Category Archives: Uncategorized

Get a job or get evicted! The Tory benefit cap message and the end of social housing!

Social landlords are stupid enough to let the Tories kill off social housing as they simply don’t get what the welfare reform policies are all about.  None more so than the Overall Benefit Cap which social landlords stupidly believe is only a problem for the private landlord and in high rent areas.  Here is why social landlords are that stupid and why their apathy and lack of thought and lack of challenge will see the social housing model as we know it now disappear.  Time social landlords got angry and time they got off their backsides to challenge the highly dangerous and ill-conceived welfare reform policies rather than say there is nothing we can do!  Read on.

The Tories are set to announce that the overall benefit cap will reduce from £26,000 per year to £23,000 and thus ensure the end of social housing as we know it.  It is about time the apathetic social housing sector woke up and smelled the coffee as this proposal means they can no longer AFFORD to accommodate the same families they do now and they cannot AFFORD the risk of accommodating any family with 3 or more children.

According to the Daily Mail

Tens of thousands of families will have their benefits slashed by up to £60 a week under a new welfare cap, David Cameron will propose today.

Households would be unable to claim more than £23,000 a year in handouts for housing and living costs if the Conservatives win the next election.

And jobless youngsters would be stripped of benefits altogether under radical plans to save £300million.

Two years ago I spoke at a number of housing conferences in Birmingham and London and I told each audience that the overall benefit cap (OBC) would mean they could no longer afford to accommodate the larger family.  That argument was supported with detailed figures and based on the assumption then that the cap figure of £500 per week would rise with wage inflation and rents and welfare benefit levels would rise faster than this – the systemic flaw in the OBC I developed in 2012 which has not been disproved and cannot be.

The proposal to reduce the cap figure to £23k of £440 per week is an 11.5% further drop and makes the position of social housing so much worse than the systemic flaw I detailed.

The posit that social housing could not afford to house the larger family went down like a lead balloon with these housing audiences who (a) maintained the OBC only affected private rented housing and then only in the like of London and this is despite the OBC impact assessment saying 46% of those affected lived in social housing; and (b) social landlords maintaining that it is our ethos and we will always house those most in need – a laudable principle yet one that social landlords cannot sustain financially with a £26k cap and at £23k per year means radical change and the end of the social housing model as we know it.

Let’s look at the very basics of the OBC and social landlords once they see the figures this reduced cap figure gives WILL get the point that they cannot AFFORD to house the larger family any longer.

The overall benefit cap – How it works

How the cap works is very simple as you start with the cap figure and then take away the amount of welfare benefits received to leave the maximum residual HB or LHA that is payable.  With the current £500 per week cap take away the £396.69 of welfare benefits received which leaves a maximum and residual HB contribution of £103.31

The £396.69 per week is an exact figure which is the national amount of welfare benefit a couple with 4 children receive and note well that welfare benefits are at the same level whether you live in Land’s End or John O’Groats.

The £103.31 maximum HB payable will now reduce by a further £60 per week as the cap figure reduces from £500 to £440 per week and we have a couple with 4 children getting a maximum HB amount of £43.31 to pay for rent.

That couple cant afford social or any form of housing with the obvious outcome of get a job or get evicted.

Couple with 3 children – This 2 Parent 3 child (2P3C) household receives £330.32 in welfare benefits leaving £109.68 per week as the maximum HB payable if and when the cap figure reduces to £440 per week.  That will afford most social housing in the provinces, unless this household lives in an AR tenancy or in London.

The 1 parent 4 child (1P4C) household – receives £355.43 in welfare benefit leaving £84.57 as the maximum payable in housing benefit which is unlikely to cover rent in any social housing property across England.

Other factors play a key part to for social landlords.

The introduction of direct payment to the tenant that in and of itself creates huge financial risk to the social landlord needs to be viewed even more circumspectly in this reduced cap context.

Monthly payment of benefit to the social tenant and the ability of managing money is another factor.

The increased demands on social landlords as private tenants will undoubtedly be evicted and local councils will only be able to place these homeless families in social housing as that is the only suitable provision.  The 2P3C household with a maximum HB of £109.68 per week cant afford private housing right across the country.

The 2P2C household will have a maximum HB/LHA entitlement of £176.04 which will afford a social housing rent for a 3 bed property yet is not enough for a 3 bed private rented property right across the whole of the South East, Oxfordshire, Berkshire, Bath, Bournemouth, Hertfordshire, Southampton and Edinburgh to name but a few.  Such 2 parent 2 child households will undoubtedly be evicted from the PRS and local councils will be demanding social landlords take these homeless families.  Yet what if they then have another child and their maximum HB reduces from £176.04 per week to £109.68 per week?

Forget any moralising here that such a family should not have any more children as quite often many children are unplanned and these things happen.  The same issue can be seen with a working family with 3 existing children and one on the way and then the lone breadwinner loses his or her job.  Or the sole breadwinner gets sick or is disabled with diabetes or COPD or some other issue – their social housing tenancy becomes hugely at risk and it is these risks that social landlords have to look at very closely rather than brush aside the overall benefit cap thinking wrongly this is only a high rent private housing matter.

Of course what the benefit cap reduction means is that the public purse pays out more in temporary housing for those made homeless.  Yet central government don’t give two hoots for that as this is just (another) transfer of cost and financial risk from central to local government, yet still a public purse cost increase.  Social landlords who are not council landlords are and will be coming up with more and more ways to put two fingers up to councils who will want these housing associations to take these higher risk cases – not because HAs want to do that, but because they will have to do that in order to survive financially!

Yes the relationship between councils and housing associations is going to become very strained with the OBC reduction and is yet another example of how the welfare reforms are a direct attack on the social housing model itself.

And of course the systemic flaw is still there too as it appears highly unlikely that the cap figure will rise along with wage inflation or rise at all.  Then throw into the mix that the Tories are proposing to increase HB by just one per cent from 2016 onwards regardless of how much the landlord increases the rent level. Yes that means no social tenant will be getting full rent paid and the social landlord will have to incur far greater rent collection costs too to get this shortfall (a mini bedroom tax anyone?) from all tenants including the pensioner – and I can’t see social landlords harassing them with red-inked letters as they have done with the bedroom tax household can you?

To cut to the chase the social landlord is in the shit if the Tories are not voted out and the benefit cap is reduced to £440 per week.  The social landlord will have to become acutely risk averse and cannot afford to house the larger family household as they do now and do now in massive proportion to the PRS.

These dimwitted Tories with their back of a fag packet policies are dictating that social housing no longer takes the type of households that social housing is now the only option for.  So where will such households go?  There is nowhere for them to live!  Outside of sterilising every female or selling the odd child to Madonna in order to keep a roof over one’s head where the hell will such families live!!!

Get a job or get evicted – I don’t care if you’re disabled – get a job or get evicted – I don’t care if your child is disabled and you have to care for them – get a job or get evicted – I don’t care if you are your partners full time carer and you are saying the public purse hundreds of thousands – get a job or get evicted!

That is Tory policy – get a job or get evicted – cue unscrupulous employers rubbing their hands with glee as the cannon fodder of National Minimum Wage workers has just grown dramatically so they can expand dramatically just as workfare expands as God knows how many more households will get sanctioned and social housing becomes ever more a financial risk too far and social landlords have to red-ink and doorstep the social tenant just as the social tenant takes control of the payment of rent with direct payment!

So dear social landlord, if you think the benefit cap only affects private rented properties in high rent areas keep making the annual pilgrimage to Cloud Cuckoo Land!

_______________________________________________________________

I haven’t discussed the even more naive proposal to stop HB to 18 – 21 year olds as the proposal is bizarre and under developed.  The Daily Fail suggests this will affect 30,000 single people yet that bears no correlation to the number of 18 -21 year old claiming HB currently as they record 130,361 single people under 25 with no child dependents and also 14.207 couples under 25 with no child dependents making 144,000 or thereabouts.  The 18 – 21 year olds should make up 4/7ths of this figure or about 82,000 of them so how the 30,000 figure is arrived at is anyone’s guess and a clear and obvious guess of the Daily Fail and the Tories.

Yet as PRS landlords will stop housing any young person because of this and also because such a policy is an incentive to have a child in order to get a roof over ones head….Yes you begin to see just how fucking naive and stupid this policy is too don’t you reader!

No need to say it also means 16 – 21 year olds can pay tax but not get HB; that soldiers injured and unable to work can’t get HB; that single women aged 16 – 21 can’t flee domestic violence and abuse as a refuge can’t afford for them to stay there given they will get no HB….oh and what about all those non-dependent deductions your tenants with 18 – 21 year olds at home will now get and they cant afford the rent?

Yes its a really fucking insanely stupid idea isn’t it reader and one dreamt up because the Tories believe the general public are stupid enough to believe their myth and spin about the benefit claimant …which the general public and the social landlord have done bugger all to challenge when they should have done… Oops this is turning into a rant…just as it did two years ago when social landlords ignored what the OBC means and told me that their ethos will mean they will always house the vulnerable!

Naivety writ large.  Apathy writ large.  Inability to see the woods from the trees writ large.  Oh but please carry on blaming this messenger and carry on developing AR units with foundations in quicksand as it mirrors your abilities in thought over the benefit cap.

Stop and think social landlord.  I rant because I am angry at what ill-considered and highly dangerous policy is doing to social housing.  You should get bloody angry about it too!

Lord Freud is not the L’Oreal man – His worth? Time he was FACT off

Lord Freud’s remarks were, by his own admission, offensive.  If he had said ‘blacks’ or ‘women’ or ‘gays’ were ONLY WORTH £2 per hour the true offence of his words come to the fore.

Note well I use ‘blacks’ and not black people as that is the same offensive and condescending label Freud use of ‘the disabled’ when he referred to this group of people.  The true offence of his words and thoughts were heightened by this condescension and bigoted use of language and especially in the context of discussing their worth.

It is extremely dangerous ground for any politician to open a debate about people’s monetary worth as then it opens up the meritocratic debate about how much they are worth – and in Lord Freud’s case that becomes a minus figure per hour.

Lord Freud, the architect of the bedroom tax and the (unelected) welfare minister charged with reining in the ‘burgeoning’ welfare benefit spend which the ‘last lot’ left the country in a mess with in the coalition view.  So let’s have a cursor glance at how much his tenure over the radical welfare reforms have saved UK plc.

Ah!

Yes the first point is that the overall welfare spend has increased by 13% since the election and that is a 13% increase in welfare benefits and a 13% increase in working tax credits too.

welfarebenspendfreud

On that simple analysis Lord Freud has seen the ‘hard working taxpayer’ (strange how that term is never used!) having to find an additional £44 billion per year on his plans all aimed at reducing the welfare spend which he has ‘burgeoned’ through his own incompetent policies.

Ah you say but a large part of that is the pensioner bribe, which admittedly all parties do when in office, and which all parties fail to tell Joe Public they take more than £2 of every £3 spent in welfare benefits.

wb£

Yet as you can see this has increased some more under this coalition moving from 66% to 68%

Yet lets leave aside the contentious issue of the pensioner spend as just raising that FACT – yes its one of those bloody pesky facts again reader – causes outrage. How dare you call the pensioner a scrounger (by inference) etc, when the “poor” pensioner only gets double the minimum amount of welfare benefit that the scrounging single working-age person.

In Freud’s case let’s look at Housing Benefit which he and his coalition ministers cite as the largest welfare benefit spend after pensions and which is the key target for the bedroom tax, benefit cap and the rest of the welfare reform policies.  Let’s look at his record there.

A month after the last election and after the first budget the coalition stated they would reduce the overall HB bill by nearly £2 billion per year by 2014/15 from the outrage of £20 billion they inherited from the last lot who they say had doubled the HB bill.

Today’s HB bill is in excess of £24 billion or £4 billion per year more not £2 billion per year less and is therefore £6 billion more as a direct result of the policies of Lord Freud.

So reader how much is Lord Freud worth judged by his record?

And while on the subject of the last lot ‘doubling’ the HB bill here are some more of those damn pesky FACTS which show that Freud, McVey,IDS and the increasingly politicised DWP civil servants have been lying through their teeth when discussing Housing Benefit

HB bill blair v thatch

As you can see the HB bill went up by 78% in 13 years of the last lot, which compares to Thatcher increasing it by over 6 times in her 11 years.  And those of you who can do basic arithmetic can see from the above that the HB bill went up from £5.095 billion to £11.38 billion in the 6/ years under the Major administration.

In summary Freud should be sacked for his performance and not just for his incredibly offensive remarks over people with a disability.

 

PS – Of all ironies all the above figures come from official data on benefit tables and caseload figures released by DWP in the same month that Freud uttered these truly offensive remarks and available here

 

 

I hate lies, try facts (2) – The EU and migration – as many Brits abroad as EU nationals here

There are as many British people living in the 28 EU countries as there are EU citizens from these 28 countries living in Britain.

So lets ban EU nationals from living here as UKIP et al want and send them back to these 28 countries.

Then these 28 countries send back the Brits living there and guess what we still have exactly the same number of people in the UK!

All we have achieved is pissing off 28 countries with whom collectively we have the majority of our trade with.

What a great plan this is eh reader!!

Here are the damn pesky facts which spoil the UKIP and Tory arguments and which have led to mass hysteria in the gutter press and all other media in the UK as they dance to the tune of Farage.

 

 

 

Pay black people £2 per hour as that’s all they’re worth? Now you get why Freud has to be sacked

The scurrilous and offensive remarks of Lord Freud over people with disabilities should have seen him sacked.  Last night on BBC Question Time he was defended to the hilt in a disgraceful example of people not getting what he said.

The simplest way to GET what he said is to subititute “black” for “disabled” and THEN you get it so below I have simple cut and pasted my blog from Wednesday with that change

It reads:

Lord Freud, said by many to be the architect of the bedroom tax and some wider welfare reform policies has been recorded saying black people are NOT WORTH THE MINIMUM WAGE of £6.50 per hour and should be paid £2 PER HOUR FOR THE WORK THEY DO.

Here is a link to how Sky News report this which includes the tape recording of Lord Freud saying this.

There should be no need for any comment from me other than to say resign yet Cameron defended him at today’s Prime Ministers questions.

For every minute Lord DAFT (David Anthony Freud Tory) dallies and dithers as to resign or not the pressure on Cameron and the Coalition government to sack him rises ten-fold and if Cameron does not act swiftly then the political repercussions for the Tory Party are huge as the general public will believe Cameron and the Tories support his outrageous view.

The Sky News report reads:

In a direct challenge to David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Questions, Ed Miliband revealed comments made by Lord Freud at a think-tank event in which he suggested BLACK workers should only be paid £2 an hour and not the full £6.50.

Lord Freud made the comments after being questioned on BLACK people and the minimum wage by a Conservative councillor. According to sources at the event the question was specifically aimed at the mentally handicapped.

He said:

“Now, there is a small…there is a group, and I know exactly who you mean, where actually as you say they’re not worth the full wage and actually I’m going to go and think about that particular issue, whether there is something we can do nationally, and without distorting the whole thing, which actually if someone wants to work for £2 an hour, and it’s working can we actually … “

Resign or be sacked!

 

I hate lies and liars. I love numbers and facts – To evaluate Welfare Reform look at the facts

I was speaking with a friend today who said “You had some fun taking the p*ss mercilessly out of Lord Freud yesterday.”  He’s right I did but it is not a laughing matter as once you get over the shock of his appalling comments on people with disabilities that anger and calls for his sacking I argued late last night should be as much for his incompetence and performance as Welfare Minister.

Here is where the lies and deliberate lies come in and despite it being typical that MPs (and Lords) lie I still hate being lied to by those in government and regardless of political party.  My anger over being lied to is heightened when those lies are easily disproved with a 2 minute google search on actual facts.

For example this coalition is fond of telling us – the lowly plebs, Joe Public, the electorate – that they (a) inherited an unsustainable mess from the last lot; and (b) they are sorting out the ‘burgeoning’ welfare state with their policies; and (c) especially the case with Housing Benefit for which I could source dozens of times when Freud, IDS, Steve Webb and McVey have said the Housing Benefit bill doubled under the last lot.

That is simply untrue and must be a known lie of itself as below are the facts taken from the DWP’s own figures AND it is also a blatant lie as it is an error of commission as this coalition fails to tell us what their performance was with Housing Benefit which as you can see is far worse than the ‘last lot.’

The last lot -v- She who must be obeyed

HB bill blair v thatch

As the above shows in stark terms the Thatcher years saw Housing Benefit rise by more than SIX FOLD and is a much greater increase in the HB bill than the ‘last lot’ – in fact Thatcher’s HB record is over EIGHT TIMES AS BAD as the Blair/Brown record.

You can also deduce from the above that the Major administration until 1997 saw the HB bill rise from £5.095 billion per year to the £11.38 billion per year inherited by the first Blair government.  Or in stark terms Major more than doubled the HB bill in 6 years and the ‘last lot’ did not double the bill in 13 years.

How about the claim that this coalition make they are cutting the ‘burgeoning’ welfare spend?

