Imagine – IDS On The Couch; his Anger and Lies

Two separate issues this week have apparently left IDS & co ‘Furious‘ and ‘incandescent‘ and rather then cover what has been brilliantly summarised by Nick at Ilegal.org. I suggest you visit the site.

The events leading to these outbursts also left me outraged and in my capacity as a qualified Counsellor, I decided to attempt a cathartic exercise and consider  just what would happen if IDS was a client.

 

Case Notes – Client IDS/07/07/14  Session – 1.

IDS is experiencing  frequent and severe Anger episodes; his job causes him to justify himself and respond to questions,  it is on these occasions he experiences these outbursts. (Video evidence is plentiful). He is responsible for managing vital projects with major outcomes for the recipients, and he believes those affected require punishment rather than reward to engage

I am concerned on several levels:

– the frequency of  the episodes are putting his physical health at risk – Dr Elizabeth Mostofsky, from Harvard School of Public Health, “Although the risk of experiencing an acute cardiovascular event with any single outburst of anger is relatively low, the risk can accumulate for people with frequent episodes of anger“.

– it is damaging his professional relationships; the anger results in him making statements that cannot be quantified (in deed there is evidence many of these statements are false). He displays a tendency to enter into Rationalization  and character assassination when challenged. (Is he a Bully?)

– the manner he delivers  these statements is further harming relationships with colleagues,  (he is prone to sarcasm and appears to suffer from denial when challenging with facts)

When probed IDS appears to believe what he says (supporting the early suggestion of denial) he refuses to accept all evidence to the contrary outright (the anger manifests immediately). He maintains people affected  by his work are at fault for requiring his services and is determined to penalise them into submission. (this ‘belief’ suggests attributional anger)

Conclusion – Given his position (and video evidence) I wonder if IDS is a Narcissist, (although currently incapable of  empathy); his persistent denial of facts and subsequent distortion of truth (supported by the well documented ‘creation” of his cv) raises the question of him being a pathological liar ?

IDS displays 5 of the 8 characteristics of  Antisocial Personality Disorder:

  • Unstable interpersonal relationships.
  • Disregard for the consequences of their behaviour.
  • A failure to learn from experience.
  • Egocentricity.
  • A disregard for the feelings of others.

which leads me to the opinion – Referral to Psychiatry as a matter of urgency.

 

If this post resonates with you – Join the TRUTH Campaign Today – #NOWPetition #ImpeachDWP

 

 

The Tory Party’s dodgy use of stats

 

It is precisely examples such as those from alittlecon below which unpin the TRUTH Campaign

READ THESE AND…

The Tory Party’s dodgy use of stats.

1. Grant Shapps claims that “nearly a million people” (878,300) on incapacity benefit had dropped their claims, rather than face a new medical assessment for its successor, the employment and support allowance.

2. David Cameron falsely states in a Conservative Party political broadcast that the coalition “was paying down Britain’s debts”.

3. David Cameron and Jeremy Hunt rebuked by the Government’s own statistics watchdog yesterday for claiming that spending on the NHS had risen in real terms in recent years.

4. Boris Johnson rebuked over use of dodgy crime statistics

5. Iain Duncan Smith rebuked over immigration statistics

6. Statistics head Andrew Dilnot says a Treasury graph on infrastructure left readers with “a false impression of the relative size of investment between sectors”

7. Iain Duncan Smith rebuked for falsely claiming the coalition’s controversial benefits cap had already caused 8,000 people to move into jobs.

HAD ENOUGH ??

SIGN & SHARE  our 2nd Petition TODAY Stage 2 – “Lies,Damn Lies, IDS and The DWP; STOP Spinning Statistics” #ImpeachDWP #NOWPetition

 http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-lies-damn-lies-ids-and-the-dwp-stop-spinning-statistics-impeachdwp-nowpetition

TELL the Tories NO MORE LIES

Reducing Unemployment To Zero Neither Feasible Nor Desirable Says Iain Duncan Smith’s Think Tank

“Whilst reducing unemployment to zero is neither feasible nor desirable” – This astonishing admission from IDS’s ‘Experts’ is maybe the Greatest Reason to Join the TRUTH Campaign. – http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/david-cameron-lies-damn-lies-ids-and-the-dwp-stop-spinning-statistics-impeachdwp-nowpetition

The Lies fed to us by Government and in particular from IDS & the DWP, are precisely those used to justify the horrors of Welfare Reform

#ImpeachDWP #NOWPetition

the void

CSJThe think tank founded by Iain Duncan Smith has let the cat out of the bag and admitted that reducing unemployment to zero is neither feasible or desirable.

The comments come in the latest report from the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), the madcap Christian dominated think tank that came up with Universal Credit. The CSJ praises George Osborne’s drive for full employment (stop laughing) but points out that this does not mean everyone should have a job, but that employment levels remain at a level which does not cause inflation.

The problem for the CSJ, and George Osborne, is that if work was in plentiful supply then the bastards would have to pay us properly.  That is why real full employment is neither feasible nor desirable to the people who profit from our work.  Capitalism cannot function without unemployment but still unemployed people are not just blamed for…

View original post 93 more words

A Return to the Workhouse?

Almost a year ago I wrote about a report on residential training provision, and remarked that the proposals therein, called to mind a Dickensian view of the Workhouse.

Today I read two articles discussing changes to Jobseekers Allowance, due to come into force next month for Homeless people; according to Inside HousingUnder the new rules, Job Centre Plus advisors will be given the discretionary power to exempt rough sleepers and those in supported accommodation from looking for work“, this will however be subject to “claimants will have to prove they are taking reasonable action to find accommodation“.  The writer appears to view these new amendments as a positive move, offering quotes from Homeless Link and St Mungo’s Broadway, both announcing these changes as, the Government recognising the extra barriers Homeless people experience when seeking work and acting upon them.

The second post from Johnny Void was far less supportive, challenging the exemptions as, only lasting four weeks “despite the average length of hostel stays being significantly longer than that“; he justifies this by pointing out, “the minimum length of stay in one of St Mungo’s Central London hostels is eight weeks, with most residents staying an average of six to nine months”. He also notes “The so-called easement period will be granted only at the discretion of Jobcentre busy-bodies and will not apply to people who have been homeless for a long time“.

Both posts refer to a Report from Homeless Links which found “nearly one in three (31 per cent) homeless people on jobseeker’s allowance have faced penalties, compared with just 3 per cent of typical claimants” continuing with “Eighty-seven per cent of of the services report homeless people are experiencing food poverty, with one in six turning to crime“.

These amendments come at a time when Homelessness is rising exponentially, affecting “an estimated 185,000 people a year“, these figures are from a report by Joseph Rowntree Foundation & Crisis, who define homelessness as “people sleeping rough, single people living in temporary accommodation, statutorily homeless households who are currently or imminently without accommodation and “hidden homeless” households, such as those living in severely overcrowded conditions, squatters or “sofa-surfers”; ergo  many of those affected here will not benefit from Government changes.

The same report does identify the number of rough sleepers as being, up “by 6% in England and 13% in London…(and noting) This pushes the two-year increase in the capital to over 60%” and these are the people these amendments will affect.

It appears accepted by a majority of researchers who have studied the impacts of Welfare Reform , the Act is implicated in the rise  of people without a home; CASE, a research group of nine major housing associations providing affordable homes in the South East of England, asserted in their 2012 report The impact of welfare reform on housing, ‘the combination of the Bedroom tax, Direct Payments and the Benefits Cap would result in people losing their homes’. Further a recent report by Grant Thornton UK  First impressions of the impact of welfare reform, found “worrying signs are emerging, including rising rental arrears, homelessness and reliance on food banks, which may be linked to the reforms“.

Given the above I’m left wondering why Government is tweaking with JSA regulations, when the reasons behind the rise in Homelessness and Poverty, including those which appear as consequence of Welfare Reform, are being overlooked? It is accepted there are many causes for Homelessness, and whilst Government can have little control on personal grounds for this experience; they have almost absolute power over Structural reasons, and it on this basis I challenge the effectiveness of the regulation changes. I fail to understand how the potential for a civil servant not to sanction a homeless person for four weeks, will have an positive impact on their lives.

It is recognised the UK is experiencing an increasing dearth of social housing, as even where genuinely affordable housing did exist, it is being bought and the rents immediately hiked often above the Benefit Cap, forcing  Housing Benefits claimants into rent arrears/eviction. A recent example of this is Government MP Richard Benyon, purchasing the New Era Estate in London; this is particularly disconcerting from man who reportedly blasts the ‘something for nothing’ welfare state, whilst receiving £625K a year in Housing Benefit. For Government to have a productive impact on Homelessness it needs to address the shortage in Homes that are affordable for all; particularly those earning than the living wage and people in receipt of Housing Benefit, all of us without the means or desire to access a mortgage.

This still leaves the question of who will benefit from the regulation changes: a search on Homeless UK shows 1579 projects, offering supported housing and hostels for Rough sleepers, all of whom will profit via receipt of Housing Benefit for those exempt; could this be the reason the Housing charities are so supportive of these changes? Johnny Void  sums this up as “they will still be technically homeless but at least the charity gets a huge Housing Benefit cheque every week“.

If there is any reality in the above intimations, then will be witness a growth in the hostels and associated accommodation, self justified by the rise in Homeless people, and will they become the Workhouse of the 22nd Century?

Surely its time for the Government to fulfil Cameron’s promise for Greater transparency and tell the public the TRUTH behind the rationale of Welfare and other Reforms .

 

Angry? Sign the Petition –  Stage in the TRUTHcampaign

Tweet – #NOWPetition #ImpeachDWP

 

 

 

 

Fight For TRUTH – STOP the TORY LIES

A Quick update on the petition  – THANK YOU – we’ve now passed 2,500 signatures and some very kind person had paid to promote the petition (a SPECIAL Thanks to you xx), Now WE NEED to SHARE this as much as possible

If you need any more evidence Joe Halewood of the excellent SPeye Joe (Welfarewrites) informs us in June 24 Lord Freud deliberately mislead the House of Lords over bedroom tax; by quoting figures easily proved to be bogus, he stated ” There are some 200,000 smaller premises in the social rented sector available through each year” ! But the actual and universally accepted figure is 68,000 not 200,000 and so we see Lord Freud tripling the amount of the real figure as is his want. Freud also said “The process of which I am aware is when people appeal to the tribunal; there have been more than 100 such cases,” However Joe claims “Having personal knowledge of over 80 bedroom tax appeals myself just from one small part of Merseyside alone and further knowledge, some first-hand and some second-hand of a further few hundred bedroom tax appeals in Merseyside and hundreds more across the UK we again see Lord Freud knowingly misleading the House of Lords yet again.”

Further, as Bernadette Meaden yesterday wrote in Disabled people demand truth in politics. “Statistics should give us a true picture of what is happening: if the government misuses them it distorts the public debate, and leads people to judge policies on an inaccurate basis. It undermines democracy”. We know this to be true  and this is why the TRUTH Campaign formed a part of this article in Ekklesia.

If Debbie & I have learnt anything over the past 4 years it is – If WE don’t scrutinise and Challenge Government – No One Will!

So if you believe Government Budgets, Polices and Programmes should be based on FACTS and not skewed statistics; PLEASE continue to push this.

Join out Thunderclap and help us get the SOCIAL REACH of 69,038 to sign our Petition

Tweet – #NOWPetition #ImpeachDWP

As Robert Livingstone shows in his latest piece

SelfServatives

Government Policies are Bad for our Health – Time for Challenge #NowPetition

The latest group to be hard hit by Government Policies are women employees, Female workers hit hardest by Austerity Agenda & associated Cuts, this won’t be a surprise to anyone not fortunate to earn enough; but for most of us, this is another example of how Government Policies are penalising the majority of people – simply because they are not rich.

The past four years are strewn with evidence demonstrating precisely how, outcomes of Government Reforms have been detrimental to the general public; Welfare Reform has brought about WorkfareBenefit CapBedroom TaxPIP, and  changes to ESA, JSA sanctions  & Tax Credits, to cite a few of the programmes. All of the above, have been criticised by numerous independent groups, charities, think tanks and across social media, as not only being prejudicial but as being incongruous. Similar criticism applies to Policies in Justice Reform, the Home Office, the Health ServiceTax & Revenue etc. Further we’ve been subjected to a series of inconsistencies from various Minsters & MPs across Parliament, from expense claims to downright untruths; and this behaviour in the main goes unchallenged, or worse is defended.

These Policies and Programmes have had a negative effect on  disabled people, older people, black & minority ethnic people, low paid people, jobless people, children and women, and  the articles used in the above links, are merely examples of the plethora of  evidence available. This leads me to one conclusion; current Government Policies, particularly when based upon such questionable, data are damaging the health and well-being of the majority of people in the UK.

It is for this reason we are challenging Parliament to STOP the SPIN, we want Government to ensure  their Laws and Policies, are fair and based upon Fact; further we are  dissatisfied with Political attempts at psychological coercion, with MPs persistently misusing statistics to justify prejudicial Polices.

For these reasons we believe the TRUTH Campaign will positively challenge Government; and as people afflicted by the current raft of unjust Policies, we demand change.

If you, your family, friends, colleagues etc are negatively affected by any Government Policies – Join the TRUTH Campaign – sign our petition, join our Time For Truth Thunderclap, tweet #NOWPetition #ImpeachDWP, share on Social Media; and Spread the word Government Policies are Bad for our Health

 

Cameron values:

Complements my post beautifully Juli – Exposes Camerons ‘Values for what the are ‘Fantasy Lies’.

Enough with the SPIN – the TRUTH Campaign #NOWPetition #ImpeachDWP

juxtaposed

Cameron values:
Belief in Freedom – and the ability to take liberties;
Tolerance of others – so long as they are brothers
In his crony alms;
Accepting personal and social responsibility – by
Giving it to personnel who lord the harm and those
Who can’t afford not to make scapegoats just to
Plug the gap in due accountability;
Respecting and upholding the rule of law – insofar
As it does not impinge on the entropic economic,
Greed-is-to-aspire death machine.

And, too, he goes compare and sees his values
Everywhere in symbols. How the motifs and his
Motives face and bow!

For how he loves his Union Flag
As much as all the striver/skiver tags;
He relishes his fish and chips – though maybe not
As much as people rummaging for food in skips.
And how his football quips attest to his devotion to
All patriotic notions! Under Cameron Mao, now

View original post 73 more words

Why is the Government Arguing for British Values?

I’ve already reblogged a gay mentalist’s excellent post “There are no such things as British values” this morning but feel so strongly about the Government’s Rationale behind this push for ‘British Values’,  here I want to add discuss the purpose. I find it amusing that the PM David Cameron has deigned these values to be “belief in freedom, tolerance of others, accepting personal and social responsibility, respecting and upholding the rule of law“, as I consider these to be in the main, the very ideals Government Policies are removing from the majority of the British public.

Definitions of Freedom include:

personal liberty, as from slavery, bondage, serfdom; It has been argued on numerous occasions that WorkFare, where people receiving benefits are forced into unpaid work or lose their social security is in direct conflict to personal liberty.

Tolerance of others for me refers to challenge of inequality and the ‘isms’ and enforcement of The Equality Act (2010); The irony of this is the Governments Austerity Measures have witnessed as rise in racism, sexism, domestic violence,  ill health of disabled people, homophobia, and poverty; all which indicate a growth in intolerance of others, as does the Governments own rhetoric on the adverse effects of immigration.

Personal and social responsibility appears to refer to an unwritten obligation we are all supposed to adhere to; as we ostensibly choose our own actions we are therefore responsible for the outcomes,  and that we all have a duty to act for the benefit of society as a whole. If this is the case, the actions of the Government which continue to ensure the 1% wealthiest members of the UK, prosper at the expense of the majority, clearly do not comply with this ‘value.

respecting and upholding the rule of law – The ‘rule of law  is a system of rules and rights that enables fair and functioning societies; Government Polices have seen reductions of workers rights, of right to appeal against deportation, and access of right to justice as examples.

The above are merely examples of precisely how the Government’s behaviour demonstrates its commitment to so called ‘British Values’ and given this, I contest the ideology behind this campaign is another attempt at Social Control. It is well documented where a society shares values, they quickly become the ‘norms’, the acceptable ways of behaviour; thus the adoption of these British values allows Government to behave in a manner that suits the rulers.

I do find it ironic that Cameron has ‘attached’ this campaign to the 800 year anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta.  This was after all the baronial uprising against the reigning king; is he really suggesting the Elite overthrow the  Monarchy or, and more likely in my opinion, reasserting that those not of such high birth are not worth of Right at all?

 

Follow The TRUTH Campaign Tweet #ImpeachDWP #NOWPetition

Recover or DIE – Time to Fight Back #NowPetition #ImpeachDWP

I find it intriguing to read that ACPO (The Association of Chief Police Officers) argued, in their case for purchasing water cannons, “it would be fair to assume that the ongoing and potential future austerity measures are likely to lead to continued protest. Experiences in Millbank in 2010 demonstrate how quickly protest can turn to serious violent disorder. In addition, the social and economic factors that are currently being experienced have the potential, when combined with a significant (and often spontaneous) “trigger” event, to lead to the outbreak of significant disturbances“. So the Police understand that the Governments austerity measures result in protest;  further Richard Seymour also acknowledges the reason for the Mayor of London spending £218,000 on such weaponry is about, “policing austerity“.

This purchase suggests Government is fully aware that its Polices such as  Welfare Reform, Civil Justice Reform, Media Reform, Tax cuts for the Highest Earners etc; result in the majority of people experiencing (often severe) economic distress, and concern for their Rights; and yet, Government perseveres with its agenda

Sue Marsh today asks, “What do you call a government who….”, in this she lays out a wide range of the actions taken by Government to date; in response to Sue rather than state what I call the Government I elect to examine the rationale for such behaviour. Having analysed the paradoxical manner Government acts and speaks, albeit focussing on Welfare Reform, in many occasions;  I can determine Government’s primary purpose to be the subjugation of the majority of the people

For me, Steve Bell’s cartoon in the Guardian today sums it up nicely –

 

Steve Bell 12.06.14

 

Now the question is – Are you going to let then get way with it?

 

Fight Back – join the Truth Campaign –  Make them Admit the Real Purpose for Hiding behind things, be they Water Canons or Dodgy Statistics SIGN & SHARE; We’ve done it before We CAN Do It Again

Tweet #ImpeachDWP #NOWPetition