Quote: "Aug. 1, 2011 -- Researchers seeking to explain the rising number of asthma
cases in children have fingered a new suspect: electromagnetic fields
(EMFs), energy that can’t been seen or felt that is generated by
household appliances, electronic devices, cars, and power lines.
In a study, they found that babies born to women who are exposed to stronger EMFs during pregnancy had more than triple the risk of developing asthma compared to babies born to women exposed to weaker EMFs.
In other words, about 13% of children born to women in the group with the lowest EMF exposures developed asthma compared to about 33% of children born to women who had high EMF exposures.
“That’s a striking figure,” says David Savitz, PhD, a professor
of community health and obstetrics and gynecology at Brown University
in Providence, R.I. “That magnitude of association we don’t see very
often. If it was correct, and that’s a big ‘if,’ that would be really
startling.”
Savitz, who has studied the health effects of electromagnetic
fields but was not involved in the research, says that while the finding
is interesting, there’s no reason to give up using a hair dryer or microwave just yet.
He says that unlike contaminants like cigarette smoke or lead
that are known to be dangerous, there’s little evidence that
low-frequency EMFs, the kind measured in the study, are harmful.
“This has been very, very thoroughly studied, and it really is
questionable whether it causes any health effects at any reasonable
level,” Savitz tells WebMD. “It’s certainly not something that falls
into the category of a known hazard.”
But Savitz and others acknowledge that all research has to start somewhere.
“There are a lot of important topics that started out looking
pretty flaky and pretty unlikely. There was a time when it made no sense
that smoking could be bad for you,” he says.
Other experts agree.
“The study appears to be well executed and the finding is
surprising,” says Jonathan M. Samet, MD, a pulmonologist and
epidemiologist at the Keck School of Medicine at the University of
Southern California in Los Angeles." Go to: http://www.webmd.com/asthma/news/20110801/electromagnetic-fields-linked-asthma-kids
Quote: "Yesterday’s new peerage appointments attracted almost universal
criticism for further adding to the inexorable growth in size of the
House of Lords under David Cameron. But could the gradual erosion of the
Lords’ reputation actually benefit the government by weakening
parliament? Might it even be a deliberate plan? And – given that the
Prime Minister holds all the cards – what can be done about it? Meg Russell comments.
This post has an eye-catching title, but it isn’t a joke – my
question is deadly serious. David Cameron’s list of 45 new appointments
to the Lords, announced this week, has attracted predictable wails of
outrage – from the media, from opposition parties , and indeed from myself. His Lords appointments in the last five years have been completely disproportionate. As I demonstrated in a report
earlier this year, he has created new peers at a faster rate than any
other Prime Minister since life peerages began in 1958. Although growth
in the size of the chamber has always been a problem, since 2010 it has
escalated to new proportions. As is clear from my well-rehearsed graph,
updated for this week’s appointments, the upward trajectory increased
sharply from 2010. In the 11 years of Labour government from 1999-2010
the chamber grew by 40-70 members (depending how you measure it); in the
five short years since Cameron took office, it has grown by two to
three times as much.
Note:
‘Actual eligible membership’ includes those on leave of absence and
otherwise temporarily excluded from the chamber, all of whom could
potentially return. Source: House of Lords Information Office figures
from January each year, updated with 2015 appointments.
Cameron’s latest list of appointments was long anticipated. A few weeks ago, the Prime Minister appeared to conjure up a new convention, that the Lords should be rebalanced to reflect the politics of the Commons – I pointed out that this was a non-convention, and in an interview on the Today Programme
(1hr 15min) explained why it would also be a terrible idea. For the
Lords to reflect the Commons politically would make it a far less
effective institution. It is precisely because no government since 1999
has had a Lords majority, and ministers have had to justify their
policies there on the basis of argument, rather than simply partisan
loyalty, that the Upper House has done a good job of holding government
to account. The Blair and Brown governments had to navigate policy and
negotiate with the Lords, in a chamber where the Conservatives remained
the largest party for nine years. It is precisely its ‘no overall
control’ character – with the balance of power held by Liberal Democrats
and Crossbench independents – which revived the previously moribund Lords post-1999, and in doing so both strengthened parliament and led to better government.
It was widely anticipated that Cameron wanted to use these new
appointments to strengthen the Conservatives’ position in the Lords, in
line with his comment above. But this is not actually what he has done.
His list of 45 new appointees
includes 26 Conservatives, 11 Lib Dems and eight Labour nominees –
giving him an increased advantage of just seven. It seems quite
inexplicable that he would appoint so many Liberal Democrats, given that
party’s collapse in the national vote share and in Commons seats, and
that before this week it already had 101 seats in the Lords (compared to
eight MPs). This makes even less sense when you consider that new
Liberal Democrat peers will largely use their positions to vote against
the government. This week’s appointments were packaged as ‘resignation
honours’, and hence include various former MPs. But several of the
Liberal Democrat nominees have never been MPs at all, so why appoint
them? In a report
supported by numerous senior cross-party figures four years ago I
argued that dissolution honours lists were a luxury that could no longer
be afforded given the Lords’ growing size. But while Cameron might have
felt that he had an obligation, in line with past precedent, to senior
retiring figures like William Hague, any such obligation extends to
barely a handful on this list. So why not simply appoint seven
Conservatives and no others? Or perhaps ten Conservatives, two Labour
nominees and one Liberal Democrat? The net outcome in terms of Lords
votes would have been the same, and the media outrage could have been
avoided.
Given how strange this seems, is it possible that the media outrage
is actually part of the strategy? Next week we will publish new research
showing definitively that media coverage of the Lords has grown
increasingly negative since Cameron became Prime Minister. Such coverage
reflects badly on him, but the primary damage done is to the reputation
of the Lords. And if the Lords’ reputation is damaged, this weakens its
ability to credibly challenge the government. The chamber’s ballooning
size is patently becoming absurd, as the newspapers frequently remind us.
The 101 Liberal Democrats (40 of them appointed by Cameron himself, by
the way) already looked disproportionate. This week’s appointments
simply add to the absurdity. The Prime Minister may take a short-term
media ‘hit’, but the long-term damage will be to the Lords.
This may sound like an over-elaborate conspiracy theory. That it
should be a Conservative Prime Minister, of all things, who would seek
to damage the Lords is counterintuitive. But the latest round of
appointments (not to mention previous ones) is puzzling, until
considered in this light. And these are not simply isolated musings. I
have spoken to journalists who claim to have been told by senior
Conservative sources that there is indeed a deliberate strategy to
undermine the Lords. Such suggestions have started to creep into the newspapers
(para 21). Other events in recent years have also contributed to an
undermining of the chamber’s reputation. It is notable that the House of Lords Appointments Commission,
responsible for proposing expert independent peers, has been invited to
make only eight nominations since 2010 – compared to the 31 in the
period 2005-10 (in the context of a far smaller total number of peerage
appointments). The presence of independent members and experts are among
the most popular features
of the Lords with the public, and it has previously been widely agreed
that Crossbenchers should be maintained at 20%. Instead, this group is
being undermined.
Whether by accident or design, David Cameron as Prime Minister is
clearly failing in his constitutional duty to appoint responsibly to the
Lords, and to protect and maintain the reputation of parliament. No
modern Prime Minister has made peerage appointments with this degree of
recklessness. There is enormous concern inside the Lords itself about
the situation, and there are rumours that this concern is shared in
Whitehall as well. But until something is done to constrain his powers,
the Prime Minister maintains complete control over the system – in terms
of how many peers are appointed, when, and with what party balance. If
such powers are abused this becomes extremely serious, given the lack of
external constraint – and presents others in the system with a major
constitutional challenge. Some may argue that the answer is ‘big’
reform: most obviously the introduction of election. Indeed for some the
reaction to my headline could well be “destruction of the Lords:
hooray!” But this all depends on what comes in its place. A move to
election would require action by government, and this government clearly
has absolutely no intention to bring forward a bill. So the risk is
instead descent towards a moribund and discredited institution, as
existed in the 1950s, with ever weaker ability to hold the government to
account. Until some bigger Lords reform happens, the priority must be
to maintain the integrity of parliament, and its capacity properly to do
its job.
So what can be done? This is a serious crisis for the Lords, and
demands serious action. The Lord Speaker has apparently convened a
cross-party working group to come up with proposals by October – which
could be crucial. The House of Lords Constitution Committee could also
step in and express a view. There are options for motions, standing
order changes and private members’ bills – to cap the size of the
chamber, the numbers coming in, the proportion of party peers against
independents, and even completely to overhaul the appointments process.
One of the obstacles to second chamber reform – not only in the UK, but around the world
– is that it is not in government’s self-interest to strengthen
parliament. But when the driver of the bus seems intent on sending it
careering out of control and heading for a cliff, there comes a point
when the passengers must seize the wheel. In other words, parliament
itself now urgently needs to act. The Lords should do so with
determination and force – if it is not to simply sit by as a spectator,
observing its own destruction." Go to: http://constitution-unit.com/2015/08/28/is-david-cameron-actually-seeking-to-destroy-the-lords/
Arafel Comment: You are missing the obvious too, he (not unreasonably), has rewarded
those Liberal buddies with a Golden Handshake, he’s bought Lockean
Neo-Conism into The Lords whilst also trying to undermine its
traditional “liberal” consensus..Thank you for your analysis..it makes
sense..such closet fascists have long experience of the sting in Maam's
“tale”! Is it any wonder they are coming-out now (“oooops did I say
something wrong?”), …………"
Quote: "Israel's
former defence minister says three plans to attack Iran - backed by
himself and the premier - failed to secure security cabinet consensus
Israel's former Defense Minister Ehud Barak (L) and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (AFP)
Israel's
former defence minister Ehud Barak has said in an interview that three
Iran attack plans backed by both himself and Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu were blocked by the military.
Barak, defence minister
from 2009 to 2013, told the privately run television station Channel 2
overnight Friday that the plans were drawn up between 2009 and 2010.
They
were approved both by him and Netanyahu, but the response of the then
chief of staff, General Gaby Ashkenazi, "was not positive".
Ashkenazi's
successor, Benny Gantz, told the country's political leadership that
"the possibilities [for an attack on Iran] exist, but you know its
limitations and risks," Barak said.
He said the military's
reservations convinced two members of the eight-member security cabinet -
Moshe Yaalon and Yuval Steinitz - not to back such a plan, depriving
the premier of the necessary majority to proceed.
Yaalon, the
current defence minister, had the strategic affairs portfolio at the
time, while Steinitz, who is now infrastructure and energy minister, was
then finance minister.
Barak said an opportunity in 2012 to
attack Iran was shelved as it would have coincided with large joint
military exercises with the United States, "which was likely to
embarrass Washington and give the impression the Americans were directly
involved in the attack".
In 2013, former prime minister Ehud
Olmert accused his successor Netanyahu of spending nearly $3 bn on
preparations for an attack on Iran that never materialised.
For years, Netanyahu has trumpeted the threat to use the "military option" to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
He
categorically opposes the agreement reached in mid-July between the
Islamic republic and major powers which will lead to the lifting of
economic sanctions against Tehran.
Netanyahu and a large majority
of Israeli politicians believe the agreement is not strict enough to
prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons which they could use against
Israel.
Tehran has constantly denied its nuclear programme has a military dimension, saying it is for purely peaceful purposes." Go to: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israeli-army-blocked-netanyahus-plans-attack-iran-barak-1126283964
Quote: "UNITED Nations officials will visit the UK in the next few months to
investigate whether Iain Duncan Smith’s welfare reforms have led to
“grave or systematic violations” of disabled people’s human rights, the
Sunday Herald can reveal.
A formal investigation has already been launched by the UN’s Committee
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. UN investigations are
conducted confidentially, but a leading Scottish disability charity has
told the Sunday Herald it has been advised a visit by the Special
Rapporteur and members of the committee on the rights of persons with
disabilities is expected in the “near future”.
Only last week, Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith unveiled
plans to launch a fresh attack on sickness benefit. He outlined aims to
get one million people off the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
disability benefit, claiming too many people with “common” mental health
conditions are reliant on the state.
The SNP will today attack the “callous” plans, saying new statistics
show this will affect nearly half - 43% - of all disabled people
currently claiming ESA.
Shocking statistics published by the DWP last week showed thousands of
people have died after being declared “fit for work”. The figures,
which did not detail the cause of the deaths, revealed that 2,380 people
died between December 2011 and February 2014 after a work capability
assessment (WCA) found them fit for work.
Bill Scott, director of policy at Inclusion Scotland, a consortium of
disability organisations, said: “The UN have notified us they will be
visiting Britain to investigate ... and want to meet with us when they
come, sometime in the next few months.”
Inclusion Scotland has also made a submission to a study being
prepared by the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities, Catalina Devandas-Aguilar, which is examining the right of
disabled people to social protection.
It warned the UK Government’s welfare reforms are “jeopardising
disabled people’s right to life” by increasing the risk of suicide after
loss of benefits. Last week, the Sunday Herald revealed that DWP staff
had been given official guidance on how to deal with suicidal claimants
left penniless after suffering benefit sanctions.
The Inclusion Scotland submission also highlights a series of shocking
findings, including that disabled people in some areas of Scotland are
waiting for up to 10 months to access Personal Independent Payment
disability benefits, due to delays in assessments taking place.
By 2018, more than 80,000 disabled people in Scotland will lose some
or all of the help with mobility costs they were previously entitled to,
according to the statistics from Inclusion Scotland.
And most families with disabled children will lose around £1,500 a
year as a result of changes to child tax credits under the new Universal
Credit system.
Scott said: “It is the cumulative impact that is so serious, because
the government seems to have assumed that different disabled people
would be affected by different cuts – but that is not the case. There
are a lot of individuals who are affected by three, four, five -
sometimes six or seven different benefit cuts.
“Because disabled people are less likely to be in work, they are more
likely to also be reliant on benefits which aren’t specifically for
disabled people, but which are claimed by people on low income - like
housing benefit and council tax benefit.
“So if there are cuts to those, it affects disabled people
disproportionately, because they are more likely to be on low income.”
Scott said he hoped the UN visit would help, pointing to a report
published last year by the UN's special investigator on housing, Raquel
Rolnik, which called for the suspension of the bedroom tax.
He said there had been an approach taken to "stigmatise" disabled people for not working in recent years.
But he added: "In fact one in three of working age really cannot work -
and of the remainder, the vast majority want to work but cannot get
jobs because of the discrimination in the labour market."
SNP MSP Christina McKelvie, member of Holyrood’s welfare reform
committee said: “Just this week it was revealed that 2,380 people had
died after a work capability assessment found them fit for work and this
comes as the DWP is set to further cut support for up to 1 million
disabled people – a staggering 43% of those who receive ESA."
She added: “We have consistently raised grave concerns about the
impact and extent to which the UK Government is prepared to cut support
for disabled people. The fact that the United Nations is now set to
launch an inquiry into the issue simply underlines the gravity of the
situation facing many of the most vulnerable people in Scotland and the
rest of the UK.
“The DWP has questions to answer and the Scottish Parliament and its
committees should welcome and support any investigation by UN
representatives.”
Dr Simon Duffy, director of think tank The Centre for Welfare Reform,
said independent research carried out since 2010 had shown the UK
Government has targeted cuts on people in poverty and people with
disabilities.
He added: “In fact the people with the most severe disabilities have
faced cuts several times greater than those faced by cuts to the average
citizen. This policy has been made even worse by processes of
assessment and sanctions that are experienced as stigmatising and
bullying.
“The government has utterly failed to find jobs for the people they
target - people who are often very sick, who have disabilities or who
have mental health problems.
"Instead we are seeing worrying signs that they are increasing rates of illness, suicide and poverty."
Quote: "One unexpected benefit of
medical marijuana legislation appears to be a decrease in painkiller
overdoses, perhaps because some chronic pain patients are turning to
cannabis instead of powerful opioid drugs.
In states with laws legalizing medical marijuana, new research shows
there are nearly 25 percent fewer deaths from painkiller overdoses.
Opioid painkiller overdoses are a growing problem nationwide. More than
16,500 Americans died of opioid drug overdoses in 2010, and the numbers
continue to rise.
Although a casual relationship hasn’t been
proven, there appears to be a significant association between marijuana
legislation and a fall in overdose deaths.
Researchers from the University of Pennsylvania reported
that in states that enacted medical cannabis laws between 1999 and 2010,
there was a 24.8 percent lower annual opioid overdose death rate,
compared to states without medical marijuana laws. The study was funded
by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the Center for AIDS
Research at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City. Find Out About the 9 Most Addictive Painkillers on the Market »
“We
found it surprising that there was such a large difference in opioid
painkiller overdose rates associated with implementation of a medical
marijuana law,” said lead study author Dr. Marcus Bachhuber, a VA
Scholar at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center.
Researchers
think that lower overdose rates could be due in part to other things
states were doing to address prescription painkiller overdoses during
the same period, such as providing public education on painkiller abuse.
According to the American Academy of Pain Medicine, 1.5
billion people worldwide suffer from chronic pain. Opioid painkillers
have long been an option for treating that pain, but their use comes
with an inherent risk of addiction and death from an overdose. Chronic
pain is also a major driver of medical cannabis use, which is why the
researchers wanted to see whether medical marijuana laws and deaths from
opioid overdoses were linked at the state level.
Researchers
analyzed medical cannabis laws and death certificate data from 1999 to
2010. In 1999 three states — California, Oregon, and Washington — had
medical marijuana laws. Ten more states enacted medical marijuana laws
between 1999 and 2010.
Primary
care physicians take care of people with chronic pain. It’s inevitable
that at some point, a patient will come down with aches and pains and
head in to see a doctor. As a primary care provider, Bachhuber sees
patients living with chronic pain, some of whom tout the benefits of
medical marijuana use. Discover 7 Simple Ways to Manage Your Chronic Pain »
“I've
even seen people who would tell me that they had tried prescription
painkillers like Vicodin, Percocet, or OxyContin,” Bachhuber said. “But
the only thing that worked for them was marijuana.”
Bachhuber and his colleagues wondered how having access to alternative options for pain relief would impact painkiller use.
“We
thought maybe, if people chose marijuana over prescription painkillers
on a large scale, medical marijuana states might see relatively lower
rates of painkiller overdoses — and even overdose deaths,” Bachhuber
says. It turned out that his hunch was correct.
As
more states and physicians navigate the legality and use of medical
marijuana, it will be important to consider its risks as well as its
positive fringe benefits.
“Many medical providers struggle in
figuring out what conditions medical marijuana could be used for, who
would benefit from it, how effective it is, and who might have side
effects,” Bachhuber said. “More studies about the risks and benefits of
medical marijuana are needed to help guide us in clinical practice.”" Go to: http://www.healthline.com/health-news/states-with-legal-marijuana-have-fewer-overdose-deaths-082614#3
I did some work on this subject for The Legalise Cannabis Campaign in the late '80s and wrote a consultation/lobbying piece for Parliament. Interestingly there appears to be a direct correlation between illegality and over-use, using the Dutch figures the perecentage of regular users went down not up following decriminalisation, it was found that users were less stressed and that consequently they did not require the same quantities or regularity of use as before. There appears to be a direct endocrinic relation between adrenaline production and the need for marijuana (in those who would benefit from its therapeutic effects); "but hey like we knew that man!" Illegality throws the law-abiding into the hands of the criminals is it any wonder "joe-public" gets tense?
Quote: "More
than 80 people a month are now dying after being declared ‘fit for
work’. The safety net that used to be there for the most vulnerable is
being torn to shreds
Go to your local benefits office and desperation can be boiled down to a six-point plan, mounted on pink laminated card.
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has assembled written
guidance on suicide for its “frontline staff” – a euphemism for workers
hired to call people and break it to them that they’ve been rejected for
benefits. One section of the guidance – that is to be reported to
managers to alert them of “a suicidal intention” – instructs jobcentre
staff to find out what the person plans, when it is planned for, and
whether “the customer has the means to hand”.
I don’t know at what point social security and a risk of suicide
became inevitable partners. Or when government “supporting people” – as
the DWP described the guidance this week – began to mean, not helping people build their lives, but checking that they do not want to die.
Death has become a part of Britain’s benefits system.
That is not hyperbole but the reality that the stress caused by
austerity has led us to. Shredding the safety net – a mix of sanctions,
defective “fit for work” tests, and outright cuts to multiple services –
has meant that benefit claimants are dying; through suicide, starvation, and even being crushed by a refuse lorry when a 17-week benefit sanction forced a man to scavenge in a bin for food.
This morning, the government released mortality statistics
– or rather, was forced to after several freedom of information
requests – that show more than 80 people a month are dying after being
declared “fit for work”. These are complex figures but early analysis
points to two notable facts. First that 2,380 people
died between December 2011 and February 2014 shortly after being judged
“fit for work” and rejected for the sickness and disability benefit,
Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). We also now know that 7,200
claimants died after being awarded ESA and being placed in the
work-related activity group – by definition, people whom the government
had judged were able to “prepare” to get back to work.
Notably how or why each of these people died was not recorded –
meaning it’s impossible to say whether a death was linked to an
incorrect assessment. But for the government, distortion is key and it
is not restricted to faked benefit sanction leaflets. If we needed a sign of the DWP’s intentions, as it prepared to release today’s mortality statistics it was seemingly hedging its bets by finalising the details for a tribunal where it had planned to try to repress some of them.
How can a government have such disregard for death? It is worth
looking at how it expects some of us to live. Until a few months ago in
Bootle, Merseyside, a 48-year-old severely disabled man was being washed in a paddling pool in his front room.
Rob Tomlinson, who has cerebral palsy, had used a purpose-built walk-in
shower in the specially converted four-bed council house he shared with
his carers, his brother and sister-in law. The bedroom tax saw the
family evicted and until a new property was found a year later, Rob
lived with only a child’s pool and hose to stay clean.
There
is a reason, in the age of austerity, that politicians and much of the
media has stopped using the term social security and replaced it with
“welfare”. It sets expectations much lower. A sense of security for
members of society in need bumped down to mere subsistence.
Today’s mortality statistics do not simply point to the death of
disabled, poor, and ill people but of the system that was meant to
protect them. Before our eyes the principle of a benefit system is being
reduced from opportunity, respect, and solidarity to destitution,
degradation and isolation.
Six-point plans to avoid people on benefits killing themselves do not
exist in a society that has hope for their lives. The welfare state was
built on the idea of “the cradle to the grave”. Now for thousands, all
they receive is help to that grave." Go to: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/27/death-britains-benefits-system-fit-for-work-safety-net
Quote: "Moira
Drury died less than fortnight ago aged 61. She suffered from
combination of illnesses, including depression and cancer, but her
daughter believes that a seven-month delay in processing her benefit
claim hastened her death.
“She was incredibly determined, resilient, strong and warm-hearted,”
said her daughter, Nichole Drury. “She was such an amazing lady.”
According to Nichole, her mother’s demise was hastened by the
decision of jobcentre officials earlier this year to stop her benefits.
“She told me the day before she died that the stress of having her
benefits removed contributed to her decline,” said Nichole, who is a
veterinary surgeon based in Sussex.
“Stress and anxiety lowers your immune system and ability to fight
disease. I am absolutely certain that the stress she endured caused her
to give up her fight against her illnesses. Without the stress this
caused she would have had a little more precious time.”
Her benefits saga started when she was told by her local jobcentre in
Essex to undergo a fit-work-test, known as a work capability assessment
(WCA), on 15 January to assess whether she should continue to be
eligible for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA), a benefit awarded
to people judged unable to work.
Bed-bound and suffering from flu and a chest infection, she
telephoned to say she was not well enough to attend. Illness also
prevented her attending a rescheduled WCA just over two weeks later on 3
February.
On 16 February she received a letter from Basildon benefit centre
saying it had examined her reasons for not attending the WCA. Presumably
it did not accept that she was genuinely ill. The letter only says
tersely that it considered she was capable of work and that she was no
longer entitled to ESA.
“Having considered all the available evidence, I am unable to accept
that a good cause has been shown for not attending the medical
assessment … and you cannot be treated as having limited capability for
work. As a result, you are not entitled to employment and support
allowance.
The
DWP aims to process benefit claims within 16 days, but the reality can
be very different. Moira’s claim was stuck in the system, and had still
not been completed when she died. As a result, for the last seven months
of her life, as her health deteriorated, she received no income.When Nichole telephoned the DWP to check on the process of the
application, she was told they were awaiting medical records from
Moira’s GP. When Nichole checked with the GP practice, they told her
they had not received any such request. The lowest point came just over a month before Moira died, when she
received a court summons for non-payment of council tax. As her ESA had
been suspended, her local council had automatically stopped her council
tax benefit, meaning she was liable for full council tax. Moira was not
told. The shock arrival in July of a council tax bill for nearly £2,000
came the day after she received the results of a hospital biopsy that
detected cancer on her lung.“That was the point that pushed her over the edge,” says Nichole. Ministers are fighting a permanent battle against critics from across the political spectrum concerned at how welfare cuts and reforms and benefit processing delays have hit the poor and vulnerable, causing illness and stress, and driving those affected to food banks and loan sharks. On Thursday the government finally released statistics relating to ESA claimants who have died after claiming benefits. It is under pressure to release internal reviews into 49 benefits-related deaths since February 2012, 40 of which followed a suicide or apparent suicide. Moira
certainly did not fit with the crude media characterisations of benefit
claimants. She was working as a nurse and bringing up three young
children in the West Midlands in the 1980s, when her abusive husband
attacked her with a hammer, an assault that put him in prison and her in
hospital with a serious head injury.
When she recovered, she refused to sign on for sickness benefit, says
Nichole, and returned to work doing night shifts at the local hospital.
She later took time out to look after her daughters and subsequently
worked as a receptionist until 2007, when a combination of limited
mobility, mini-strokes, epilepsy and depression forced her to give up.
The DWP told the Guardian that its sympathy was with the Drury family
but indicated that its files said it had proved difficult to assess her
claim. “It’s important that people supply sufficient evidence –
including medical evidence – when making a claim, as it could affect
their benefit entitlement. That is why we contacted Ms Drury several
times to try and gather further evidence. People also have the right to
ask for a reconsideration of their case or appeal if they don’t agree
with a decision.”
However, Nichole, who described her mother as proud and often
unwilling to admit that she needed assistance, tried in vain to help her
to navigate a benefits system she calls an “administrative assault
course”. For her, a successful professional, who had had no personal
dealings with the benefits system, her encounter was eye-opening.
“Nobody wants to see people exploiting the welfare system. But we
don’t want a system which leaves people by the wayside. The way it works
is crude and it’s cruel, and seems deliberately designed to get the
weak and vulnerable off benefits to save money. It’s people who can’t
fight back who are the victims.” " Go to: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/27/my-mothers-death-was-hastened-by-long-delay-in-processing-her-benefits?CMP=share_btn_tw
Quote: "Govt
has ignored calls for a full assessment of the impact of Welfare,
Social Care & NHS reform on disabled people and their families. The
number of households with a disabled family member living in “absolute
poverty” increased by 10% between 2013 & 14." Go to: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106068
Quote: ".."Ohh that's clever there's a "pop-up-shop" selling "pips" look sweethearts I wonder if it will be our friend?" ..The only things in there were two receptacles one for "trash" one for "recycling" (he, he), a large flat screen tv. (not on), a reception desk and receptionist, chairs, security guard
and water dispenser (oh, and some "Red Tops" in a rack), no CLOCK (check
out Post Offices -Tm-, they don't have 'em n'more either),..I am
reminded of "The Phantom Toll Both" ("ware plague! WARE
PLAGUE.............!"), ......."
Posted by Gerardon August 28, 2015, 6:33 pm to Medialens' message board.
Quote: "This month, a woman who stole a 75p packet of Mars bars was fined £328.
She hadn’t eaten in days, had no money for food due to her benefits
being withheld, and was so desperate that she stole the cheapest food
item in the shop.
If it hadn’t been for a generous online observer,
who campaigned to fund the fine, she would eventually have been hauled
in front of the court again and potentially faced a prison sentence for
failing to produce the money.
Her story caused outrage at the lack of compassion and common sense
that the court’s decision revealed. But the most sinister part of this
news is that such ridiculous stories are cropping up in courts all over
the country, due to a new legal fee the government included in the Criminal Justice and Courts Act, which passed in February.
Other examples include a homeless man charged £900 for shoplifting,
multiple cases of people charged £150 for begging, and one man hit with
£300 worth of costs for stealing three bottles of baby milk (see below).
The criminal courts charge is a fee adult offenders have to pay towards
the cost of administering a criminal court case if they are convicted
of, or plead guilty for, a crime. A blanket fee that cannot be changed
according to the severity of the offence, the criminal courts charge is
not means-tested, and cannot be waived.
It’s not up to the judge or magistrates’ discretion whether or not to
apply the charge, and the court cannot take the charge into account when
it decides on a sentence.
The minimum £150 charge comes on top of fines, prosecution costs,
victim surcharges, and compensation costs that already hit those who are
convicted. The woman who stole a Mars bar had to pay an £150 criminal
courts charge.
Here is a rundown of the charges, from the Sentencing Council website:
The charge came into effect for offences committed on or after 13
April, and, due to the five or six months’ lag time for cases going
through the Crown Prosecution Service to the courts, the cycle of these
trials has recently begun, with magistrates only just beginning to
realise what the charge means for justice – particularly in relation to
vulnerable people who end up in court. Thirty magistrates across the country have already resigned in protest against the charge. An insider at the Magistrates Assoc" Go to: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/welfare/2015/08/it-feels-absolutely-rotten-new-legal-fee-forces-courts-punish-poor-and
Quote: "I return from summer break with a shock as the UK hits moral rock
bottom. On the day that it is revealed that 2,380 people in three years
died within 14 days of being declared fit to work by an ATOS assessment
and having benefit stopped, we also have 45 of the most appalling
members of the political class elevated to trough it for life in the
House of Lords, at a possible cost to the taxpayer of 67,500 pounds per
week in attendance allowances alone.
It is worth remembering that it was the Red Tories who brought in
ATOS, and Yvette Cooper, to be precise, who ordered the extreme
tightening of the unfit to work assessment which has resulted in death
for thousands and dreadful stress and misery for hundreds of thousands.
Ian Duncan Smith may have also gleefully implemented it, but this
particular horror was entirely inherited from the Guardian’s favourite
leadership candidate.
The House of Lords appointments are so horrible it is difficult to
comment. The most utterly objectionable of all is one of the least
known to the public. Stuart Polak becomes a Lord for services to the
Conservative Friends of Israel. That you can, unelected, become a
legislator of the UK based on your loyalty and service to another state
is appalling.
Others are more obviously dreadful. Lord Hogg now has a title that
befits the moat of his home, which he had cleaned by the taxpayer
prompting much rage in the expenses scandal. Tessa Jowell benefited from
hundreds of thousands of pounds of corrupt money from the sordid
Berlusconi, claiming she did not read the mortgage documents in which
his cash paid off her house, before she signed them, and going through
an entirely risible pretence of temporary separation from her husband,
David Mills, who escaped a corrupt Italian justice system. David
Willetts was rejected by his constituents because of extreme expenses
scamming, and walks grinning back into the Lords.
Michelle Mone is rewarded for her opposition to Scottish
independence. The woman sold out the workforce who made her fortune by
expensively covering her crotch and now comes out as a Tory knicker
saleswoman. Darling also is ennobled for services to the union, after
being too cowardly to face the electorate in May. The Lib Dems get more
legislators today than they could manage at the general election. That
is simply astonishing*.
The conduct of the political class is utterly shameless. Meantime
they indulge their fantasies of stripping workers of all protection and
of stopping aid to the needy, and while the politicians gorge and gorge,
the poor are quietly being slipped away to die." Go to: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/08/the-uk-hits-moral-rock-bottom/
Nb. Nowhere in the following Los Angeles Times article does the author mention that these strikes would probably have utilised the high-tech tactical nuclear weapons gifted to Israel by The Bush Administration (and the international community), ..If Israel "released the- jinni" of war with Iran itself it would be fully aware that there would be no way to reinsert it!
Quote: "Accounts published in Israel over the weekend suggest that Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu planned to strike Iran more than once in
recent years but met with internal opposition.
On Friday, Israel's
Channel 2 news broadcast excerpts from a taped interview that former
Prime Minister Ehud Barak gave to the authors of his upcoming biography.
Barak, who served as defense minister in Netanyahu's second government
during 2009 and 2013, described three occasions from 2010 to 2012 when plans to strike Iran fell through for different reasons.
Israel's
top leaders at the time -- Netanyahu, Barak and then-Foreign Minister
Avigdor Lieberman -- reportedly believed that Iran would soon enter a
"zone of immunity," beyond which a strike would be more complicated and
less effective. In advance of what would have been the next stage of
government decision-making, the three held a meeting with Israel's top
security chiefs, including the chief of staff and the heads of the
country's intelligence agencies: Mossad, Shin Bet and military
intelligence.
"At the decisive moment, the army's answer was that
[Israel's] cumulative capabilities did not pass the threshold of an
operation," Barak said in the interview with Danny Dor and Ilan Kfir,
authors of his new biography. In other words, the military was not ready
to strike Iran.
When the matter next came up in 2011, the
military's new chief of staff, Benny Gantz, said the army did have the
necessary capabilities and a wider security cabinet of eight ministers
was convened, according to Barak. At that point, he said, two of
Netanyahu's more hawkish ministers, Moshe Yaalon and Yuval Steinitz,
objected that the potential losses Israel could face were too great.
The
following year, plans coincided with a joint military exercise with the
United States and Israel did not want to implicate its important ally
and get into diplomatic trouble, Barak said. He added that he persuaded
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to postpone the exercise by several
months but that ultimately, the new timing was inconvenient as well.
Accurate or not, Barak's detailed account of such sensitive discussions caused anger and concern among Israeli leaders and defense observers.
Netanyahu's
office did not issue an official response. Defense Minister Moshe
Yaalon said in a statement that he would not comment on the matter,
particularly not on deliberately "distorted versions" of events. A
statement from Steinitz said he would not comment on matters discussed
in closed meetings and that he regarded revealing information from
cabinet meetings "very gravely."
The timing or purpose of the publication was not immediately clear and subject to speculation. Barak reportedly objected to
broadcasting the recordings and tried to prevent Channel 2 from airing
the sensitive tape, although he had given the interview willingly for
the book.
Tzahi Hanegbi, head of the parliament's Foreign Affairs
and Defense Committee, which oversees sensitive security discussions,
was surprised that military censors permitted the publication and said
he intended to summon the chief censor to the committee in the near
future.
"I can't understand what reasons could have possibly justified the publication," he told Israel Radio.
The
censor, entrusted with screening information for potential harm to
national security, often permits Israeli media to publish sensitive
information that appeared previously in foreign reports. According to
Hanegbi, however, 90% of what Barak said had not been published before
at all. He wouldn't say whether he believed that Barak had caused damage
to Israel's security but said the publication "does not serve Israel."
Interior
Minister Silvan Shalom expressed concern that sensitive discussions
could be tainted if security and political officials avoided speaking
their mind for fear of being "outed" in the media.
Most
sensitive material is cleared for publication after 30 years, although
some remains under wraps even longer. "If everything comes out of
intimate forums in two, three years, this changes the game rules
dramatically," Shalom said." Go to: http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-israel-reports-planned-attacks-iran-20150823-story.html
Infact Batsheva Sobelman studiously avoids mentioning nuclear weapons at all!
The first three images are me as High Priest Calchas in "The Golden Masque of Agamemnon" part of the Oresteia sacrificing to the gods (before sacrificing Iphigenia -"an Iphigenia a tooth for a tooth I always say!"- unfortunately I have no pictures of that!). The rest are from "The Royal Hunt of the Sun" by Peter Schaffer where I am Atahualpa "God Emperor" of The Incas. Check out the sets (good story about that Inca Sun Temple set involving one of the triple sun rays and my naked foot), ...! Go to: http://www.wilsonsschool.sutton.sch.uk/about/activities/drama/
I've only got the highest of praise for the people I worked with (Eddy Applewhite's performances as both Agamemnon and Pizarro were immense and the supporting cast made me stretch too), not one poor performance with The Wallington High School for Girls providing the female members as always and never letting us down, great stage management and ambitious sets.
"Hitler"
Large black and white (pamphlet/A4), print of Heinz baked bean can, the top panel reads; "What you..?", underneath in the middle panel is the famous "pouting" photograph of Hitler in lederhosen with his hands on his hips, the bottom panel reads: "talkin' 'bout?!"
Carved wooden bust of Bob Marley (in ebony), all his dreadlocks are used tampons dyed black/red with menstrual blood..untitled..
"Threat!"
Idealised (as in traffic sign), human sized figure in outline against a white background. Figure is made up of images of tank warfare, the face is notable for a slightly off-centre image of a tank gun barrel head-on (Challenger probably), revealing the deep black at the bottom of the barrel (image covers over half of face), in the guts (somewhere), is the famous picture of the blond German soldier with his head in his hands at the battle of Kursk. I don't know about the other images yet (collage of-course -have I seen this one somewhere before though?-).
"Sabotage"
In the centre of a large room stands a glass case in which there are two
substances, sand and metal. The sand provides the base within the glass
case on which a projectile sits pointing to the sky. The projectile is
bright and shining, reflecting beams of light upon the walls.
The metal is platinum, the projectile is an armoured piercing tank shell.
Quote: "The SNP and Labour have hit out over
claims that frontline benefits staff are getting guidance on how to
deal with claimants threatening suicide.
The Sunday Herald reported that the advice has been given to Scottish Department for Work and Pensions staff.
The
SNP said it highlighted the "devastating impact" of benefit cuts and
sanctions, while Labour said cuts were hitting the vulnerable.
The DWP said staff can refer claimants for support and this was "nothing new".
The
guidelines for call centre staff are designed to help staff deal with
unsuccessful applicants for Universal Credit who are threatening to
self-harm or take their own life, the newspaper reported.
'New approach'
SNP
MSP Dennis Robertson said: "The evidence reported today shows that
there is a clear link between a person's income and their health and
wellbeing - particularly their mental health.
"That the UK
government are issuing suicide guidance to their frontline staff is an
acknowledgement by them of the devastating impact of their social
security cuts on people's lives - it's not new guidance they need, it's a
new approach."
Labour's equality spokeswoman Jenny Marra said:
"The Tory's welfare cuts have hit some of the most vulnerable people
across Scotland - many who are struggling to find work and are suffering
because of an unfair sanctions regime.
"Government policies should not be pushing people into a position where they feel they have nothing left to live for."
A DWP spokesman said: "As you would expect, our frontline staff have always been trained to look for signs of vulnerabilities.
"They can refer individuals to specialist support - including specialist teams at Jobcentre Plus - and this is nothing new."" Go to: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34034326
I would post these pictures here for immediate public view, however although I credit myself with a strong stomach I cannot view these images everyday (and neither should anyone else),..
A senior Iranian Foreign Ministry official has described
the Saudi crimes in Yemen as worse than those committed by Israel during
its 2014 war on the Gaza Strip, saying the Riyadh regime even refuses
to allow humanitarian aid delivery to the people.
Saudi
Arabia has committed “unprecedented crimes” in Yemen and refused to
allow humanitarian aid by the Red Cross, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian,
Iran's deputy foreign minister for Arab and African Affairs, said on
Monday.
“The UN and the Red Cross could not even implement a
two-hour ceasefire for the delivery of vital medicines [to Yemen], and
these Saudi acts are worse than the Zionists’ crimes,” he added.
Amir-Abdollahian
said Israel had at least agreed to a UN request for the transfer of the
wounded to hospital during the regime’s attack on the Gaza Strip last
summer, but the Saudi regime has not even so far cooperated with the UN
on humanitarian causes.
The senior Iranian diplomat warned that Saudi Arabia will suffer the consequences of its acts in due time. Saudi Arabia launched its
airstrikes against Yemen on March 26 - without a United Nations mandate -
in a bid to restore power to the country’s fugitive former president,
Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, a staunch ally of Riyadh.
According to reports, over 2,700 people, including women and children, have so far lost their lives in the attacks.
Earlier
this month, Iran unveiled a four-point peace plan on Yemen in an
attempt to end the bloodshed in the impoverished Arab country.
The
plan includes hammering out a ceasefire, sending humanitarian
assistance to the people affected by violence, launching an intra-Yemeni
dialog, and establishing a broad-based government with the
participation of all Yemeni factions." Thank you PressTV, go to: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/04/21/407292/Saudi-Yemen-raid-worse-than-Gaza-war
Quote: "The
twenty-first century search for a scientific explanation of near-death experiences
(NDEs) is likely to benefit from the rapidly growing knowledge base generated
by neuroscientists and other researchers. To date, the most plausible theory has
been outlined by Dr. Karl Jansen (1996). Conditions that may induce NDEs (low
oxygen, low blood flow, low blood sugar, temporal lobe epilepsy, etc.) have also
been shown to cause excess extracellular levels of glutamate to accumulate in
the brain; when high concentrations of glutamate bind to N-methyl-D-aspartate
(NMDA) receptors, excitotoxicity can result (Jansen, 1996). Jansen (1996) has
proposed that an endogenous NMDA antagonist may be released under certain conditions
to protect cells from excitotoxicity. An exogenous NMDA antagonist, ketamine,
is known to be able to reproduce all of the features which are commonly associated
with NDEs; thus, an endogenous NMDA antagonist with a primarily neuroprotective
function may also induce NDEs under certain circumstances (Jansen, 1996).
Jansen
(2004) has suggested that the identity of the endogenous NMDA antagonist may be
NAAG (N-acetyl-aspartyl-glutamate), kynurenic acid, or magnesium. NAAG, however,
has been shown to lack both antagonist and agonist activity in cerebellar granule
neurons (Losi et al., 2004). If NAAG does interact with NMDA receptors,
it is likely to be a weak partial agonist rather than an antagonist (Valivullah
et al., 1994). In addition, kynurenic acid is an antagonist at the glycineB
binding site on NMDA receptors rather than at a site within the NMDA channel pore
(Harsing et al., 2001). Based on experiments involving rats, Karcz-Kubicha
et al. (1999) have suggested that glycineB antagonists have a low psychotomimetic
potential. With regards to magnesium ions, little evidence exists to support a
role for these ions in near-death experiences. To
date, the only neurotransmitter or neuromodulator known to exhibit antagonist
activity at NMDA receptors at a non-glycineB site is agmatine. In rat hippocampal
neurons, agmatine has been shown to block NMDA channels because of an interaction
between agmatine's guanidine group and the channel pores (Yang and Reis, 1999).
Furthermore, in neurons and PC12 cells, agmatine blocks the induction of excitotoxicity
by glutamate (Zhu et al., 2003). Agmatine also acts as an agonist at imidazoline
receptors, inhibits nitric oxide synthase, and interacts with alpha-2-adrenoceptors
(Berkels et al., 2004). In neonatal rats exposed to hypoxic-ischemic conditions,
levels of agmatine increased 2- to 3-fold (Yangzheng et al., 2002). Yangzheng
et al. (2002) have speculated that agmatine reduces brain injury in neonatal
rats exposed to hypoxia and ischemia as a result of its inhibitory effect on nitric
oxide synthase. In addition, Gilad et al. (1996) found that agmatine is
neuroprotective in both in vitro and in vivo rodent models of neurotoxic
and ischemic brain injuries. Because of its multiple interactions with receptors
and enzymes, agmatine represents a neurotransmitter that could increase in concentration
during conditions such as cardiac arrest to prevent a variety of injurious brain
activities. Agmatine
may offer protective benefits such as neuroprotection and anxiolysis in response
to certain stressful conditions (Aricioglu et al., 2003). In rats and mice,
agmatine induces antidepressant-like effects (Li et al., 2003). In addition,
agmatine reduces anxious behavior in rats exposed to the elevated plus maze task
(Lavinsky, 2003). Halaris et al. (1999) have found that plasma agmatine
concentrations are significantly elevated in depressed patients compared to healthy
controls. Greyson (1986) reported that 16 of 61 (26.2%) patients admitted to a
hospital for attempted suicide had experienced a near-death episode after the
attempt. Thus, a role for agmatine as an anti-stress factor that could induce
near-death experiences when released in sufficient quantities in a subset of individuals
seems plausible. Where
in the brain might agmatine induce the features of a near-death experience? A
key feature of many near-death experiences is the out of body experience. Penfield
(1941) found that electrical stimulation of the right superior temporal gyrus
in a patient with epilepsy could induce an out of body experience. Blanke et
al. (2002) demonstrated that electrical stimulation of the right angular gyrus
in a patient with epilepsy could induce an out of body experience as well. Both
sets of stimulation sites lied in the right temporo-parietal region posterior
to the post-central gyrus (Tong, 2003). In five patients that experienced out
of body experiences of neurological origin, brain damage or brain dysfunction
was localized to the temporo-parietal junction (Blanke et al., 2004). In
patients with epilepsy, a small area in this region has been shown to have an
integrative function for inputs from the somatosensory, auditory, and visual modalities
(Matsuhashi et al., 2004). Blanke et al. (2004) suggested that ambiguous
input from proprioceptive, tactile, visual, and vestibular sensory systems to
the temporo-parietal junction could be involved in the precipitation of out of
body experiences. Considering the fact that electrical stimulation to the right
temporo-parietal junction can result in out of body experiences but not near-death
experiences, a localized influence of agmatine on near-death experiences seems
unlikely. The
NMDA receptor plays a critical role in a phenomenon known as auditory mismatch
negativity; selective current flow through open, unblocked NMDA channels is likely
to mediate mismatch negativity (Javitt et al., 1996). Ketamine, an NMDA
receptor antagonist, has been shown to induce auditory mismatch negativity deficits
in healthy volunteers (Umbricht et al., 2000; Kreitschmann-Andermahr et
al., 2001). Visual mismatch negativity is a similar phenomenon that detects
stimulus change in the visual modality; when standard visual stimuli are repeated,
infrequently presented deviant stimuli produce an event related potential known
as mismatch negativity (Stagg et al., 2004). Astikainen et al. (2001)
found that mismatch negativity is likely to detect changes in somatosensory input
as well. Although mismatch negativity has not been demonstrated for other sensory
systems, it may play a similar role in detecting changes in vestibular and tactile
input. Thus, the ambiguity of sensory input to the right temporo-parietal junction
during out of body experiences as proposed by Blanke et al. (2004) may
be a result of agmatine- induced NMDA antagonism in individuals undergoing near
death experiences. In
conclusion, a variety of evidence seems to suggest that excess extracellular agmatine
may induce near-death experiences in susceptible individuals. Because agmatine
is an NMDA antagonist released in substantial quantities in hypoxic-ischemic conditions,
it satisfies the two key criteria that must be satisfied by any potential endogenous
mediator of near-death experiences. Future research should help to further clarify
the role of agmatine in near-death situations.
Quote: "The Department for Work and Pensions has admitted making up comments
from supposed "benefit claimants" that appeared in a leaflet about sanctions.
The leaflet, which has now been withdrawn, included positive example stories from people who claimed to have interacted with the sanctions system.
In one example, titled "Sarah's story", a jobseeker is quoted as
being "really pleased" after a cut to her benefits supposedly encouraged
her to re-draft her CV.
"It's going to help me when I'm ready to go back to work," the fabricated quote reads.
Another, by a benefit claimant supposedly called "Zac", details the sanctions system working well.
But in response to a freedom of information request by the Welfare Weekly website the DWP said the quotes were not actually real cases and that the photos were not of real claimants.
“The photos used are stock photos and along with the names do not
belong to real claimants. The stories are for illustrative purposes
only," the department said.
The leaflet, a copy of which is available in full at Welfare Weekly, contains no suggestion that the stories are not real.
The revelation is controversial because the sanctions system has been
criticised for causing extreme hardship and being operated in an unfair
and arbitrary way.
In March this year Parliament's Work and Pensions Select Committee
said there was evidence that sanctions were geared towards punishing
people for being unemployed and might not actually help them find work.
The MPs said there was evidence that the benefit cuts for
unemployed people caused more problems than they solved and might be
"purely punitive".
Previous widely-criticised decisions include people being
sanctioned for missing jobcentre appointments because they had to attend
a job interview, or people sanctioned for not looking for work because
they had already secured a job due to start in a week’s time.
In one case a man with heart problems was sanctioned because he had a heart attack during a disability benefits assessment and thus failed to complete the assessment.
Charities including Crisis and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation
say the sanctions are responsible for a significant increase in
homelessness and rough sleeping in Britain under David Cameron's
government.
Mark Serwotka, the general secretary of the PCS union, told the Independent that the department's actions were "sinister". Another example shows the system working well
"It's disgraceful and sinister that DWP has been trying to trick people
into believing claimants are happy to have their benefits stopped or
threatened. Sanctions are unnecessarily punitive and counterproductive,
and should be scrapped," he said.
Dan Scorer, Head of Policy at the learning disability charity Mencap said the DWP had misled the public.
"DWP's
made up case studies present an unrepresentative view of the sanctions
regime and its impact on disabled people. Benefits are a lifeline to
many people with a learning disability who rely on them to make ends
meet.
"We know many people have been sanctioned because
Jobcentre staff don't understand their needs and place unrealistic
demands on them while not providing support they need. To mislead the
public on the effects of benefit sanctions in this way is unacceptable.”
The DWP added in the FOI response to the website: “We want
to help people understand when sanctions can be applied and how they can
avoid them by taking certain actions. Using practical examples can help
us achieve this.
“We have temporarily changed the pictures to silhouettes and
added a note to make it more clear that these are illustrative examples
only.
“We will test both versions of the factsheet with claimants
and external stakeholders to further improve it in the future. This will
include working with external organisations.”
A Department for Work and Pensions spokesman told the Independent:
“The case studies were used for illustrative purposes to help people
understand how the benefit system works. They’re based on conversations
our staff have had with claimants. They have now been removed to avoid
confusion”." Go to: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-admits-making-up-quotes-by-benefit-claimants-saying-sanctions-helped-them-10460351.html
on August 28, 2015, 6:33 pm to Medialens' message board.
Another, by a benefit claimant supposedly called "Zac", details the sanctions system working well.