Author: Kitty S Jones

I’m a political activist with a strong interest in human rights. I’m also a strongly principled socialist. Much of my campaign work is in support of people with disability. I am also disabled: I have an autoimmune illness called lupus, with a sometimes life-threatening complication – a bleeding disorder called thrombocytopenia. Sometimes I long to go back to being the person I was before 2010. The Coalition claimed that the last government left a “mess”, but I remember being very well-sheltered from the consequences of the global banking crisis by the last government – enough to flourish and be myself. Now many of us are finding that our potential as human beings is being damaged and stifled because we are essentially focused on a struggle to survive, at a time of austerity cuts and welfare “reforms”. Maslow was right about basic needs and motivation: it’s impossible to achieve and fulfil our potential if we cannot meet our most fundamental survival needs adequately. What kind of government inflicts a framework of punishment via its policies on disadvantaged citizens? This is a government that tells us with a straight face that taking income from poor people will "incentivise" and "help" them into work. I have yet to hear of a case when a poor person was relieved of their poverty by being made even more poor. The Tories like hierarchical ranking in terms status and human worth. They like to decide who is “deserving” and “undeserving” of political consideration and inclusion. They like to impose an artificial framework of previously debunked Social Darwinism: a Tory rhetoric of division, where some people matter more than others. How do we, as conscientious campaigners, help the wider public see that there are no divisions based on some moral measurement, or character-type: there are simply people struggling and suffering in poverty, who are being dehumanised by a callous, vindictive Tory government that believes, and always has, that the only token of our human worth is wealth? Governments and all parties on the right have a terrible tradition of scapegoating those least able to fight back, blaming the powerless for all of the shortcomings of right-wing policies. The media have been complicit in this process, making “others” responsible for the consequences of Tory-led policies, yet these cruelly dehumanised social groups are the targeted casualties of those policies. I set up, and administrate support groups for ill and disabled people, those going through the disability benefits process, and provide support for many people being adversely affected by the terrible, cruel and distressing consequences of the Governments’ draconian “reforms”. In such bleak times, we tend to find that the only thing we really have of value is each other. It’s always worth remembering that none of us are alone. I don’t write because I enjoy it: most of the topics I post are depressing to research, and there’s an element of constantly having to face and reflect the relentless worst of current socio-political events. Nor do I get paid for articles and I’m not remotely famous. I’m an ordinary, struggling disabled person. But I am accurate, insightful and reflective, I can research and I can analyse. I write because I feel I must. To reflect what is happening, and to try and raise public awareness of the impact of Tory policies, especially on the most vulnerable and poorest citizens. Because we need this to change. All of us, regardless of whether or not you are currently affected by cuts, because the persecution and harm currently being inflicted on others taints us all as a society. I feel that the mainstream media has become increasingly unreliable over the past five years, reflecting a triumph for the dominant narrative of ultra social conservatism and neoliberalism. We certainly need to challenge this and re-frame the presented debates, too. The media tend to set the agenda and establish priorities, which often divert us from much more pressing social issues. Independent bloggers have a role as witnesses; recording events and experiences, gathering evidence, insights and truths that are accessible to as many people and organisations as possible. We have an undemocratic media and a government that reflect the interests of a minority – the wealthy and powerful 1%. We must constantly challenge that. Authoritarian Governments arise and flourish when a population disengages from political processes, and becomes passive, conformist and alienated from fundamental decision-making. I’m not a writer that aims for being popular or one that seeks agreement from an audience. But I do hope that my work finds resonance with people reading it. I’ve been labelled “controversial” on more than one occasion, and a “scaremonger.” But regardless of agreement, if any of my work inspires critical thinking, and invites reasoned debate, well, that’s good enough for me. “To remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all” – Elie Wiesel I write to raise awareness, share information and to inspire and promote positive change where I can. I’ve never been able to be indifferent. We need to unite in the face of a government that is purposefully sowing seeds of division. Every human life has equal worth. We all deserve dignity and democratic inclusion. If we want to see positive social change, we also have to be the change we want to see. That means treating each other with equal respect and moving out of the Tory framework of ranks, counts and social taxonomy. We have to rebuild solidarity in the face of deliberate political attempts to undermine it. Divide and rule was always a Tory strategy. We need to fight back. This is an authoritarian government that is hell-bent on destroying all of the gains of our post-war settlement: dismantling the institutions, public services, civil rights and eroding the democratic norms that made the UK a developed, civilised and civilising country. Like many others, I do what I can, when I can, and in my own way. This blog is one way of reaching people. Please help me to reach more by sharing posts. Thanks. Kitty, 2012

A Tory responded uncleverly to ‘I, Daniel Blake’

January 9, 2019 · 1 Comment ·

A great article which ‘unclevers’ Cleverly

ducksoap

Ken Loach’s film ‘I, Daniel Blake’ was broadcast on TV on Saturday evening. In a direct response to the film and to the reaction to it, Tory deputy chair James Cleverly, the dictionary definition of nominative indeterminism, vomited a few dishonest platitudes mixed with his usual snide.

His words (taken from unclever tweets) are in italics below followed by my jacksons.

“I regularly help constituents who have had problems with the benefits system.”
No-one believes that Cleverly has ever helped anyone in his life. Every claimant has problems with the benefits system because the system was designed by the Tories to be problematic.

“I know that it is far from perfect, can be intimidating and mistakes can have devastating consequences.”
It was designed to be inadequate. The problems people face are deliberate features of the benefits system.

“The system we inherited from Labour was complicated, full…

View original post 652 more words

Amber Rudd admits link between Universal Credit and rise in people needing for food banks

January 5, 2019January 5, 2019 · 13 Comments ·

Yesterday I wrote an article about housing minister James Brokenshire’s Christmas Eve revelation that the increase in homelessness ‘may’ be linked with government policies.