Again I could cite Freud, IDS et all saying as much on so many occasions. Yet let’s look at the facts, yes those pesky official numbers which THIS government released a month ago.

welfarebenspendfreud

As you can clearly see all parts of the overall ‘welfare spend’ of welfare benefits and tax credits have risen 13% since the election of May 2010.  This Tory-led coalition have not reduced the welfare spend at all either in overall terms or in real terms allowing for inflation.  The welfare spend has increase in real terms and, if you will, ‘burgeoned’ even more.

Why us (Joe Public et al) believe IDS, Freud and the rest when they constantly say they have brought the ‘excesses of the last lot’ down and under control beggars belief.  As I say above all MPs lie or at least are economical with the truth yet this coalition blatantly and knowingly lies and the public just sit back and believe it to be true!

Its that old adage of tell a lie often enough and people believe it to be fact or as Thomas Paine put it in the aptly named Common Sense:

“…a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right.”

 

Unfortunately us, the same general public which laps up these lies believing them to be true, is unwilling to make the time to find fact. Joe Public has become used to soundbite and superficial soundbite while still holding that quintessentially British notion of the government wouldn’t lie to us they have been brought up to believe.  It is only on the rarest of occasions and with constant bombardment of media coverage that the general public is willing to reconsider and the bedroom tax is a case in point.

The bedroom tax has become an electoral liability and even Tories will admit to that.  Yet when the bedroom tax first came in it wasn’t viewed that way.  The general public and a whopping 78% of them thought it was fair that it should be applied to the stereotypical benefit scrounger who was given something many hardworking families could not afford.  Yet repeated media coverage of physically disabled people being hit by the bedroom tax even though they had no option but to sleep apart and in separate rooms HAS changed the opinion of the general public….yet only after repeated campaigning and media bombardment across social media and national TV, radio and press media.

In getting carried away taking the p*ss out of Lord Freud yesterday and after all he is the acknowledged architect of the hated bedroom tax I came across an Inside Housing article on the CIH conference in June 2013 a few months after the bedroom tax.

These are the words of Brendan Sarsfield the chair of perhaps the most influential housing lobby known as the G15 or the real big boys of social housing in a separate opinion article in August 2013 entitled “Thinking Big:

Courting controversy
Take this summer’s Chartered Institute of Housing conference as an example. On stage with Lord David Freud, the minister for welfare reform who helped usher in a new wave of controversial initiatives, Mr Sarsfield stated that, outside the packed room of housing’s great and good, the majority of people agree with the government’s bedroom tax.

He says the penalty isn’t ‘the worst housing strategy in the world’, but argues it has ‘been implemented very unfairly’ and is driven by the Treasury’s desire to cut the welfare bill.

One chief executive who was in the audience at the CIH conference says listening to ‘Brendan cosy up to the one person he should have been standing up to’ was ‘an insult to those of us who work tirelessly for vulnerable people every day’.

Mr Sarsfield dismisses this criticism as coming from ‘a very small minority’ within the housing sector. ‘I think I’m right and I don’t say that with any pleasure, I just think sometimes the truth hurts,’ he says.

‘The government believes it has the support of the nation and I think our job is to make sure that the public knows who we house and that they’re ordinary people who want to work, want to get on,’ he adds.

As you can see this ‘thinking’ was ALL about and led by the perceived view of the general public and the G15 is incredibly influenced by public opinion and very influential in ‘leading’ on policy responses for all social landlords.  What the big boys do others follow in simple terms.

Yet now we know that the bedroom tax is deeply unpopular and the general public as well as even hardline Tories are against it social housing policy and response to the bedroom tax has been directed based on a hugely false premise and should readdress this and do the exact opposite.  Yet it won’t do that and we see social landlords who are notoriously slow in changing policy and direction in any case carrying on with a policy of saying ‘ there is little we can do’ to challenge the bedroom tax while every other actor involved, from the tenant to the disability lobby group to politicians from all parties have changed their view and have changed their policy and strategy to one of challenging this hated policy.

A case of social landlords being slow, stubborn, failing to see the reality, failing to move with the flow and relying on nebulous public opinion as fact rather than evaluating fact and then acting upon it.  I don’t doubt there is some political support probably in Mr Sarsfield case for the bedroom tax and Tory policy but even if not this still revels the inactions, poor practice and sheep mentality of all other landlords in blithely following the lead of the G15 (with some rare but very honourable exceptions)

Those same ‘social landlords’ while correctly arguing that 95% of housing spend goes on revenue and not capital housing issues – a very good but separate point – implicitly fail to state and broadcast the facts of HB and overall welfare benefit spend claimed by this coalition and used to disparage and attack social housing per se and in fact untrue.  Social housing simply does not do proactive challenge or raise awareness of the facts surrounding social housing and is content to tug its forelock and NOT challenge government policy.

Some do and have set up #4social housing and SHOUT or campaigns which seek to do this.  Yet they only preach to an internal housing audience and fail to get their many key and correct message to the general public.  That is a huge omission and a huge fault of a lack of thinking on their part.  True they are not responsible for the social housing sectors 30 year record of not standing up for social housing and the many benefits it give the taxpayer and perhaps such a task is beyond the best efforts of the sector to persuade the general public of just how good social housing is and how it SAVES their taxes not subsumes them, yet they will never know unless they try and they do need to direct their efforts externally from the housing audience and to the external general public.

They should start where this post began – with fact.  Take away the £1.125 billion social housing receives as ‘subsidy’ by way of grant and social landlords would cost the HB bill the same as private landlords do and that is over £4 billion per year more!

Dear Taxpayer, If you give me £1,125 a year I will save you £4,000 per year. Yours social landlords

Tell me one taxpayer who wouldn’t want a return on their investment!!

Dear Taxpayer, in case you’re dithering on that offer which in financial terms must appear as too good to be true we will also continue to accommodate the “problem cases” of the Sick the Old, the Disabled and the Supported as a continued part of that deal. Yours social landlords

Not hard messages to sell to the general public but they have not been sold at all over the past 30 years and they are all based on fact – that pesky thing that social landlords in their apathy and forelock tugging to whatever government is in power failed to evaluate and disseminate.

Or in simple terms social landlords based their bedroom tax policy on the fleeting whim of public opinion and did not change course.  And yet refuse to even tell the fickle general public what a wonderful bloody deal social housing gives the taxpaying general public in the first place.

The bedroom tax has proved that opinions of the fickle general public can change and do a complete role reversal when fact is revealed and the general public is made aware of those facts.  Now what would any sane person think the social housing sector should do as a result of that?

Ahem!

Yes I know this is long and won’t be read by those in social housing.  I did enquire as to the cost of renting Owls and flying these message in one by one to all social landlords as today I’m told the drones so beloved of certain social landlords wont be publicly available or be fully licensed until 2023….However, the threat of a writ from J K Rowling for that idea….

Closet racism endemic even to the Independent – that’s what UKIP tap in to!

Two days ago a staggering High Court judgment was handed down on a staggering case concerning LB Southwark and how appallingly and outrageously they had acted towards a tenant who was not only illegally evicted by the council but then had all his belongings destroyed, including his passport, and then the council conspired in an unlawful cover up, which the judge said may be a criminal cover up, to cover their tracks including obstructing the police and blatantly lying to councillors and obstructing them to.

Make no mistake this is an horrific case that even in a film would seem beyond credulity and I would urge anyone to read the full judgement as defy them not to utter the word ‘fuck’ repeatedly when they do.  Not only is it an outrageous case of illegal eviction, it is perhaps (and hopefully!) the worst case of absolute power corrupting absolutely I have read about a local council in decades.  Words such as outrage, scandal and the like just do not cut it.

Yet the issue I focus on here is how it has been reported in the press as that is a much bigger issue revealing closet and institutionalised racism even amongst the usual liberal Independent newspaper.

You see the issue – which should not be an issue at all – is the victim in this case known as AA was not born here and had a black face to boot.  Those facts are totally irrelevant to this legal case and totally irrelevant to just how outrageously and unlawfully the council acted.

The Independent’s headline was

Judge blasts Southwark Council for evicting Sudanese tenant and destroying all of his possessions

Note the Sudanese bit and take that word out of the headline and is says exactly the same thing.

Then look at how the Independent – of all papers – begins with its opening paragraph:

Housing officers conspired to unlawfully evict a Sudanese refugee from his council flat and destroy his possessions, including memory sticks holding thousands of hours of work, before then covering up their wrongdoing, a judge has ruled.

An outrageous case of fact but marred by the words “Sudanese refugee” which is replaced with the word “tenant” again says exactly the same thing.  Yet this is no politically correct rant or any other such nonsense as look at what the second paragraph in this shameful Independent article says:

The victim, who was granted British citizenship after fleeing Sudan’s civil war in 1985, was made homeless for a year and forced to sleep on the streets after officials acting for Southwark Borough Council entered his home while he attended a court hearing in April last year over rent arrears of £18 per week.

So the victim has been a BRITISH CITIZEN FOR 29 YEARS and again watch what happens when I take out that reference which of course has been downplayed as this victim is Johnny Foreigner despite being a British citizen for 29 years and so is by truly offensive inference less of a victim for that.

The victim[OMITTED] was made homeless for a year and forced to sleep on the streets after officials acting for Southwark Borough Council entered his home while he attended a court hearing in April last year over rent arrears of £18 per week.

The wording has exactly the same meaning and IF the offensive and racist references to his ethnicity and circumstances of 29 years ago had been omitted would have made this front page news.  Ask yourself if this man had been born with a white face and born in London how you would have reacted to the third, fourth and fifth paragraphs which give some detail and how much more outrage you would have over this case

All his possessions, including his passport, credit cards, furniture and computer equipment containing several years of research and personal material, were removed on the day of the eviction and destroyed in a waste disposal facility.

In a swingeing ruling, a High Court judge found that housing officers entered into a conspiracy to “harm” the man, known only as AA, by securing his eviction from his flat in Peckham, south London, and then conceal their actions from investigators.

Judge Anthony Thornton QC said: “The various officers conspired to evict AA by unlawful means, to seize and destroy his possessions by unlawful means and to cause him harm and loss by evicting him and dispossessing him of his possessions.”

The judge goes on to say the council officers who were named too adopted a policy of “eviction at all costs” and committed staggering abuses of their power and “They each acted with the intention of harming AA by evicting him when there were no reasonable grounds for evicting him and by arranging for his possessions to be seized and destroyed unlawfully”

But hey he has a black face and isn’t Somalia a bi close to Wagga Wagga Land where they have that Ebola which is going to wipe out all us good white folk?

Scandalous reporting Independent! Will you be advising your readers to elect Farage in 7 months time?

__________________________

Please take the time to read the full judgment which is here and in the immortal words of Farage (and copied by Teresa May) “I kid you not” when I say you will be muttering “fuck” and many variants of that when you read just HOW outrageous this case is.

 

 

Pay the ‘disabled’ £2 per hour to work says architect of Bedroom Tax Lord Freud – Resign now

Lord Freud, said by many to be the architect of the bedroom tax and some wider welfare reform policies has been recorded saying people with disabilities are NOT WORTH THE MINIMUM WAGE of £6.50 per hour and should be paid £2 PER HOUR FOR THE WORK THEY DO.

Here is a link to how Sky News report this which includes the tape recording of Lord Freud saying this.

There should be no need for any comment from me other than to say resign yet Cameron defended him at today’s Prime Ministers questions.

For every minute Lord DAFT (David Anthony Freud Tory) dallies and dithers as to resign or not the pressure on Cameron and the Coalition government to sack him rises ten-fold and if Cameron does not act swiftly then the political repercussions for the Tory Party are huge as the general public will believe Cameron and the Tories support his outrageous view.

The Sky News report reads:

In a direct challenge to David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Questions, Ed Miliband revealed comments made by Lord Freud at a think-tank event in which he suggested disabled workers should only be paid £2 an hour and not the full £6.50.

Lord Freud made the comments after being questioned on disabled people and the minimum wage by a Conservative councillor. According to sources at the event the question was specifically aimed at the mentally handicapped.

He said:

“Now, there is a small…there is a group, and I know exactly who you mean, where actually as you say they’re not worth the full wage and actually I’m going to go and think about that particular issue, whether there is something we can do nationally, and without distorting the whole thing, which actually if someone wants to work for £2 an hour, and it’s working can we actually … “

Resign or be sacked!

freud

What a caring lot the Tories are!!

 

UPDATE

Apologies for such a quick update but what is swirling around in my head right now is this.  Lord Freud is the architect of the hugely unpopular bedroom tax.  The Tories know the bedroom tax is an electoral liability to them.  The Lib Dems and Labour are queuing up to take opportunistic political advantage of this as in the Andrew George bill of last month and the Barbara Keeley Bill of yesterday.

SO, will Lord Freud be used as the excuse for the Tories to withdraw the bedroom tax and abandon the policy?

Don’t want to get 480,000 households hopes up but that angle is intriguing

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,980 other followers

%d bloggers like this: