music from Dartford band Rush Hour who will be keeping us entertained from 11am, with speeches from 11.45 plus the opportunity for you to make your voice heard.  We plan to have a range of speakers who will keep us informed and entertained.  Confirmed so far is Chair of Inclusion London, Kirsten Hearn, who will share her views on the proposed changes and Cllr Darren Johnson AM.  There will also be the chance to hear the experiences of local people talking about what the proposed cuts to benefits and services will mean to them as disabled people trying to live independent and fulfilling lives.  If you would like to be one of those having your voice heard there will be a chance on the day for you to tell us what the changes mean to you.

For a detailed map of the area, including public transport links click here.  The nearest tube is London Bridge which is served by the Jubilee and Northern lines.  If you would like help in planning your journey then the Transport for London website has a journey planner that covers all public transport options: www.journeyplanner.org.  Details about the accessibility of different types of public transport can be found here.  There are limited opportunities for parking in central London.  For details of where to park and how the blue badge scheme operates in Westminster click here. 

This gives advice on the different parking regulations in force and has a link to the Blue Badge London website that has a searchable list of the parking available.

As new speakers and contributors are confirmed we will be adding them to this page, so do keep an eye out for any changes.  Please also help us spread the word about Hardest Hit.  London is one of many cities across the South East that have been severely affected by budget cuts.  Across the region people are seeing deep cuts in services such as social care and transport, which they rely on to remain independent.  Please come along, and bring as many friends and family as you can.  Help us to send a clear message to the Government: stop these cuts.

To register your interest in the rally please email: london@hardesthit.org.ukor call 020 8522 7433

Labour Needs to Broaden its Representative Base

Sadly, the Labour MP base is not reflective of much of the working class; and, is most definitely not reflective of those we need to vote Labour in the next election for us to win. Where I live, in Stockwell, my three councillors, all Labour, are white; two work in lobbying types jobs, and the one with the real job is an actor.

The other two are the product of professional politics. None of them look or sound like the people they represent; yet, they will speak on our behalf,  and early next year, to a man and woman, will vote in more cuts.

Unite desperately needs to be putting active members up as councillors, as MPs, Assembly Members, MEPs etc. No disrespect to Unite members working within the bubble of Westminster; but, we also need representatives from the buses, markets, and banks; we need convenors from industry to represent us; people who've worked in the communities with youngsters to come forward and apply their know-how to local and central government.

So sure, let's support Shelley Asquith for Chair of London Young Labour in this instance; but, let's also ask that Shelley attends our UL meetings (indeed Mike should invite her to our next one on 13^th October) and uses her position to seek out other young trade union and Labour Party activists from a wider cross-section of jobs - something we should all be doing anyway!

Lambeth Pan Disability Forum Thursday 6 October 2011

Hello Everyone
The Lambeth Pan-Disability Forum will be meeting next on Thursday 6 Octobern between 2.30 pm and 4 pm. Our meeting will take place, as usual, on the 1st Floor of 336 Brixton Road, SW9 7AA (the Lambeth Accord building).

We'll be discussing issues around the cuts as well as TaxiCard and Care provision. So, please come along and have your say.

Thanks

Seán

State Sponsored Killing is Wrong

Killing, harming or abusing children are highly emotive, and charged, crimes. Who amongst us does not harbour some anger or disgust for perpetrators of such actions. Indeed, if a parent discovered their child being abused or harmed in any way I could understand if they meted out their own justice on the attacker. I'd not agree with them disproportionately harming or, even, killing the offender; yet, I'd see their actions as very human.

The same cannot be said for the state after a series of deliberations deciding to put someone to death for a crime or infringement against society. This form of barbaric punishment does not rectify anything; nor does it have a deterrent effect, unless by acting as a deterrent it is meant the executed person will not reoffend.

Sadly, murder is still prevalent in the USA, both within non-death and death penalty states. So, there goes the deterrent defence. Over the years I've watched TV programmes where family members of murder victims tell the world that this man or this woman deserves the death penalty for the awful crimes they've committed. They always claim that only the state taking of a life will bring 'closure' to their loss.

Troy Davis Murdered by the State of Georgia Early
on Thursday 22 September 2011 - RIP

Invariably this talk of closure will be mixed in with Old Testament 'an-eye-for-an-eye' type justification for the putting to death of the criminal, as though the mere mention of the 'Good' book is somehow a seal of approval. But then, this is America; and, thankfully not all that happens in America turns up on our shores a few years later.

It is no coincidence that the right-wing in the USA is the loudest advocate of the death penalty; nor is it any coincidence that right leaning states, such as Texas and California (the first with a Bush Governor the second with Schwarzenegger) regularly execute, usually African American and Hispanic, prisoners.    

REMPLOY OPEN MEETING

The Remploy Open Meeting in Unite House last night was a great success; with around 55 Comrades in attendance. The Top table boasted a list of big hitters from the Remploy Consortium and the trade union movement, namely Julie Haynes, Mark Holloway, Kevin Hepworth, Len McCluskey, and Paul Kenny.

Julie and Mark co-chaired the meeting, opening with a brief explanation of the Sayce Report the conclusions of which call for an ending of government subsidy to Remploy factories; which in effect would force the closure of the remaining 54 sites.

Paul Kenny spoke, and sketched a damning picture of incompetence by the Remploy Board of almost criminal intent. Here is a national company that has the business nous of a fly pitcher, indeed a fly pitcher would have more business savvy - after all, he has to look after his own interests.

National companies of Remploy's size would have some sort of energy deal with a national supplier, thus reducing costs over their numerous factory and branch sites; not Remploy. They'd be signed up to an economical mobile phone contract for all management personnel; again, they seem to sign up to the most inefficient deals they can find. The same with buying materials in bulk; they eschew doing this. It's almost as the whole concept of the economies of scale has passed this bunch by.

The same applies with marketing their product. When a senior trade union official asked the Remploy Furniture Division for a couple of hundred of their furniture catalogues he was told the company only has 50 printed at any one time - seems there's no call for such marketing tools!

Some years ago, Michael Eavis, he of Glastonbury fame, offered Remploy a contract for making T-shirts, a deal worth £1 million. Instead of grasping the deal with both hands, Remploy complained that it would cost them £50,000 to 'tool-up' for the operation. It was left to a trade unionist to explain to the capitalist that sometimes you must speculate to accumulate!

A cynic would be forgiven for wondering if the company actually gives a toss. It's almost as they're operating a scorched earth policy!

Paul Kenny then went on to talk about the shameful way Remploy Employment Services massaged their figures. Remploy claims it has helped 20,000 disabled people into sustainable employment during the 2010-11 period. Sadly, this is untrue. What Remploy actually did was to 'secure' 20,000 job placements in this period. However, by double and, in some cases triple, counting people all Remploy really did was to introduce a few thousand individuals to the world of 'revolving door' employment.

It would be interesting if Remploy Employment Services' books were laid open to forensic scrutiny the number of individual people they really placed into sustainable employment. Add to this the way in which the cost of employing a factory worker is calculated by Remploy; which is dividing the number of factory workers by the government subsidy!

Thus, a figure of £25,000 is used as the cost to subsidise each Remploy factory worker. This inventive accounting totally disregards the Employment Services side of Remploy that takes its share of the subsidy to pay for a top-heavy management structure, administration, their high street branches and staffing.

When you factor in these costs, the subsidy reduces by some £8,000 - £10,000 per capita. Now we're looking at £15,000 to £17,000 subsidy. Still too much many will argue; however, if the company fully exploited public contracts it could further reduce these figures.

Remploy's shortcomings were not a secret. The Consortium of Unions had exposed them in the past; but, the mainly right-wing media wasn't going to allow truth get the way of lazy reporting. Following their line, Sayce also chose to ignore anything put forward by the trade unions; and, as a result she came to her decision by way of a false premise.

Kenny finished off by declaring that disabled people were entitled to work; that Remploy factories offered employment opportunities in a safe and organised environment to a group of people who would otherwise be marginalised by employers, and thus by society as a whole.

Kevin Hepworth, an FTO who heads the Unite contingent of the Remploy Consortium, echoed much of what Kenny had to say. The problem was that Paul had given such a comprehensive presentation anyone following him would always struggle to add to the story.

Similarly, Len McCluskey couldn't add too much to Paul Kenny's contribution. However, Len did have a long relationship with Remploy, he was Chair of the Consortium for 16-years; thus, he has a grasp of the inner workings of the company both from a business and political perspective.

A question and answer session ensued. A number of ex-Remploy workers expressed their views of the past and impending factory closures. And, it was this group's accounts of life after Remploy that drove home the callousness of the factory closures.

Neither Liz Sayce, nor her paymasters in Parliament understand, or more likely care about, the very real damage they will cause by closing down Remploy factories. The majority of the 2,800 disabled Remploy workers remaining in factory employment will not find work. 80% of those who lost their jobs 3½-years ago are currently out of work. Some of these have spent time passing through revolving-door employment; the rest have not worked since.

Back in 2008 there was far more work around. In today's depressed employment market disabled people are firmly planted at the bottom of the ladder with little or no hope of advancing upwards. Remploy, Pathways to Work, Work Choice, and all the other schemes this government has wasted hundreds of millions on have failed. A short time ago all the organisations contracted to place disabled people into meaningful and sustainable employment reported a failure to reach their agreed targets.

Even before the recession and the current economic downturn we, in the trade unions and the disability movement, told the government their targets were unachievable. As long as employers continue to discriminate against disabled people, many of us will find it impossible to gain employment. As long as the government refuses to properly fund such schemes as Access to Work, disabled people will be viewed as too expensive to employ. 

A Helping Hand

A Helping Hand

'Can I help?'

'Are you ok?'

Queries

I get every day.

'Want a hand'

Asks a flashing smile,

As my heart melts

Wishing I was younger

When such a hand

Would be grand

I'd have never let go.

'No thanks'

Is my reply,

A bloody lie,

Laced with regret,

As she passes by.

One day,

Soon I hope,

My princess

Will sweep me up

And,

Into the sunset

We'd disappear,

Her pushing,

A grateful me.

Remploy Open Meeting

Dear Comrade

The Remploy London Union Reps would like to invite you to an open meeting to discuss the findings of the Sayce Review on Supported Employment and its implications for Remploy factories and disabled workers. 

Speakers to include, Len McCluskey, Unite GS, Paul Kenny, GMB GS, Kevin Hepworth, Unite Remploy Consortium Officer, Julie Haynes, Unite Remploy Consortium Rep, Mark Holloway, GMB Remploy Consortium Rep. The meeting is taking place on Tuesday 20th September from 6.00 pm to 8.00 pm in Unite House,  128 Theobalds Road, Holborn, WC1X 8TN. 

http://mt0.google.com/vt/data=bZeqZHWrDiUHwiocUvPX9dNL263E5FUG30MlogJhYdOmBREGy1aZ0kUgssnDLvF3XRPP5Px_HiqXNG1sUsDb9oG15EZohwU_7XN_bXA

Public Transport links:

Buses

The following bus routes serve the Holborn area: 

1, 78, 19, 25, 38, 55, 59, 91, 68, 98, 171, 168, 188, 242, 243 & 521

Tube Stations

The following tube stations serve the Holborn area: 

Holborn & Russell Square

Railway Stations

The following main line stations are within a short distance of Holborn: 

Euston, Kings Cross and St Pancras

Seán McGovern

Atos Represents Global Capitalism, not France!

Crippen! Lose the French stereotype!

Mostly I enjoy Crippen's work. He, usually, manages get his point across in this medium using comedy to temper the political message.

This cartoon, in my opinion, fails because he's resorted to stereotyping in a shallow way. The cartoon portrays Atos as a beret-wearing-onion-selling-Frenchman, armed with a model guillotine.

Why the need to stereotype this multi-national company (it operates in 42 different states) as French? Are the French especially noted for their aggressive approach to capitalism; are they more rapacious than, say, the Dutch (whose Origin BV came together with Atos to form 'Atos Origin' in 2000)?

The point is that Atos Origin is a capitalist venture, and thus doesn't show loyalty to any one state; no, it shows loyalty only to profit. Capital(ism) isn't bound by national boundaries, flags or anthems; it moves wherever it can to find, or create, the optimum conditions to make maximum profit - for the most part adopting the doctrine of following the line of least resistance (resistance is usually any factor that impedes the maximisation of profit, wage bills, taxes, etc).

So Crippen, there's no need to portray Atos as a Frenchman, or French, a pig in a pin-stripe suit would have more than conveyed the message - that is greed breeds greed; and, the pinnacle of greed is the total control of all processes, including appeals.  


Anyway, the representation of the French onion seller is false as he doesn't have a bicycle nor is he wearing a Breton smock!  

The Left and Remploy

The Left is somewhat shy when it comes to Remploy and disability in general. I'm not sure why this is so; after all, we're considered the progressive political wing, a thesis I'd agree with.

When it comes to supported employment there does appear to be a divergence in opinion within the left. One school of thought dismisses this type of employment as perpetuating discrimination of disabled workers. Within the disability movement itself this school of thought tends to be more prevalent amongst 'better' educated people. Ironically, the kinds of people who perpetuate this purist line tend to work within the disability industry at a white-collar level.

Of course many of those working in the disability industry as advisors or consultants are directly or indirectly paid via government funding, centrally or locally; this is in itself a form of supported employment.

However, nobody is going to criticise a personalisation broker who earns her or his money from an indirect subsidy. But, woe to the poor ill-educated disabled worker who, through employer prejudice or co-worker bullying, finds working in a Remploy factory a safe and welcoming experience.

What a shame the Left feels so little for unfashionable causes such as Remploy. Indeed, our Comrades in Remploy need the support of the Left more than ever. We need support; we need solidarity; and, more than anything we need ideas to push forward our struggle - you must appreciate we exhausted a lifetime of ideas four years ago on the original Remploy campaign.

So, the invitation stands.   

Darcus Howe Accused of Rioting!

Marcus Howe was explaining to Fiona Armstrong that he wasn't shocked at what he'd seen over the past days of looting and rioting. He went on to quality this remark. That young black and the young white youths in poorer areas of this country were unhappy at the direction in which they were being pushed by the powers that be; indeed, he stressed the concern he had for his grandson who was of an age that meant he was likely to be stopped and searched because of his colour.

These, I thought were fair comments. However, the silly BBC newscaster then asks this elderly highly respected broadcaster whether he condoned the rioting and looting, a question, I doubt she'd have put to a white equivalent; Marcus let this comment go. He proceeded to give some context to these events, being interrupted at every turn; then the newscaster accuses Howe of rioting himself in the past; an action which he strenuously denied.

Darcus Howe - renowned African-Caribbean broadcaster, columnist and civil liberties campaigner

Rioting is one thing, being attacked by the police while demonstrating peacefully is not rioting. We were not rioting when we were attacked by the police on the Wapping picket lines 25-years ago.

Many people have suspected that the BBC has lost its way journalistically in recent years. We can now also add racism to their interviewing techniques. Maybe the David Starkey broadcast has had an influence.

David Starkey - Right wing
 reactionary TV pundit