Now it seems that Amber Rudd has also admitted that the Government’s flagship Universal Credit policy has been responsible for driving record numbers of people to food banks, however, she still insists the new benefit is “a force for good”.

Call me a cynic, but perhaps this apparent softening from the Conservatives, a move away from the usual position of rigid denial of harm caused by their punitive welfare policy regime may be rather more an indication of a possible early General Election, rather than revelation because of a visit by the ghost of Christmas present.

The new Work and Pensions Secretary, who took over the role from Esther McVey, made the comments during a visit to a Jobcentre in Longton, Staffordshire, on a ‘fact-finding tour.

Rudd resigned from her previous role when it became apparent that the Home Office had designed a hostile environment, making deportation threats to the children of Commonwealth citizens. Despite living and working in the UK for decade, and being given indefinite leave to remain in the UK in the 1970s, UK Windrush citizens have been told they are living here ‘illegally’ because of a lack of ‘official paperwork’. Some of the Windrush generation have been denied health care, housing and employment as a consequence.

The Home Office did not keep a record of those granted leave to remain or issue any paperwork confirming UK citizenship – meaning it is difficult for Windrush citizens to prove they are in the UK legally.

And in 2010, landing cards – proof of identity – belonging to Windrush migrants were destroyed by the Home Office.

Rudd has stepped into another role which has seen the creation and maintenance of a hostile environment, which has been designed to ‘disincentivise’ people from claiming social security, ‘nudging’ people into work. The ‘nudge’ comprises of conditionality: a series of coercive ordeals that are designed to ensure no one feels comfortable or secure claiming lifeline support.

Given that most people have worked, contributing taxes to pay for their social insurance, it’s controversial, to say the least, that citizens are being subjected to such a punitive system, which is about ‘discouraging’ them from claiming the support they have paid into.

The visit to the jobcentre in Longton was part of what she described as a “nationwide tour” to promote Universal Credit, which has, since its introduction, faced widespread criticism from both MPs and charities alike.

She said: “The purpose of me coming here, as part of a nationwide tour, is to see what’s happening on the ground, to reassure myself that Universal Credit is working and also to find out what we can do better.

Amber Rudd, the Department for Work and Pensions secretary.

“I recognise that there have been problems as it [Universal Credit] has been taken forward.

“That has made people fearful of it, and so one of the reasons I’m visiting different Jobcentres is to speak to the work coaches, and to clients as well, to find out what has been working well for them, as well as what hasn’t been.

“There have been issues previously, when Universal Credit started, with the time it took to get people the money that they needed, and we have addressed some of those.”

Rudd then claimed: “First of all, the vast majority of people, around 84 per cent, get the money they are expecting on time. I want to continue the improvement on that. It wasn’t like that when it first started.

“I’ve been told that in this office, there were three people on the Friday before Christmas who were able to get advanced payments on their application that day.

“It was those elements, of getting the money into people’s hands earlier, which were critical to stop the growth in food banks.

“I regret the growth there has been in food banks and I hope that these changes will stop that.”

However, Rudd said she still believes Universal Credit “is a force for good”, that delivers “better outcomes for people” than the benefits it replaces. However, any advance in payment is subsequently deducted from the ongoing award, which means people are still not receiving payments for the first five weeks of their claim – the advance is a loan to cover the period where no support is awarded. Repayment of the advance is deducted from the amount people get monthly, when their award is finally made, often leaving people more short of money to make ends meet.

She said: “It offers what we seek it to offer, which is to be a safety net and also to help people into work, without the terribly huge tax rate that there used to be.”

She clearly needs to consider her use of the phrase “safety net” here, since many people claiming Universal Credit are unable to meet the costs of their most basic needs. This has led to the rise of absolute poverty in the UK, at levels not seen since the 1930s. People not having enough to eat is an example of absolute poverty.

Rudd also said that she was struck by the ‘huge enthusiasm’ of Jobcentre staff in Longton.

However, surely what matters are the views of service users, rather than those administering it. After all, many a despotic regime has been administered by ‘enthusiastic’ jobsworths.

In November last year, the UK’s largest food bank network – the Trussell Trust -published figures showing a 13% increase in users between April and September 2018.

The charity attributed the rise to the minimum five-week wait for new Universal Credit claims before people they receive an initial payment.

Chief Executive Emma Revie commented: “We created systems like our national health service, fire service and benefits system because we’re a country that believes in protecting each other.

“Our benefits system is supposed to anchor any of us from being swept into poverty, but if Universal Credit is to do that, we need to see urgent changes.

“It’s not right that people are being forced to use food banks after weeks of waiting for Universal Credit payments.”

“We’re seeing soaring levels of need at food banks”, she added. “The time to act is now.”

“If the five-week wait isn’t reduced, the only way to stop even more people being forced to food banks this winter will be to pause all new claims to Universal Credit, until funding is in place to reduce the five week wait.

“Food banks cannot continue to pick up the pieces – we have to make sure our benefits system can protect people from hunger.”

I don’t make any money from my work. I have a very limited income. But you can help if you like, by making a donation to help me continue to research and write informative, insightful and independent articles, and to provide support to others affected by the Conservative’s welfare ‘reforms’. The smallest amount is much appreciated – thank you.

Housing Secretary admits government policies may have contributed to rising homelessness

January 3, 2019January 3, 2019 · 8 Comments ·

The government spend a lot of time denying that their welfare policies have any harmful consequences on citizens’ lives. However, an outspoken Conservative minister has remarkably all but admitted that policy choices by the Conservatives are at least partly responsible for record levels of homelessness and rough sleeping, particularly those policies related to Housing Benefit.

The Housing Secretary, James Brokenshire (pictured above), has admitted that policies may have “played a role” in rising levels of homelessness. He made the confession in an interview published on the Politico website on Christmas Eve, in an apparent U-turn on his previous comments, in which he insisted that austerity is not to blame for the current homelessness epidemic.

In an interview with the Guardian, Brokenshire had previously dismissed claims that government policies, including cuts to social security benefits, are fueling the rise in the numbers of households who are subjected to eviction orders and extreme poverty.

But in his latest interview, Brokenshire accepted that the UK government “need to ask ourselves some very hard questions” about policy choices and how those choices have impacted on some of the poorest members of society.

This apparent rethink follows the tragic death of rough sleeper Gyula Remes, who collapsed and died just yards from the Houses of Parliament, prompting a Labour MP to tweet: “There is something rotten in Westminster when MPs walk past dying homeless people on their way to work.”

Brokenshire had previously argued that record levels of homelessness seen in the last five years are a result of a “combination of concerning elements in terms of addiction, family breakdown issues”.

Generally, government ministers respond to legitimate concerns raised regarding the harmful consequences of their programme of social security cuts by either blaming those affected; citing some assumed personal failing or character deficit, circumstantial events or attitudinal barriers, or they accuse those voicing concerns and citing case examples of negative policy impacts as “scaremongers”.

Yet the government’s own data shows that since 2014, the loss of a private tenancy has been the biggest cause of homelessness in England. According to research by Generation Rent, 94% of this rise can be blamed on ‘no-fault evictions’, which have more than doubled since 2010. The precariousness of private sector tenancies, combined with a chronic shortage of social housing, punitive welfare reforms and successive years of cuts to homelessness prevention services, have created a ‘perfect storm.’

When asked by Politico, however, if Government policies have attributed to rising levels of homelessness, Brokenshire admitted: “We do have to look and reflect on ourselves as to the increase.

“Yes there are other factors that are relevant here, but we have to look at the policy.”

We have to ask ourselves “some very hard questions … for example in relation to the introduction of changes to welfare”, he added, and also “whether we’ve done enough [to mitigate the damages].”

Although Brokenshire has appeared to shrug off any suggestion that government policies since 2010 might be to blame, on the Today programme over the Christmas holidays, former Chancellor George Osborne went much further and insisted austerity – which included brutal cuts to welfare payments, local authority budgets, public health spending, the police, other public services and the ministry of justice – has played no part whatsoever.

In the exclusive interview with Politico, Brokenshire says: “The death of 43-year-old Gyula Remes came as a shock in Westminster, where workers have got used to walking past up to half a dozen homeless people every day.

“It’s a stark reminder that what we’re talking about is individual lives.”

Brokenshire added: “I share the feelings that everybody has, of shock and distress in knowing this individual had lost his life.”

He is reluctant to comment on the specific case – a Westminster Council review is underway – but insists that accommodation had previously been offered to all the people sleeping rough.

“There’d been a lot of help and support offered. Offers of accommodation had been made. Some people had taken them up … [But] it’s a fact that in a number of cases, the roof over the head may well be there but for a number of reasons the rough sleeper may not be willing to take up that help.

“It is certainly not from my perspective saying they are somehow to blame, as some have tried to portray this as — that is profoundly not what I am saying. It’s about compassion and support … It’s complicated because of some of the real challenges of mental health and addiction.”

Photo credit: Ed Yourdon via photopin cc

The first ever official figures on the number of homeless people who have tragically died were recently published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

The figures reveal that nearly 600 homeless people died in 2017, with more than half of those deaths attributed to alcohol, drug abuse, or suicide.

Ben Humberstone, head of health analysis at the ONS, said: “What’s striking about these figures is how different they are to the general population – 55% of the deaths of homeless people are related to drugs, suicide or alcohol, also known as the diseases of despair, compared to just 3% of deaths from these causes among the general population.”

However, we must not conflate causes with effects. The statistical data does not tell us whether those 55% of deaths – related to substance misuse or suicide – would have happened had the citizens concerned not been pushed into destitution, or whether poor mental health and substance misuse contributed to people becoming homeless in the first place. Government statistics show that private sector tenancies coming to an end are the leading cause of homelessness, coupled with low wages and cuts to welfare and delays in payments, leading to insurmountable rent arrears, in both public and private sector housing.

Previously, Brokenshire is on record denying that government cuts have created the spike in homelessness statistics, saying: “I don’t see it in those terms.” He said. “I see it as a combination of concerning elements in terms of addiction, family breakdown issues. The thing that struck me over recent months in speaking to some of the LGBT charities in terms of young people, because of their sexuality, being thrown out of home.”

Labour’s Shadow Housing Minister Melanie Onn MP said: “These figures are utterly shameful and reflect a complete failure of Conservative policy on housing, which has seen rough sleeping skyrocket since 2010.

“We are one of the richest countries in the world and there is no excuse for people dying on our streets.

“Labour will provide £100m to ensure that everyone has shelter when it becomes dangerously cold.

“We will end rough sleeping within five years to ensure that everyone has a place to call home.”

The Conservatives reiterated their pledge to eradicate rough sleeping by 2027. Brokenshire said that work was under way with the Work and Pensions Secretary, Amber Rudd, to “assess where problems were”.

Brokenshire also revealed that although he personally does not give money to homeless people, he said he buys the Big Issue when he can.

Meet Liam and Michelle. It’s time to listen to the voices of homeless people about the fatal flaws of Universal Credit

Two very vulnerable homeless men left to die in sub-zero temperatures

Please don’t just walk on by, we are better than this

Government backs new law to prevent people made homeless through government laws from becoming homeless

From the abstract to the concrete: urban design as a mechanism of behaviour change and social exclusion

Conservative MPs accuse citizens of ‘scaremongering stories’ about experiences of Universal Credit.

I don’t make any money from my work, and often struggle to get by. If you like, you can help by making a donation to help me continue to research and write informative, insightful and independent articles, and to provide support to others affected by the welfare reforms.

250,000 disabled people sent 45-page form demanding evidence by DWP bureaucrats following DWP underpayment blunder

December 30, 2018December 30, 2018 · 42 Comments ·

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have issued ‘senseless’ 45 page forms to thousands of ill and disabled people who are owed £970m in unpaid Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) by the government, leaving people having to provide evidence of details of their lives from up to seven years ago.

More than 250,000 people are being told they must fill out the ‘scandalous’ 45 page form to have their award changed after a government error has left them underpaid by thousands of pounds.

Unreasonably, families are expected to recall intricate financial details and arrangements from up to seven years ago. The form asks claimants to state exact dates they were in hospital and give details of insurance payouts, mortgage payments and savings.

Campaigners warn it is “passing the buck” to benefit claimants who now face an unnecessary barrier to justice.

Shadow Minister for Disabled People, Marsha De Cordova, branded the form “scandalous”, adding: “People will very often not have kept the evidence the DWP is asking for which could lead to many being denied vital support once again.”

The 45 page form is being sent to thousands of people who are owed £970m in unpaid ESA dating back to 2011, through no fault of their own.

The government blunder, revealed earlier this year, affects people who moved from older incapacity benefit – Incapacity Benefit to ESA between 2011 and 2014,when the government made fundamental cost-cutting changes to the welfare system. In total 570,000 cases are currently being reviewed, of which 180,000 are expected to receive back payments by the end of 2019.

A DWP spokesperson insists that everyone owed money will receive it. But some claimants expressed bafflement after the ESA3(IBR) form dropped on their doormats.

Carol Willoughby, 73, from Chessington, was asked to fill in details dating back to February 2013 for her 68-year-old husband Michael.

ESA claim form

A page of the form asks about money set aside for repairs or from a pension.

Questions on her form included “please provide dates that you have been an inpatient in hospital” and requests to state amounts of lump-sum state pension, trust fund income and money set aside for essential repairs.

Mrs Willoughby said: “The DWP were supposed to check all the errors and deal with it.

“Now they’re putting the onus back onto us to provide all the information going back five years, half of which we won’t have any more.

“It will take me hours. They’re asking ‘have you been in hospital, when were you in, how long were you in for’.”

ESA claim 2

Another page asks for details of dates and visits to hospital from years ago.

When they were asked about Mr Willoughby’s case, the DWP said that some 261,000 of the excessively bureaucratic forms have been sent out.

This huge figure is utterly shocking, and it comes just weeks after the Mirror revealed up to 15,000 people caught up in the scandal have already died.

James Taylor, Head of Policy at disability charity Scope, said: “This feels like the DWP is passing the buck onto disabled people and their families.

“They have already been short-changed by bureaucratic errors in the welfare system that go back nearly a decade.

“The DWP need to make sure that those who have missed out on their full ESA entitlement are payed back promptly with the minimum amount of stress and anxiety.”

ESA claim 3
The intrusive form also asks disabled people to provide details of payments from ex-partners, if relevant

Ayaz Manji, policy officer at mental health charity Mind, said the DWP must ensure “nobody falls through the gaps”.

He added: “Those of us with mental health problems can struggle to navigate a complex application process.

“The DWP needs to do all it can to take responsibility for fixing these errors.

“It’s senseless to place unnecessary barriers in front of those who have already gone through a lengthy, complicated and stressful process.”

Yes, anyone would think that the government have placed this bureaucratic barrier in front of ill and disabled people to make it as difficult as possible for them to be fairly reimbursed the money they were entitled to but not paid because of a government error.

esa claim 4
The form asks for details of property owned in the dates on the form.

A DWP spokeswoman insisted people only need to complete sections that are relevant to their circumstances. Officials claim that anyone can seek help completing the form over the phone, and where needed staff can arrange a home visit.

The DWP are also contacting people who they do not hear from within three weeks of sending out a form.

The DWP spokeswoman said: “We want to have all the information we need to make sure everyone gets the money they are owed and anyone can provide this over the phone with our support.”

I wonder why the DWP bothered with the forms, then, if that’s the case.

It’s widely assumed that public services are organized and delivered for the benefit of citizens. The reality, however, is very different. The more we scrutinise the role and function of different government departments and programmes, the clearer it becomes that they are being redesigned to bring direct and indirect benefits to private businesses.

Ministers have been accused of creating a “hostile environment for sick and disabled people” following the blunder, which occurred when claimants were transferred onto the main sickness benefit, ESA.

Both PIP and DLA are designed to help people with the extra costs of disability, or long-term health conditions, yet any award is reluctantly made, and all too often people have to go to court to challenge extremely inaccurate assessment reports and enormously unfair decision-making.

Yet the British public are funding corporations as well as government departments, and we should expect and demand that those businesses observe certain conditions of basic fairness. Private companies were hired to fulfil a role of discrediting disabled people’s accounts of their disability, and to engage in very bad report writing, with an ultimate aim of resource gatekeeping. At the same time, legal aid was withdrawn to prevent citizens from accessing justice and seeking redress.

The Centre for Health and Disability Assessments Ltd (Maximus, who conduct Universal Credit Work Capability Assessments) saw profits double between 2016 and 2017.

One director got a £373k dividend and £12 million was paid in shares. Thousands of disabled and ill people had their lifeline support cut due to the private companies contracted to gatekeep essential financial support. The majority of ill and disabled people have worked and paid tax. They now need to draw on their social insurance, and are finding instead of support, they face punitive policies and a hostile environment, while big businesses are making obscene levels of profit for inflicting hardship and utter misery on some of our most vulnerable citizens.

Meanwhile, the government and media constructed a narrative to demonise and condemn the poorest citizens, labelling them as undeserving “scroungers” and would be “fraudsters.” This was a justification narrative – an attempt to try and pass the state abuse of disabled people as somehow “fair”.

Image result for disabled benefit scroungers

The government has awarded at least £1.4billion of outsourcing contracts linked to the roll-out of Universal Credit and the other welfare reforms since 2012.

The 10 highest value contracts awarded by DWP linked to Universal Credit and welfare reforms since 2012

£595million to Maximus People Services Ltd for health and disability assessment services.

£207million to Atos for Personal Independence Payments assessment service Lot 1 contract extension (Lot numbers refer to different geographical areas)

£184million to Atos for Personal Independence Payments assessment service Lot 3

£122million to Capita for Personal Independence Payments assessment service contract extension Lot 1

£122million to Capita for Personal Independence Payments assessment service contract Extension Lot 2

£90million to Atos for a medical services IT contract

£8.2million to Serco to deliver a new claims telephony service for Personal Independence Payments

£6million to Advanced Personnel Management Group to provide healthcare staff to conduct work capability assessments for Universal Credit and Employment Support Allowance

£3.9million to Pinnacle People Limited for Phase 2 of the New Enterprise Allowance Scheme in the north east to support people into self-employment and to start their own businesses

£3.3million to Ixion Holdings (Contracts) Limited for Phase 2 of the New Enterprise Allowance Scheme in London and the home counties

Source: Tussell

It’s about time we had a public debate about the size and uses of the corporate welfare state. And about democratic accountability.

Curiously, none of those private companies that were contracted to profit through disabled people’s loss and distress have received forms that demand evidence and details of their histories.

Corporate welfare is prioritised rather more by the government than citizen welfare. In fact private companies are faced with perverse incentives – to generate profit requires undermining the welfare of citizens.

I don’t make any money from my work. If you want to, you can help by making a donation to help me continue to research and write informative, insightful and independent articles, and to provide support to others.

Research shows austerity results in ‘social murder’

December 27, 2018December 29, 2018 · 12 Comments ·

Dr Chris Grover, who heads Lancaster University’s Sociology Department says that austerity can be understood as a form of structural violence – a violence that is built into society and is expressed in unequal power and unequal life chances, as it is deepens inequalities and injustices, and creates even more poverty.

The article, Violent proletarianisation: social murder, the reserve army of labour and social security ‘austerity’ in Britain, suggests that as a result of the violence of austerity working class people face harm to their physical and mental wellbeing, and, in some instances, are ‘socially murdered’.

Dr Grover calls on the Government for change and action. He cites the consequences of austerity in the social security system – severe cuts to benefits and the ‘ratcheting up’ of conditions attached to benefits as constituting ‘social murder.’

He refers to the process as ‘violent proletarianisation’ (the idea that violent austerity is aimed at forcing people to do [low] paid work, rather than being supported by social security).

“To address violent proletarianisation what is required is not the tweaking of existing policies but fundamental change that removes the economic need for people to work for the lowest wages that employers can get away with paying,” says Dr Grover, echoing what many of us have also observed and commented on.

Published on 19 December in the journal, Critical Social Policy, Dr Grover gives examples of where social security austerity has led to a range of harms:

an additional six suicides for every 10,000 work capability assessments done;
increasing number of people Britain dying of malnutrition
increasing numbers of homeless people dying on the streets or in hostels

The article rationalises that austerity, the difficult economic conditions created by Government by cutting back on public spending, has brought cuts and damaging changes to social security policy meaning Britain has fallen victim to a brutal approach to forcing people to undertake low paid work.

This is something that many of us have also observed.

“The violence takes two forms,” says Dr Grover. “First it involves further economic hardship of already income-poor people.

“It causes social inequalities and injustices in the short term and, in the longer term.

“Second, the poverty that violent proletarianisation creates is both known and avoidable.”

Dr Grover adds that only by fundamentally rethinking current social security policy can change that protects the poorest people be made.

The article examines socioeconomic inequality and injustice, discussing the way it is used to force the commodification of labour power, and a consequential creation of ‘diswelfares ‘that are known and avoidable.

By keeping citizens poor, and without the means of meeting their most fundamental needs, the state creates a desperate reserve army of labour, which is open to exploitation by employers. Conditional welfare also coerces citizens into accepting any work available, regardless of how poor the conditions and wage levels are. There is no means of bargaining for job security, better working conditions or pay, since people claiming social security cannot refuse a job offer, without facing financial sanctions, and subsequently, destitution.

The author suggests that violent proletarianisation is a contradictory process, one that helps constitute the working class, but in a way that socially murders some of its reserve army [of labour] members.

Just as ‘the market’ allocates wealth and resources, it has also come to allocate life and death.

Grover takes his inspiration from Friedrich Engels’s account of the social murder committed by British capitalists to assess the contemporary impact of conservative economic policy, which they define as policies designed to maximize the accumulation of profit while socialising the associated risks and costs. Conservative neoliberals claim that if their policy prescription is followed, it will produce broad-based economic benefits including more rapid growth, higher incomes, less illness, and, even, more democracy.

The Lancaster university research contrasts the myths of Conservative economic policy with the reality. What Conservative economic policy has actually accomplished is a redistribution of wealth and power away from the vast majority of the population to private companies and their owners. The effects of these policies on citizens and workers have been politically determined economic instability, unemployment, poverty and widening inequality, resulting in suffering, harm and a rise in premature mortalities.

Social murder is a phrase used by Engels in his 1845 work The Condition of the Working-Class in England whereby “the class which at present holds social and political control” (the bourgeoisie) “places hundreds of proletarians in such a position that they inevitably meet a too early and an unnatural death.”

Social murder was explicitly committed by the political and social elite against the poorest in society. Although Engels’ work was originally written with regard to the English city of Manchester in the Victorian era, the term has been used by other left-wing politicians such as John McDonnell in the 21st century to describe the impacts of Conservative economic policy (neoliberalism), as well as being linked with events such as the Grenfell Tower fire. The victims of Grenfell Tower didn’t just die. Austerity, outsourcing and deregulation killed them – just as the conditions of Victorian Manchester killed the poorest citizens then.

Engels said: “When society places hundreds of proletarians in such a position that they inevitably meet a too early and an unnatural death, one which is quite as much a death by violence as that by the sword or bullet; its deed is murder just as surely as the deed of the single individual.”

Over 170 years later, Britain remains a country that murders its poor. When four separate government ministers are warned that Grenfell and other high rises are a serious fire risk, then an inferno isn’t unfortunate. It is inevitable. It is social murder.

The acts that culminated in the deaths were licensed by those in public office, or private sector authority, who had decided the lives of poor people mattered less than the profits of the rich. This is a logic that’s still very evident today.

The past decade of austerity has been one of political violence: of people losing their lifeline income for not being disabled ‘enough’, of families evicted from their homes for having more than two children or a bedroom that the state deems surplus to requirements.

These are tales of private suffering and immense misery, of a person or a household plunged into stress, anxiety, depression or worse.

Aditya Chakrabortty concluded last year, in his well-observed article about the Grenfell tragedy: “Class warfare is passed off as book-keeping. Accountability is tossed aside for “commercial confidentiality”, while profiteering is dressed up as economic dynamism. One courtesy we should pay the victims of Grenfell is to drop the glossy-brochure euphemisms. Let’s get clear what happened to them: an act of social murder, straight out of Victorian times.”

—

You can read the research report in full, without the paywall, here: Violent proletarianisation: Social murder, the reserve army of labour and social security ‘austerity’ in Britain

My work is unfunded and I don’t make any money from it. But you can support Politics and Insights and contribute by making a donation if you like, which will help me continue to research and write informative, insightful and independent articles, and to provide support to others facing the consequences of the punitive welfare ‘reforms’.

The Conservatives really can’t read simple graphs

December 23, 2018December 23, 2018 · 4 Comments ·

The Conservatives clearly need some lessons in how to read graphs. Well it’s either that or they have become extremely at ease with gaslighting the UK public, editing our collective perceptions, accounts, experiences and social history, while presenting evidence that contradicts their lies, unabashed.

Last week I reported Dominic Raab’s oblivion to the fact that despite his grand claims that wages were rising faster than they did over the last decade (most of which featured a Conservative government), the graph he posted as evidence actually demonstrated that real wages are lower today than 10 years ago, when Labour were in office. After being mocked a lot, he subsequently deleted his rather foolish Tweet.

Now James Cleverly is at it. It’s curious that he also presents the evidence that his headline is fake news:

https://twitter.com/JamesCleverly/status/1076460492732940288

me cleverly aide cleverly

I wonder when Cleverly – who really should change his surname to ‘Sillysausagerly’ or even ‘pork pies’ – will delete the evidence of his foolish moment?

He claims he could clearly read Jeremy Corbyn’s lips in parliament last week too.

But he seems incapable of recognising what is right in front of him.

I deeply suspect he was being Conservative with the truth yet again.

Please can someone help this girl who is sleeping in a bin

December 22, 2018December 23, 2018 · 9 Comments ·

This girl was last seen sleeping in a bin in Deepdene just off Brixton hill in London. Please can we identify her and get her some help before it’s too late. Nobody should have to live like this. pic.twitter.com/TKkYI8JNzy

— UnityNewsUK (@UnityNewsUK) December 22, 2018

No one should ever have to live like this in one of the wealthiest countries in the world.

In 2013, Chris Skidmore, a Conservative MP, claimed that the impact of austerity and public service cuts wasn’t bad because people have not been left “lying dead in the streets”. He made the remarks at the Conservative conference during a meeting of the Thatcherite Free Enterprise Group.

He defended the comments at the time, and said: “The point I was making was that when we were making cuts, people suggested they were so bad that people would be lying dead in the streets. That has clearly not happened.

“With the economy recovering it is not the picture of doom that was predicted.”

People ARE dying because of austerity. And more than 500 homeless people have died in the last 12 months in the UK

Labour MP Lisa Nandy responded to Skidmore’s comments, saying that they exposed the Conservative’s callous attitude to people hit hard by their austerity measures.

She added: “It’s a pretty extreme measure by which to assess the impact of cuts. Hundreds of thousands have been hit by the bedroom tax and a million youngsters are out of work.

“People will be shocked to hear the dismissive way Tories treat suffering.”

The denial, strategic narrating and editing of people’s accounts of their experiences of austerity by this disgraceful government must end. There is no use for a government that simply uses techniques of neutralisation and calls those raising legitimate concerns ‘scaremongers’ to divert us from the fact that their policies are inflicting great distress, harm and premature death on some targeted groups, and to stifle valid criticism.

What is the point of a government that does not ensure that citizens in the UK have the means of meeting their most basic survival needs, in the sixth wealthiest nation in the world, while handing out public funds it has taken from the public to millionaires and rogue private companies?

It’s time for positive change. In fact for many of us, change is essential if we are to survive.

Earlier this year, a homeless man died from horrific injuries after sleeping in a bin in Rochester, Kent. He was wrapped in a roll of carpet to keep warm, when the bin was emptied. Russell Lane did not wake up and was hidden from view under the carpet. This tragic incident is a further reminder of the risks associated with sleeping in bins – both in cases involving homeless individuals, or those on a night out. Hypothermia may make homeless people drowsy and they may experience difficulty with their level of alertness and with waking up.

Large padded bins are a sheltered location to sleep, but those sleeping in them are often hard to detect and are at risk of serious injury or death both from falls into collection vehicles and the deadly compressing machinery within them. Imagine how awful it must be having to choose between dying of hypothermia and exposure or taking a risk and bedding down in a bin.

Just before Christmas last year twenty-eight-year-old Jay McLaren was found dead at a recycling plant after sleeping in a bin following a night out in Sunderland town centre, while last July there was a large-scale search for the body of RAF gunner Corrie McKeague who, it is believed, fell asleep in a bin in Bury St Edmunds before being unknowingly taken to landfill for incineration.

As a so-called civilised society, we mustn’t look the other way. In cold weather, the plight of people who have no shelter is especially harsh, and many passersby may struggle to know what to do. But here are small things we can each do to make a difference, and reduce the dangers of freezing weather for homeless citizens. For example:

We could stop, smile and buy someone a warm drink, or provide some warm food.
We could set up places were people can take their old coats and blankets, socks, hats, gloves, scarves – and then distribute those to people sleeping rough. Or even set up a point in each town so that homeless people know where to go for warm clothes that have been donated.
We can also contact Streetlink. (Click) When a rough sleeper is reported via the Streetlink app, or by phone – telephone number 0300-500 0914. The details you provide are sent to the local authority concerned, so they can help connect the person to local services and support. You will also receive an update on what action was taken so you’ll know if the situation was resolved. StreetLink aims to offer the public a means to act when they see someone sleeping rough, and is the first step someone can take to ensure rough sleepers are connected to the local services and support available to them.

Please help this poor girl.

Wasn't for the observant refuse collector, this young girl would've been another statistic in the hundreds of homeless people who have died this year. How long are people going to accept a @Conservatives government whose policies are the reason for people like her living in bins? pic.twitter.com/Nszi4P4knk

— Chris Furlong (@SocialistChris) December 22, 2018

The young woman was found in the recycling wheelie bin could have been crushed to death had she had not been found and filmed by a refuse collector. He bought her a meal. However, no one seems to know where she is now.

People are starving destitute and dying on the streets because of draconian Conservative policies that were designed to cruelly punish the poorest citizens.

It’s time that people in the UK stopped looking the other way.

I would like to help, but I live at the other end of the country, and would struggle to travel down to London at the moment, as I am very unwell with a lupus flare. I have to get to the hospital in Newcastle on Monday (Christmas eve) for an emergency appointment with my specialist for some additional treatment – it’s usually a high dose shot of steroids. So I can’t travel at the moment.

Mother advised by DWP to visit food bank if Universal Credit doesn’t arrive by Christmas Eve

December 22, 2018December 22, 2018 · 20 Comments ·

A mother of three children has been left with just £10 for Christmas after her Universal Credit money was not paid.

Paulette Reid from London was expecting to receive her money today but nothing was paid into her account. When she telephoned the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) she was told that the money should be paid on Christmas Eve.

Reid was then stunned to be told to go to a local food bank if the money did not arrive. She has just £10 left in her bank account and now fears she and her three children could be spending Christmas without electricity or food.

“At this point I don’t actually know what I’m going to do. If I don’t get anything I won’t even have money so that I can travel to a family member’s house,” she said.

“I will have to spend Christmas at home possibly with no electricity. It really is at that point because I was really relying on that money today, I need to pay the electricity, there’s no food in the fridge.

“I’ve done no Christmas shopping either – it’s not like I’m ok until that point.”

Reid has recently found a job in customer services after months of unemployment. However, because she only started work on 4th December, she will not receive her wage until the end of December.

“I went in to my local DWP to say to them ‘look I’m working’ and I’m struggling because I’ve got childcare fees to pay, I’ve got to get to work everyday and I don’t have anything right now so I can pay my childcare fees in advance because I have to do that,” she said.

Reid’s youngest child is six and she has two adult children. Last week she was given £90 to cover childcare, but nothing else.

She added: “Nothing for travel, nothing for food, nothing to help support me stay in work in general.”

She was told instead that she would receive a full payment on 21st December because payments were being early due to the Christmas holiday period.

She said:”I thought ‘ok that’s not too bad’,” but I woke up this morning and there was nothing.

“I called the 0800 number and was told ‘if you were due to be paid on Christmas Day normally then you won’t get anything until Christmas Eve if you’re financially stuck and you find Christmas Eve arrives and you haven’t received any money then you’re welcome to visit one of your local foodbanks for support’.”

However, that was also the money she had planned to spend on her family for Christmas.

“That was also me getting presents for my little one, being able to contribute towards Christmas dinner,” she said.

She added: “The rent is due on Christmas Day so they will either take it before or after so if they take it this weekend that’s me failing on my rent.”

In utter despair, Reid called her local MP Rupa Huq who has written to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, raising her case.

Reid made a claim for Universal Credit in March after being made redundant.

She said of the system: “I’m shocked by the way that it’s run, I can see why people are in debt, why they’re suicidal, why they’re depressed. It isn’t a system that is set up to help people get back to work.”

The MP for Ealing and Acton tweeted a photograph of the letter saying: “Last weekday before Christmas/ first day of recess.

“Office has just received a call from a mum of two in tears as payment not come through yet and has £10 to her name for festive season.”

The reality of Universal Credit

Last weekday before Christmas/ first day of recess. Office has just received a call from a mum of two in tears as payment not come through yet and has £10 to her name for festive season

Have raised enquiry with @DWP & @AmberRuddHR asking for HELP pic.twitter.com/bjecZyBMoJ

— Rupa Huq MP (@RupaHuq) December 21, 2018

A DWP spokesman said: “Same day advances worth up to 100% of a Universal Credit award are available on day one, so no one should be without money.”

Perhaps it’s time the Department spent time ensuring that people actually get the advances when they are badly let down.

No matter how many time this line is repeated by government ministers and the DWP, it’s meaningless unless it actually happens.

former DWP

A comment in a Facebook group where I have posted this article.

Labour pledges to repeal nineteenth century law criminalising rough sleepers

December 22, 2018December 22, 2018 · 9 Comments ·

Image result for for the many not the few

Friday 21 December 2018 / 10:18 PM Jeremy Corbyn

Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn and Shadow Housing Minister Melanie Onn have announced that the next Labour government will repeal the Vagrancy Act 1824 which criminalises begging and rough sleeping.

They will say that the priority should be to support, not criminalise, those who are sleeping rough or begging.

The Georgian-era legislation is unnecessary for dealing with genuine anti-social behaviour as a number of other civil measures exist in modern legislation, including civil injunctions and criminal behaviour orders.

The Vagrancy Act was used to bring a criminal charge nearly 3,000 times in 2016 with offences under the act commanding a fine of up to £1,000 and leaving those convicted under it with a two year criminal record.

Labour has committed to ending rough sleeping within five years of forming the next Labour Government, with a plan to reserve 8,000 homes for those with a history of rough sleeping.

Earlier this week, the Shadow Housing Secretary, announced plans for a £100m fund to make emergency cold weather accommodation available for every rough sleeper during winter.

Jeremy Corbyn MP, Leader of the Labour Party, said:

“It should shame us all that rough sleeping has doubled in the last eight years and nearly 600 people died while homeless last year.

“Homeless people need help, not punishment.

“The next Labour government will make ending homelessness a priority. We want to build a society which doesn’t walk by on the other side when we see someone in need.”

Melanie Onn MP, Labour’s Shadow Housing Minister, said:

“It beggars belief that we still use Georgian-era laws to criminalise some of the most vulnerable in society.

“Treating rough sleepers as criminals does not solve the underlying causes of homelessness and makes it harder for them to access support to move away from the streets.

“Rather than criminalising rough sleepers Labour would support them, with 8,000 new homes available to those with a history of rough sleeping as part of a plan to eradicate rough sleeping within five years.”

Originally published on December 20, 2018

Meet Liam and Michelle. It’s time to listen to the voices of homeless people about the fatal flaws of Universal Credit

Two very vulnerable homeless men left to die in sub-zero temperatures

Please don’t just walk on by, we are better than this

Government backs new law to prevent people made homeless through government laws from becoming homeless

From the abstract to the concrete: urban design as a mechanism of behaviour change and social exclusion

Conservative MPs accuse citizens of ‘scaremongering stories’ about experiences of Universal Credit.

£435k Brexit donation to DUP wasn’t reported says Electoral Commission

December 21, 2018December 21, 2018 · 5 Comments ·

A DUP advertisement that appeared in The Metro A DUP advert that appeared in the Metro

A £435,000 donation to the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) from a pro-Brexit group was not reported to the Electoral Commission, it has been confirmed. The BBC has reported that Scottish unionist funding organisation Constitutional Research Council (CRC) has been fined £6,000 for failing to report the donation.

Following an investigation, the Electoral Commission ruled that there was “no reasonable excuse” for failing to report it, along with other political contributions.

It was a record fine by the Electoral Commission.

However, the Commission accepted that the donation and its donors were “permissible”.

The DUP received the donation during the Brexit referendum campaign and spent £282,000 of the money on an advert (pictured above) in the Metro newspaper.

A BBC Northern Ireland (NI) Spotlight programme asked questions about whether the DUP incurred joint spending with other EU referendum campaigners but did not declare it under a common plan.

Under Electoral Commission rules, groups are not allowed to work together in order to get around funding limits, but the DUP has denied wrongdoing and insisted it acted within electoral law. It said yesterday that it had nothing to add to previous comments on the matter.

Following the airing of the documentary in June, the Electoral Commission requested further evidence from BBC Spotlight NI but were told there was no other significant information other than what was in the programme. The BBC broadcasted their own investigation.

In August, the Electoral Commission surprisingly announced that there were “no grounds” for an investigation into the issue. However, the UK Electoral Commission – the body tasked with protecting the integrity of our elections – has behaved with all of the intergrity and accountability of the Pro Conservative mainstream media during its ‘investigation’ of this controversial, secret Brexit donation.

Details of the fine were contained in new correspondence from the Electoral Commission released by the Good Law Project, the BBC reported.

The group had been seeking a judicial review over the commission’s refusal not to probe the allegations made on Spotlight.

In October, Court of Appeal judges sitting in the High Court handed down a short further judgment in respect of the Good Law Project’s judicial review of the Electoral Commission. You can read the judgment here.

The High Court rejected the application for permission to appeal advanced by the Electoral Commission and Vote Leave. The donations made by Vote Leave to Darren Grimes to meet his expenses with AggregateIQ were Vote Leave’s referendum expenses, said the High Court, and there was no real prospect of persuading the Court of Appeal otherwise. This has four main consequences.

Firstly, both the High Court and the Electoral Commission have now held that Vote Leave broke the law during the referendum.

Secondly, it is false – it is no exaggeration to call it a lie – to pretend that the Electoral Commission gave Vote Leave permission to work together with Darren Grimes. Vote Leave relies (you can read its witness statement here) for that assertion on a waiver given by the Electoral Commission. The waiver reads as follows:

However, it only applies if there was no “co-ordinated plan or agreement” between Vote Leave and Darren Grimes. And there was.

Thirdly, the High Court has held that the Electoral Commission misapplied the law during the referendum. The waiver – above – was wrong in principle.

Fourthly, importantly, the Commission was wrong when it gave a waiver to Leave campaigners without giving that waiver to Remain campaigners. And, had it given that waiver to Remain campaigners they, too, would have carried on spending.

Responding to these latest developments, Caroline Lucas MP has called on the Electoral Commission to “urgently reopen its investigation and use its powers to demand concrete evidence of where these significant donations came from.”

“This is about protecting the integrity of our democracy”, she added: “The Electoral Commission itself has already admitted Leave campaigners broke the law ahead of the 2016 referendum. So for them to simply take the DUP and Constitutional Research Council at their word is deeply irresponsible.”

The Good Law Project says: “It is open to the Electoral Commission to ignore the indication from the High Court and ask the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal. However, we can only hope that it will not waste further public money attempting to defend its mishandling of the Referendum.”

The Electoral Commission is apparently reluctant or powerless to enforce the laws of what ought to be democratic events such as referendums and elections.

Yet without a normative, wider, institutionalised accountability and transparency, we have no democracy.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: