The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL << Me again!

READ THIS!!! RT @leftfootfwd @suey2y The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled I Sue Marsh – http://j.mp/mAtB7z

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL << Me again!

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL << Me again!

*PLEASE READ AND RT* @leftfootfwd The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/ctJztz6 by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL << Me again!

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://bit.ly/lUagEr

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://bit.ly/lUagEr

Sue Marsh – Did you ever stop for one minute to consider the unfairness of people living in huge unaffordable houses paid for by people going out to work who can’t afford to live there themselves?

Why is it that as you seek to build your socialist utopia you don’t consider the fairness of what you propose?

Why should greedy landlords get rich at the expense of the taxpayer because that is what has resulted from your favoured situation. Myself I’d rather see schools and hospitals built with taxpayers money not lining the pockets of modern day rackmans…

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled..
11,000 disabled people at risk of losing their homes…
http://j.mp/mAtB7z

RT @leftfootfwd: Shocking impact of Osborne's cuts on disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL <<WOW! Check out trolls in comments! Did I hit a nerve?

RT @leftfootfwd: Shocking impact of Osborne's cuts on disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL <<WOW! Check out trolls in comments! Did I hit a nerve?

Anon E Mouse – Well, that’s OK then, we’ll make hundreds of thousands of people that the DWP themselves find unwell homeless in order that a few hundred housing benefit recipients can’t live in mansions. Policy genius.

You make a ludicrous and irrelevant argument. T

#spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

RT @suey2y: #spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest. via @superfurryandy

Sue Marsh – No one is making anyone homeless any more than this government is cutting the deficit. The current spend by the coalition is up on Labour and you are simply swallowing the spin about cuts.

You are actually proposing that people on minimum wage like myself should pay to allow the unemployed to live in houses costing more in rent than I earn a week?

That position is shameful for a so called socialist Sue Marsh and you are deliberately ignoring my central point about paying for greedy landlords to get richer on the backs of the workers.

How many people so far have lost their homes through these much needed housing benefit changes so far Sue?

Perhaps before you start spouting off and fiddling the statistics about what MAY happen you should spend more time considering the poor in this country and showing a bit of compassion towards them and a little less towards the greedy landlords who do nothing to earn their money…

#spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

Isn’t it nice to be “all in this together”….

I think Sue is a bit annoyed that New labour and Blair are not in power, more then she cares for the disabled.

Would the reforms make people homeless, though?

You say at the beginning of the article that people will be forced out of their homes, but then you go on to quote that they will be forced to move into cheaper accommodation. Surely that’s not the same thing as being made homeless.

Incidentally, I’m not disagreeing with your overall point about how cuts could have a devastating impact on the disabled. I think it’s a travesty that the cutbacks being implemented in the social security budget don’t fall on the idle and irresponsible (i.e. those who could but won’t work and those who have children as a career choice) instead.

P.S. To pre-empt a very predictable, tiresome riposte, I don’t read the Daily Mail.

P.P.S. Anon E Mouse has hit the nail on the head with regard to housing benefit, by the way.

That is the reform, perhaps above all others, that the coalition must have the guts to drive through. Subsidising rents of c. £30-40k p.a. is wrong and utterly unsustainable.

The government shouldn’t keep lining the pockets of landlords while urinating on taxpayers from a great height.

Mr Mouse – It is not surprising that Sue has fallen into beleiving the meme of the savage cuts – it has been propgated by Labour and their broadcasting arm at the BBC since the day after the election. From Day 1 of the new Government both have been highlighting hardship cases brought about by the savage cuts – long before any cuts had been made or had shown effect. Furthermore Dave and his ‘Tories’ seem to be keen to perpetuate the idea that they are making real cuts when they are not. I can only assume they do this to try and pretend that there is some sort of difference between themselves and the opposition in order to justify their own existence.

Robert – Well said. Am I correct to assume you are the “Robert” who suffers severe disability?

If you are then Sue Marsh should consider that she is clearly not representing everyone in that position and is essentially involved in self promotion and I have to agree with your assessment about her caring more about the Labour Party than the disadvantaged in our society…

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

Hi Sue,

Just wished to congratulate you on the series of excellent articles that you have written. Unlike your critics they are factual and logical. We at Inclusion Scotland don’t give a toss about which party is cutting disabled people’s benefits – the Coalition or New Labour but rest assured that you do speak for the thousands of disabled people we come into contact with. All the Best, Bill Scott, Manager Inclusion Scotland

Selohesra – Maggie Thatcher did exactly the same – kept claiming to be cutting when she wasn’t.

After George Osbourne gave that snotty cow on Today this morning a good slapping down I was cheering.

When will Labour activists realise that their approach is having no effect and start being honest and present a party that actually represents working people? You know people might actually vote for that.

It’s certainly better than the nonsense here from Sue Marsh which will encourage no one to vote Labour again…

Since when was it the norm for 25-34 year-olds to live in a place of their own?

There are millions of people in this age group who work hard and yet cannot afford a home of their own or to live in an up-market neighbourhood. Many among them remain with their parents. Others search on Gumtree for “strangers” with whom to share.

To what premium of provision, above that with which others (who provide for themselves) are expected to be satisfied, are recipients of state welfare “entitled”?

And at what point does it become simply distasteful to suggest (while offering no supporting evidence) that to provide an individual in need with accommodation at the expense of future tax payers could be somehow injurious?

Wow, some desperate responses from those not willing to engage at all with my points.

The article says very little about housing benefit and surely the main thrust is that overall, this will actually have a fairly small though horrible affect on the disabled?

The main point I make is that around a million people who the DWP themselves know have serious medical conditions will soon lose everything, whilst a further 3.5 million will lose a huge percentage of their incomes.

Robert, your comment is just silly. You know very well, that I am equally scathing of Labour’s role in all of this. You yourself are disabled, and you know very well that I fight daily to highlight issues that will affect you and people like you.

As for the person who claims there are no cuts, well you’re just so misguided, there’s nothing to really say. Osborne is spending for sure, but he’s spending on higher debt, higher inflation, higher unemployment and pet projects like Lansleys Health bill (3 Billion) Universal credit (3 billion) and Libya (who knows??)

I point out in this article that sick and disabled people are about to lose 9 billion from a 16 billion budget. I suggest they will not be able to bear this.

No amount of mock outrage will stop the fallout of this, so why not stop it before it goes too far?

Comment 1 hits the nail on the head, and sarcastic responses will only further alienate those like “Anon E Mouse”, whose support you should be trying to gain.
I wish “the left” would admit that it is wrong “that people on minimum wage like myself should pay to allow the unemployed to live in houses costing more in rent than I earn a week”. If the left conceded this, it would nullify the arguments of the right, and we could move on to have a sensible debate about who actually does deserve money (eg, Sue).

Sue – Bullseye ‘spending on higher debt’ – I think you are finally getting the point. How about we cut the debt and that will ultimately mean lower interest payments and therefore more money to spend on worthy causes.

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

#spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

Most of the comments on here so far (not all) consistently fail to address what is already beginning to befall the disabled of the UK. Perhaps because it is indefensible, so better to ignore it? The Grayling Doctrine, shall we say? Or IDS, take your pick.

All the dogma and insults in the world won’t change that reality. Admit you don’t give a damn for those worse off than you and take your astroturfing elsewhere.

Lordy! Some righteous right wing frothing here. Too much money is paid out in housing benefit, it’s true, but that’s not the fault of tenants. The attack on social housing that started with Thatcher’s gerrymandering Right to Buy and continued under successive Tory and Labour governments continues. At the same time an artificially created housing bubble has left private landlords in the clear to exploit both housing benefit and their tenants, using the falsely created high cost of housing to justift high market rents. Instead of aiming their guns at this ridiculously under regulated sector and bringing it in line to benefit both the public purse and those who NEED to rent privately, Tories aim once again to demonize those who for whatever reason HAVE to fall back on assistance. Many people who claim housing benefit also work, or have worked, and pay into the system. These ‘reforms’ are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut and avoiding the real issues, and the feeble/selfish minded fall for it hook, line and sinker.

Sue Marsh – You say: “As for the person who claims there are no cuts, well you’re just so misguided, there’s nothing to really say.”

So now you are resorting to the old left method of refusing to discuss the issue when you are proven to be wrong – better than the usual smearing I suppose.

From The Guardian, hardly a supporter of the government with idiots like Polly Toynbee writing for it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/may/24/government-borrowing-hits-record-figure-april

Now instead of posting what you wish was true perhaps you’d like to address the fact that you are simply wrong Sue Marsh and retract your previous comments…

Unbelievable comments. To suggest that the cuts aren’t even happening is almost funny, were it not such a serious situation. Of course the unemployed shouldn’t be living in more expensive houses than working people, and very few actually are. The media is having a field day with hatred against the disabled, and the lies that are being printed as being the majority, is shameful. Sue wasn’t discussing the general unemployed. She is discussing the disabled people in our country, who, despite what everyone is being spoon fed to believe, aren’t actually criminals. Some disabled people have health needs that cost money: carers, wheelchairs, medical equipment. A disabled child may actually NEED a separate bedroom from their sibling, rather than it being something assumed as a luxury. Where are all these disabled people living in mansions though?? Everyone needs someone to hate, and the public are certainly taking the media up on their offer of the disabled being the target. This is disgusting. Sue, thank you for a good article highlighting the current situation.

Anon E Mouse – I don’t even understand what you’re claiming? What am I simply worng about? Osborne not cutting? I backed up my point with what he’s actually spending the money on.

The spending plans ALWAYS set out that Osborne would NOT cut the debt, he would spend more. That is very different to departmental cuts and cutting the deficit.

So what am I wrong about? That sick and disabled people are being asked to shoulder an unfair level of deficit reduction? That millions are about to be abandoned? That myself, Scope, the CAB, Compass, Professor Harrington, Professor Greg, the Social Security Committee (Gov’s own advisors) Mind, Mencap, and most other charities have produced all of this research and opposition?

I would indeed love a socialist utopia as you put it, but in the meantime I’ll content myself with a society that simply doesn’t allow terribly ill or disabled people to go to the wall.

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/0k7c7hL << Me again!

P.S- Of COURSE there will be some disabled people made homeless, are your heads really stuck in the sand that deep? Think about it, benefits removed, so if you are committing fraud then no problem, you just go on ESA and get a job. However, for the majority, who are actually valid claimants, benefit being taken away means no income. AT ALL. No income means no means to pay for a roof over your head. I’m not saying that everyone will end up in that situation, but it really is incredibly naive to suggest that it wont happen.

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

[...] a quick post to link to this article at Left Foot Forward by Sue Marsh. It’s well written but she makes some shocking [...]

The government’s housing benefit reforms HAVE made people homeless, I personally lost my home purely because I’m 33 years old. That property was a poorly maintained studio appartment living, sleeping and cooking quarters all in one room with an only just separate bathroom, you know, the sort of property hard working people can only dream of renting. I was receiving the unthinkable, king’s ransom of £4000 pa in housing benefit. The reforms even llimited my employment opportunities, the vast majority of the tiny amount pf jobs available are temporary, pretty much guaranteed to end before my 35th birthday.

May I point out that the ONLY reason I’ve been put in this position by this wonderful government is because I’m under 35, had I been just two years older, the government would have been more than happy to keep paying me more than this country can apparently afford.

My benefit wouldn’t have been cut had I rented from a social landlord, but I day I rent from a social landlord is the day I never want to work again, because this government in its infinite wisdom decided that getting a job and earning too much can cost you your social tenancy.

Lastly, this blog post talks about the physically and mentally ill losing their homes even when it’s detrimental to their health, now imagine someone with severe mental problems sharing a house with your daughter, I’m sure supporting the “cut to the bone regardless of consequences” regime that this government insists on going through will be just as happy to read in their favourite right wing rag about their darling daughter being brutally murdered by her schizophrenic housemate who used to have his own place.

Sue Marsh – There haven’t been any cuts yet – it’s all just Labour scaremongering and you’re part of that.

Citing those people as you do; what do you expect those groups to say but it doesn’t make it “evidence” just their opinion.

Please tell me why you believe “terribly ill or disabled people to go to the wall” that? I see no evidence whatsoever – just misguided cynical view of the world.

Why don’t you want the re-election of a Labour government Sue Marsh?

Your unpleasant approach is not getting any traction whatsoever and Labour are tanking in the polls – understandable with a loser like Miliband as leader I guess but you can argue no member of the PLP or Labour Party voted for him so that’s excusable.

Regarding your utopia, the whole world has rejected it (Cuba is on the way – North Korea a while yet) – even the Socialist government in Portugal has given up today and again I ask; do you really want to keep Labour in opposition in this country because activists like you Sue Marsh are doing just that.

You still haven’t said why you think it’s fair a minimum wage worker like myself should earn less in wages than the rents the government pays for others. Why is that fair Sue Marsh?

Quite frankly you are doing the government’s job for them with your attitude. Do you have nothing at all to offer that is positive about the Labour Party or a solution for the situation you claim is so terrible?

Well put Sue. Another excellent (and well researched) article, which has obviously rattled the troll cage.

An interesting read -> The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled – http://bit.ly/jXUG9O #disability #welfare #housing

Gregalomaniac – Troll cage?

Why don’t you try defending a position instead of the Labour approach of smearing people who’s opinions you disagree with. Do you think that Michael Foot would have behaved as badly as your comment would suggest?

Why do you think it’s fair that a minimum wage worker like myself should earn less in wages than the rents the government pays for others.

Isn’t the Labour Party supposed to represent the less well off or are those days long gone?

Anon E Mouse “There haven’t been any cuts yet” Well of course there have! Not the majority, but plenty.

The “groups” you talk about, including the professor who designed the system, the government’s own advisers and charities all did research and used DWP statistics and evidence.

1 million or more sick and disabled people are about to lose everything. These too are the DWPs own figures (and very conservative estimates on my behalf at that. That is “going to the wall” in my opinion.

My “unpleasant approach” has gained the support of thousands of regular followers, many MPs across all parties, members of the Lords, media and ensured that my blog has risen steadily through the rankings to be consistently in the top 50.

Nothing I write is about getting Labour re-elected – it is irrelevant to my article. I am concerned with sick or disabled people, not supporting politicians who are wilfully trying to pretend they don’t exist.

Sue – are you so unsure of your ground that you have to Tweet your own article (Tweet 22 below) pleading for anyone to support you

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

No-one is going to the wall, there will be a roof over these people’s heads. They will have to do what most 25-34 year olds do AND SHARE A PROPERTY.

I thought Lefties held great stock by equality, oh, silly me, the sick and disabled are a special interest group, a toy to be played with when it suits Labour in achieving its vote, erm, aims.

This silly woman’s argument is specious to claim that they will end up homeless and then say they need to live in accommodation on their own to remain off the streets; something that most 25 to 34 year olds can only dream of doing.

God, that meant I ‘could’ have been homeless from the age of 21 to 29 when I shared a house with ‘strangers’.

As for “share with strangers”, well, they would be on Day 1 but I imagine after a few days, they won’t be strangers, some might actually be new friends. Which might be slightly more enriching for society than having these people isolated alone in a 1-bed flat.

You Sue Marsh are Laurie Penny and I claim by £5.

Sue Marsh – I have followed your blog for several months myself and whilst I do not understand that you seem to be unable to be more balanced which would support your case more I stand by my “unpleasant approach” remark.

As for the numbers following your blog what does that have to do with the nature of your posts? Gordon Brown was a throughly unpleasant character yet incredibly people in this country voted for him. Hard to believe I know but there you are.

I also find the music from Take That pretty unpleasant but people support them in droves. The remark is childish and completely irrelevant.

And you seem unable to bring yourself to answer my question Sue Marsh.

Let me try again and ask that maybe you would try YES or NO so everyone can be clear where we all stand.

Is it fair that my taxes pay to allow other people to pay rents to greedy landlords of more than I earn?

The comments here from those opposed to Sue’s message are frankly unbelievable, verging into downright disablist hatred. Sue has been possibly the single most effective voice of disabled people in this debate, no matter how you might attack her for daring to be disabled and have an opinion, she speaks for us, and she accurately describes the terror disabled people are living with. Demonised in the press at every turn; ethnically cleansed by the IB to ESA migration which is being inflicted on tens of thousands a month; ILF, the support for the most disabled of all, closed to new cases; ATW, our support into the workplace, with its budget slashed and proclaiming it will not support a whole range of adaptions it previously funded; DLA to be replaced by PIP, dumping 25% of its claimants at an idealogical stroke, no matter that the government can dump them, but they can’t dump their disabilities, no matter that DLA is the gateway to things like Motability, Carer’s Allowance and everything else.

And now Housing Allowance to be slashed, people already being notified of reduced rates for next year, no matter if the changes haven’t cleared parliament yet. And yes, this will disproportionately affect disabled people, because the reality of disability frequently forces disabled people into a higher sector of the rental market than would be typical of a non-disabled peer, whether because their disability means that they cannot survive in shared accommodation, or because they need extra rooms for carers, or medical equipment, or because landlords tend to charge a premium for accommodation with the wet rooms, level access or wider spaces that their disability may need. Striking at the top of the HB market may seem fair when the Tories trot out the handful of abusive cases, but it also means selectively striking at disabled people, and that is a truth they would prefer you not to think about.

The cuts aimed at disabled people are real, sustained, in effect right this minute with worse to come, and backed by a poison-pen campaign from Cameron, IDS and Grayling cynically preaching that we are all scrounging layabouts, a campaign which they know is already resulting in disabled people being harassed and assaulted in the streets for daring to be disabled in public. Disabled people are terrified of both the effects of the cuts on their fragile personal budgets, and the very real increases in open hatred directed towards us. The disability boards are full of people projecting, based on all too real experience, that the result of the HB changes will be a very real deterioration in their health. What is tolerable to non-disabled HB claimants fails utterly to address the needs of many disabled HB claimants.

In the end the question you have to ask of the posters orchestrating this assault on Sue for darring to speak out is: which part of ‘to each according to their needs’ do you find so repellent?

How about changing

‘to each according to their needs’

to

‘to each according to their needs short of enriching a (slum) landlord class effectively stealing money from minimum wage workers who can’t afford to subsidise unrealistic rents they could never hope to pay from their own earnings’

I’m confused by this idea that under-35 year olds don’t normally live alone. When I was 21 I rented a small 1 bed flat in a block, for a sum that was about half of my monthly salary (which was above minimum wage, but below the then UK average). It was an entirely normal thing to do.

And then, when I got sick, I continued living in that block, thanks to Housing Benefit, and the neighbours who knew me and the friends and family who lived nearby gave me those little bits of help that kept me safe and fed, thus saving Social Services (or, if I had badly hurt myself trying to “cope”, the emergency services) a fortune.

If I’d been required to move house, I wouldn’t have had that taxpayer-money-saving support available to me any more. I’d have had to start from scratch with a new community.

I can’t even begin to imagine what sort of a house-share arrangement might be available to a person who can’t do the household chores and needs to clutter up the place with wheelchairs, bath seats and other assistive devices.

DavidG – Nice New Labour response.

1. The smearing: “The comments here from those opposed to Sue’s message are frankly unbelievable, verging into downright disablist hatred”. Not true.

2. The lying: “poison-pen campaign from Cameron, IDS and Grayling cynically preaching that we are all scrounging layabouts”. Not true.

3. The use of scaremongering inappropriate language: “Demonised in the press at every turn; ethnically cleansed by the IB to ESA migration which is being inflicted on tens of thousands a month”. Not true.

What the hell gives you the right to use words like “Ethnic cleansing” in view of Rwanda or Bosnia? That is a shameful and disgraceful remark and you should withdraw it immediately.

To equate the forced cost cutting of a government to stop greedy landlords getting rich from ordinary worker’s taxes with the mass genocide of human beings is breathtaking. Did you never see the graves of those wretched people in Africa?

You end with: “which part of ‘to each according to their needs’ do you find so repellent?”

The bit where my minimum wage taxes pay for the unemployed to live in houses they couldn’t ordinarily afford and people like you have the nerve to believe that my taxes should be used to make greedy landlords richer whilst public services are starved of cash. That bit.

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/SPaouro

Selohesra – I’m just an ordinary woman trying to change something I see as potentially very damaging to our society. I’m proud when other, much more prominent, blogs ask me to write for them and of course, who wouldn’t want to spread their own message far and wide?

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/SPaouro

Anon – You can’t just reply “not true” unless you’re right!!

Try this http://fullfact.org/search/node/incapacity%20benefit The inaccuracies fed to the press by the DWP over this issue now run into 4 PAGES – almost all upheld by the Press Complaints Commission. I believe this may be the “poison pen” campaign DavidG refers to and the evidence would seem to back him up

Mr Mouse: Disablist? Sue was accused of holding her position to exploit disabled people for political ends. When you understand that Sue is disabled and speaking for and with the support of disabled people then that is clearly disablist, it seeks to deny her disability and tarnish her motives.

Drawing attention to the poison-pen campaign against us isn’t lying, you can see Cameron’s contribution on the BBC news site and IDS’s latest broadside in the Saturday hate-rags. Your agreement with their message may blind you to the reality of what it means for actual disabled people, but that doesn’t make the message for us any less real or any less hateful. I talk about this poison-pen campaign in greater depth in my blog posting at http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/06/another-poison-pen-letter-from-ids.html

Scaremongering? I and many other people have been abused in the street, earlier this year someone tried to frame me for benefit fraud. The fear is very real and entirely justified. http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/01/i-wonder-what-you-were-thinking.html http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/02/hate-from-government-hate-on-street.html

Ethnic cleansing. I use the term with full knowledge of the implications, because I feel that is precisely what we disabled people are being exposed to as we are demonised for political ends. With the WCA carefully designed to exclude some of the most disabling of all effects of incapacity, and an active campaign to turn us into figures of hate I can draw no other conclusion than that the intention is to ethnically cleanse the benefit system of entire categories of disabled people.

You can continue to deny the need of disabled people for disproportionately high support from HB, and the disproportionate effects of cutting that support, but that just shows that you concern isn’t about need at all. As you yourself said, “Isn’t the Labour Party supposed to represent the less well off or are those days long gone?” Clearly in your case they are. But given your denial of any threat against disabled people, even in the face of the facts, perhaps the Labour Party and ‘to each according to their needs’ was never for you in the first place.

Sue Marsh – As shocking the response from DavidG was regarding his “Ethnic Cleansing” as a description of government cuts I do not understand why you have linked me to a site that prints facts from newspapers.

Personally I have never elected a single newspaper hack to act as a servant of the people as I do the government.

Not even Gordon Brown’s personal friend, Paul Dacre of the Daily Mail was elected by anyone – mind you neither was Brown but at least we enjoyed booting him and his cronies out of office – something we can’t do with newspapers.

Anyway my comment was: “poison-pen campaign from Cameron, IDS and Grayling cynically preaching that we are all scrounging layabouts” and I have seen no evidence whatsoever from anywhere that that is true.

Once we start electing the newspaper staff I’ll agree with you Sue Marsh.

Anyway you seem to be ignoring my question about the fairness issue for minimum wage workers like myself…

I predict Sue Marsh will not answer the question over whether it is fair for minimum waged workers to subsidise housing benefit of 30-40k per year.

Anon E Mouse – You’re obviously intelligent, so it is clear that I shared the FullFact link with you because all of the stories came from DWP press releases.

I am indeed now ignoring you as you are rude, offensive and continually ignore any answers I DO give you. As you always do when I write for Left Foot Forward. It doesn’t matter how many times I answer your questions, you twist what I say.

If you want more information from someone who knows much more about Housing Benefit reform than me (as I’ve pointed out, my article is about sickness and disability cuts in general) then I’m sure you’ve noticed that this very site has just posted an article about it! I’m sure it will help.

I am more than happy to answer genuine questions, debate serious points and try to engage with those who show an interest, whether they agree with me or not.

That is not the same as a full day of insults and attack with no genuine responses to anything I say.

The real problem is you open up the doors to people to come here, you then refuse to build social housing, in the hope the battle to get a mortgage will help the banks, we all know how that turned out.

Brown and Blair worked out the battle plans for the disabled and sick, everything the Tories are doing would have been done by Brown or one of his cronies, stopping DLA for those people in a care home shown on Panorama, they do not deserve this benefit, the creep also wanted to stop all DLA.

problem for me right now is of course seeing the difference between Labour and the Tories, oh I know Sue would love to see Blair back, and then she could swoon about her working while the rest of us battle to find an employer willing to give us a job.

I think it’s totally wrong for people to get a house or a home which cost more then some people make in a month be they disabled single mothers or anyone else. fair rents use to be Labours call, not higher rents.

The impact upon disabled people due to these cuts will mean a lot of people, already in accessible accommodation, will be forced to live in places not suited to their needs, which in itself is a disgrace. Disabled people already have to bear an unfair burden of these cuts, kicking them out of their homes will just exasperate the situation.
Anon E Mouse why do you hide your identity from us, if you are going to heap tirades of diarrhoea soup upon us, then at least let us know who you are.

Sue Marsh – Well done. You still didn’t answer whether you think it’s right or wrong for a minimum wage worker like myself to pay taxes to pay for rents for others at rates I could only dream of. What a surprise.

Those stories you link to may have come from the DWP but that is not a “poison pen” from Cameron and to suggest so is deceitful and pathetic from the commentator.

And for you to suggest I was stating something not true is offensive and just plainly dishonest.

What you don’t like Sue Marsh is that people here clearly don’t share your misleading position – take Robert above for example reminding us of Labour in the past and “Fair Rents” and your position of desperation to get Labour back into office despite their appalling record of inequality and warmongering. And their support of greedy landlords with our money not theirs.

If you post the stories on this fine blog then you should be able to defend your position or don’t post the item.

You have been shown to be deliberately misleading and dishonest by the other commentators here and your response is to smear me with your “rude and offensive” remarks about me instead of answering my question.

Is it fair Sue Marsh? Everyone reading this knows your position on fairness it appears…

John Hargraves – what is the fascination on this site with knowing people’s real names. Knowing your name does not really tell me anything about you – I suspect many people in the world share your name so it certainly does not uniquely identify you. In reality you are as anonymous putting a regular Christian name and surname on your post as someone posting under a pseudonym . Indeed you could argue that my psuedonym which mirrors how I feel about our politicians from all the mainstream parties tells you more about me than your name does about you – unless of course you are the Hargraves who appeared on Out of Town & How – in which case I salute you.

John Hargrave – You attribute things to me that I have simply not said and things the author of this article has no evidence to state as fact.

How many people have been evicted from their homes John Hargrave? Are you so naive to believe that a government would allow this to happen? Grow up please and stop the theatrics – this is a serious issue to people with disabilities not a game to try to make people forget how bad Labour were in office.

Robert above is bang on when he comments that Labour want’s to pay other peoples money to greedy landlords but all that will happen is the greedy landlords will lower their rents which are frankly obscene.

The validity of my argument is not affected by my identity. Unless of course you intend to try a Labour smear on my character and not the points I make.

If you don’t believe that will happen ask Peter Watt, Alistair Darling, Gillian Duffy or David Kelly’s widow. Play the ball and not the man please…

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://t.co/2EYhBHp by @suey2y

Deeply amusing that people who are at the lower end of the income scale (or who claim to be) are attacking each other when they should be supporting one another. Ironic isn’t the word. Whether you are a homeless ex-forces living on the streets, a disabled ex-firefighter injured dwhilst trying to do your job, a minimum wage employee, a self employed business person struggling, your goals should be one and the same. Instead of blubbing and dribbling and attacking each other, I suspect there is more than one malajusted freak who is simply unsympathetic to the plight of others in a childish manner and merely trying to elevate themselves from their own toilet life by xxxxing on the heads of others.

Well done by the way Sue I contacted the Royal British Legion and they are monitoring the Government and its Welfare reform Bill at present and I have managed to find others to who believe we Brits should stand up for each other.

Mouse: From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. If you are assessed as being able to pay tax, and if someone else is assessed at needing support due to their disability to live in a house you could not afford, because they need the space or the facilities, then how is that a problem? You are being asked to pay according to your ability, they are being supported to the extent of their needs, it is the very definition of socialism at work. What exactly is your problem with living up to the socialist ideal?

” that is not a “poison pen” from Cameron and to suggest so is deceitful and pathetic from the commentator. ”

If someone sets out to demean a whole segment of disabled people as not worthy of the support of the state, repeatedly insinuates that disability benefit fraud is rife, when in fact it is the lowest of all benefit fraud except for the pension, when the tabloids dance to their master’s tune, bragging that 75% of people are being rejected and are therefore frauds, never mind that the figure is nowhere near 75%, never mind that many of the withdrawn claims are solely there because the DWP insist on them being made (break a leg on JSA and you’ll be told to claim ESA while you’re unfit for work, but you’ll be recovered before your WCA is due), never mind that many legitimate claimants are driven out of the system as I so nearly was (http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/04/wca-sick-joke-or-national-disgrace.html) and never mind that the hacks deride terrible disabilities like epidermylosis bulosa as ‘blisters’ then how else should we label it but ‘poison-pen’? Disabled people have seen a steady decline in their acceptance in the community as a result of this campaign against us, as reflected in the attacks I and others have experienced. In fact to label it as ‘poison-pen’ does the severity of the hatemongering scant justice. If anything is pathetic, it is your assertion that nothing whatsoever is true. Try experiencing things from the side of the disabled person, Mr Mouse, and you will soon realise that the situation is not simply bad, but far worse than I have managed to paint it.

“And for you to suggest I was stating something not true is offensive and just plainly dishonest.”

You have been told the truth by those experiencing it at first hand and continue to deny it, how else should we categorise your honesty? The evidence is there to see, on WTB, the Broken of Britain, DPAC and the blogs and postings of individual disabled people. Are we all engaged in a sustained campaign of lies, or might the problem lie with your denial of the truth? Or as disabled people are we simply unworthy of being listened to?

#spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

#spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y #TBofB

Anon,

You say to Sue,

“Well done. You still didn’t answer whether you think it’s right or wrong for a minimum wage worker like myself to pay taxes to pay for rents for others at rates I could only dream of. What a surprise…”

Now you well know that social housing, housing benefits, child support or benefits in general, are not reducible to, or the same as, the benefit provisions made available to the disabled. I think you would also agree that the challenges confronted by those who suffer long term illness or physical disability are different from those of us who, thankfully, do not have such afflictions, (e.g. going up a flight of stairs may not be a problem for you or me, but it is a different story for a person who is wheelchair bound.) We perhaps could also agree that for those so afflicted to enjoy a quality of life closer to our own, that special equipment, facilities, and care, etc, may be required. So, we can say that there are additional costs associated with these factors.

With regard to your general point, you might recall that Sue in the OP cited the Scope report that notes:
“The £9 billion of cuts will affect every aspect of the day-to-day support disabled people rely on to live – including housing, living costs and social care support. Examples of this are, by 2015:
• 170,830 families where both parents care for a disabled child will lose £520 million
• 516,450 disabled adults whose partner is a full time carer will lose £1.258 billion
• 98,170 single disabled people will lose £127 million
• 114,066 disabled people moved from incapacity benefit (and ESA) to Job Seekers allowance will lose £994 million

http://www.scope.org.uk/news/disabled-people-hit-by-welfare-cuts

This is a good start to view the number of households to which Sue refers. So, how many of the numbers cited above are paid rentals at rates that you could only dream of? All of them, the vast majority, some of them, or, what I would say is more likely, very few, if any of the above. If you can provide statistics that prove otherwise, I would invite you to do so!

Secondly, he losses cited by Scope are combined and include housing, living costs and social care support. Losses in one area, (e.g. full time carer) can combine with or be impacted by losses in another, ESA removal after 365 days. While the individual’s need for the support continues, the support provided is eliminated. It is not unreasonable to conclude that such losses will impact other basic needs, i.e. paying rent, utilities, food, etc. As these losses impact at the same time rentals in both social and private housing are on the increase, the likelihood of resultant evictions is indeed high. You will recall that the coalition has mandated with the removal of secure tenancy that new tenancies to be set at a fixed percentage according to the local market rate. What argument and evidence can you provide to illustrate your point that no one will be evicted because of coalition policy?

Finally, if you take the time to view the exchange between Timms and Grayling on Welfare reform cited by Sue, you will quickly see for yourself how out of touch the Tory coalition has become.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/welfare/110503/am/110503s01.htm

Great blog Sue, some of the comments are coming from a place of not being aware of the facts. Sue puts a lot of research into her facts and figures – unfortunately a lot more than the govt and media does with their disablist propaganda. Anon y mouse – The solutions to your problems are simple a) landlords need to face a cap on how much rents they can charge. b) the minimum wage needs to be increased to the amount recommended by the EU which is at least 60% of the average wage. Their is no need for cuts – the green party for one has outlined how they can manage the deficit and the economy without cuts by things like closing tax loopholes, dealing with tax evasion and avoidance would help a lot, the robin hood tax etc. Us at the bottom of the pile like the sick and disabled, those on minimum wage and those who are unemployed need to be on the same side – we are all being ****ed by this govt and until we all see this and are on the same side – the govt will quite happily use divide and rule tactics to keep us saying – why have they got a big house when I havnt etc. etc.

NB – People are dying and have died due to the policies being used by this and the previous government concerning the sick and disabled!

Re shared housing for the 25 to 35 year olds – this has a completely differnt impact on the sick and disabled than the healthy non-disabled. Who would like to live in a house with somebody with a mental health problem, or someone who was screaming in pain at various points or cleaning up someone sick for them, or someone with all sorts of health conditions that would impact on other people in the shared house and god help people with hidden disabilities who would be getting moaned at all the time for not doing their share of the house work etc. due to the other people not understanding the impact of their health condition. The disruption, stress and logisitcs of moving house for the sick and disabled is also a nightmare and thats if they can find someone to rent to them on benefits! I think the average single room rate is about £45 per week – a tall order to find in itself!!

I love your blogs Sue – always informative, well researched and very readable – keep up the fab work you do xxxx

DavidG – Socialism doesn’t work – That’s why practically the whole world has got rid of it – certainly every country given a choice.

I have worked with the disabled and elderly in a care home – I’m fully aware of the plight of people that are disabled – I really don’t need a lecture thank you. I disagree with your opinion, that is all.

And you’re back on the am-dram again – no one has set out to demean anyone – you’re being too touchy and why don’t you want to stop fraud if it is occurring?

And when did I deny the truth? I do not believe that your silly remarks such as stating that newspaper stories are the same as government policy – you have no evidence whatsoever to prove that. Blame the media please not the government.

Your problem is Labour lost the election and the activists don’t like it. Instead of trying to act like Tony Blair and bringing people into the big tent you seem to be rewriting history.

Finally you should publicly withdraw your “Ethnic Cleansing” remark.

Government cuts, which is all they are, compared to the implications of genocide, is really offensive to any decent person of whatever political persuasion…

It is almost getting to the point where some of the able-bodied resent disabled and sick people so much, they would be happy to have us all shot (to save them money) or simply put somewhere where the able-bodied don’t have to be reminded that there are people weaker than them who need support.

Why is it that in 2010, the sick and disabled face more cuts than anyone in society? Why have several sick and disabled people already committed suicide due to the cuts and there not been an outcry? Why are terminally ill people, with 6 months left to live, being found “fit for work” by the DWP and ATOS?

I just don’t get why so many people who have the ability to do what they want, when they want, are happy for those who cannot to suffer? What has happened to our society where most people are prepared to stomp on the weakest all so they can have a few extra pennies a weak?

Where will it stop? Will some people not be happy until NO money is spent on the sick and disabled? Money that most of us paid NI towards at one point or another?

Barbs – I disagree on the cuts.

I do agree on the greedy landlords and their offensive rents and if the policy you advocate was adopted those rackmans would grumble and put up with it.

Remember we are giving the equivalent of a new primary school every 20 minutes in interest alone to city slickers and spivs and that is wrong.

Why do you believe it is right to continue to reward the money markets with our taxes?

scandalousbill (Sorry fella I missed your post!) – I’m not saying this government is not out of touch but as a Labour supporter I’m surprised the plight of the poor and less well off in society are being ignored to pay our taxes to the greedy landlords.

I know it sounds Socialist (Urgghhhh) but I would cap rents where the taxpayer has to pick up the tab. And the landlords would just get on with it.

As for Sue Marsh she shouyld stand by her articles and answer questions when she is asked them directly. Let me try it on you scandalousbill.

Do you think it’s fair that minimum wage workers should allow greedy landlords to take all their taxes to provide housing for others that they themselves cannot ever even hope to afford?

Fair or not scandalousbill…

@Anon E:

I do not think it is fair. However, we should not be asking the residents in these homes, especially sick/disabled people, to have to pay the price. These landlords should, somehow, be forced to reduce their rents or have caps placed. There should be greater protection for disabled/sick residents, especially when these homes have been converted for their needs.

Those on minimum wage should also fight for better wages. But I also do not understand why they resent sick/disabled people more than they resent those who are charging the extraordinarily high rents. Why accept cuts to sick and disabled people before cuts that hit the landlords themselves? When I was last well enough to work, I for one moment did not resent people who lived in homes more expensive than I could afford and especially not disabled people as I was fully able at the time and could do what I want when I wanted. I can muster up a lot of anger for landlords, but not for average people who happen to have a nicer home than I do paid through my taxes.

But then again, one learns what is truly important when one gets ill.

If I had my way, those landlords who refuse to drop rents for sick/disabled people and then force them to leave should have their property confiscated by the state with no compensation. It is not sick and disabled people who are the parasites, it is those who make a profit off our already-weakened backs.

If they’re going to play tough with the already weakest in society, they must expect a battle. Many of us have nothing much to lose, and when society attacks those with little to lose, we know what often happens. I’m sure the image of the police attacking disabled people who have been made homeless through no fault of their own will be a nice little PR problem for call-me-Dave.

Douglas – I most certainly do not resent anyone in life – able bodied or otherwise.

Despite the possible Socialist tag, I do agree that where landlords are paid from benefits they should have their rates capped. What I cannot understand is why other people do not see it that way and have to agree with Robert I’m afraid about Sue Marsh’s agenda.

Thanks’s for agreeing it’s not fair. Sue Marsh seems unable to see anything that gets in the way of getting a Labour government back in power which is a disastrous idea with the clowns in the shadow cabinet at the moment.

Scandalousbill’s a decent fella and I know I can count on his honesty in my question as well…

I disagree with your assessment of Sue. She is definitely more interested in fighting for the sick/disabled than seeing a Labour government back in power. She has been probably THE most tireless campaigner for the weakest in society for YEARS. Sue has, on her blog, gone out of her way many MANY times to condemn Labour who started the attacks on sick and disabled people, yes, even when they were in power. Especially the odious, anti-human Purnell.

I definitely feel, myself, that Sue is on my side and not trying to further a purely Labour agenda. Most disabled people I know cannot bring themselves to even think of voting Labour again until they thoroughly change their ways, myself included.

let’s get one thing straight here, it is the government, not the working man who set the levels of hb. so the working man has no say over how much of his taxes goes to pay hb. the railing should be at the government saying to the landlords, hey, here’s a nice little earner, state sponsered too. i do not think the sick and disabled should be scapegoated for something they cannot change. policy can change, disabilities for the most part cannot. and i’m not talking about a broken leg here either.

@Mouse: “Socialism doesn’t work”

How cleverly you avoid answering the question of whether you are willing to pay to support disabled people. You say that you are fully aware of our ‘plight’, and yet you continuously work to deride and undermine the people here who actually are disabled, accusing them of amateur dramatics, outright falsehood, trying to imply we support fraud. It seems you think we should be seen and not heard.

” I do not believe that your silly remarks such as stating that newspaper stories are the same as government policy”

So if IDS launches an attack on disabled people in the DWP press release, having been warned barely three weeks ago by Scope that these press releases are resulting in increased attacks on disabled people, and three different Tory rags produce near identical stories demonising disabled people for daring to claim DLA with something as trivial as a ‘bad back’, complete with quotes from anonymous ‘sources close to the reforms’ which set out to deliberately mislead the public, then how exactly does he bear no responsibility for the result? Remember, he has been warned of the consequences, he has issued the attack nonetheless, and members of his team have engaged in off-the-record briefings. Which part of the ethics of personal responsibility are you having difficulty with?

“Your problem is Labour lost the election”

Then why is my blog from a couple of weeks ago entitled “Disabled People: Still Labour’s Whipping Boy” ( http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/05/disabled-people-still-labours-whipping.html ) Why have I criticised the latest speeches from Stephen Timms (available on this site) and Ed Balls (see Labour on Facebook) for failing to address the needs of disabled people? Why have I similarly criticised not just David Cameron, but Nick Clegg? My problem is not with individual parties, but with the policies of all parties towards disabled people.

You’re very quick to try and deride other people and wrap yourself in the bloody flag of ‘honesty’, but I’m curious as to why it is that you continuously work so hard to deny that disabled people are facing horrific cuts and a deterioration in the behaviour of the public towards them.

It is one thing for a left-wing blog to offer a platform to causes that we must assume it feels to be well-meaning from time to time. But I might not be the only reader who is struggling to see any benefit to anyone from the brain-dead poverty of objectivity that is now prevalent.

The OP published an article that can be encapsulated thus:

SHRIEKING HEADLINE: “Shocking Impact”! “Heartless Cuts”!
THE ACTUAL TRUTH: young, single, disabled people can continue to rely on tax-payers to provide housing for them if they need it, and to a standard similar to that commonly enjoyed by their able-bodied, self-sufficient peers.

LFF would do better to humour fewer of these single interest groups whose combined presence, rather than collectively volunteering any kind of left-leaning political alternative to the Govt, serves only to send the following messages:

1. We demand immunity to spending cuts
2. We fundamentally oppose all cuts
3. We are devoid of objective thought (our cause trumps all others and we just do not care about the nation’s economic problems)
4. Nothing that serves our self-interest can be unfair on anyone else in any circumstance
5. We are content for other people’s children to pay the price for our irresponsibility

13 Eastie – But that’s not what the article is about? It’s about the other cuts sick and disabled people face. The article I refer to at the beginning is not written by me, it is written and researched by Crisis. It claims that 7,000 out of 11,000 will not be protected from eviction. They conclude that this will lead to homelssness. I do not.

I conclude that cuts of 9.2 billion from a 16 billion budget will almost certainly lead to more homelessness though I clearly state that I couldn’t possibly guess how much. I point out that far from the 11,000 people mentioned by crisis, the other cuts will affect round 3.5 million.

My article is not about housing benefit, it is about cuts to vital support for the sick and disabled.

Oh, and I don’t write the headlines – we’ve had this criticism before, lol

well i for one am been forced out of the home i inherited due to my disability, debts, and cuts in services. I dont know where to go or to live. I have crippling problems with my spine, hands and feet, I cant even buy normanl shoes as my feet swell so much i have to buy shoes in the post from a disability shoe place, they cost a fortune i havent got to spend, but its this or walk around on crutches in the rain in slippers.
i dont have family support or friends living near by who help me, nor neighbours who help me, im alone except for one close friend who is learning disabled who goes shopping with me. Ive been attacked in the street when having vertigo attacks, people think im drunk when im not, and ive had my enefits taken from me and left to survive on a very small inheritance that has to pay for everything, thats adaptations, prescriptions, physio, taxi fare to hospital as i live miles from it and no bus service direct, taxi fare home from the emergency doctors at night if im taken ill, as they refuse to come out to me so i have to go 14 miles to them..add aids and adaptations, help with utting light bulbs in etc, i have to pay a handyman to do these things as i loose my balance when i climb steps, and someone to cut my garden hedges back off the footpath..its not fun, Im not allowed to drive and i will eventually go deaf with my condition and probably end up in a wheel chair as my immune system is attacking my body. No way would i be able to sharea house with anyone not close to me, due to been up all night in pain, needing to sleep with the radio on to drwon out the noises in my head, changing sheets daily when i get night sweats, and having incontinance aids all over the place…

@59, 60

Sue – I’m happy to let you blame someone else for the hysterical headline under which your piece was presented. Presumably, if you think LFF is unable to present your case faithfully you will be seeking another outlet in future?

Nonetheless, I think you need to have another read of your article, Sue.

The first few paragraphs are dominated by a bogus housing issue. You are determined to have readers believe that:

“11,000 young disabled people were at risk of losing their homes due to the coalition’s housing benefit cap”

“the effect it will have on their lives and almost certainly, their homes.”

“I have no idea how many of those 3.5 million will lose their homes, but the maths seems fairly clear. ”

‘So, if I were you, I’d get used to seeing sick or disabled people on the streets.”

These are your words – they are not citations and they are not evidenced. You fail to explain how anyone at all will actually lose his home.

Moreover, you will be well aware that much of the proposed cost-saving is to be achieved by systematic case-review i.e. getting rid of bogus claimants (including many whose so-called “disability” is nothing more than a predictable and reversible consequence of irresponsible drinking / drug abuse / over-eating).

Such cases undermine the cause of those genuinely disabled through no fault of their own (and in whom you will have to take my word that I have a keen personal interest). They grew in number under Labour and it would be to your credit to acknowledge this and to recognise that there is an issue that, irrespective of any need for austerity, and out-with any political ideology, needs to be remedied.

Anon,

You ask:

“Do you think it’s fair that minimum wage workers should allow greedy landlords to take all their taxes to provide housing for others that they themselves cannot ever even hope to afford?”

No, not at all.

Nor do I think that it is fair that young locals from Somerset, Dorset, etc, be priced out of their local housing market because some toff city traders want a summer home. But that is not the point at hand.

What I asked you was to back up your assertions that disabled groups outlined in the Scope document fell into your notion of rents at rates you could only dream of being subsidized by the government and also to provide some reasonable argument and evidence to back up your assertion that the draconian welfare policies of the Tory coalition will not result in disabled persons facing eviction.

BTW 13 eastie:

You say:

“THE ACTUAL TRUTH: young, single, disabled people can continue to rely on tax-payers to provide housing for them if they need it, and to a standard similar to that commonly enjoyed by their able-bodied, self-sufficient peers.”

With regard to this point, you might recall that Sue in the OP cited the Scope report that notes
:
“The £9 billion of cuts will affect every aspect of the day-to-day support disabled people rely on to live – including housing, living costs and social care support. Examples of this are, by 2015:
• 170,830 families where both parents care for a disabled child will lose £520 million
• 516,450 disabled adults whose partner is a full time carer will lose £1.258 billion
• 98,170 single disabled people will lose £127 million
• 114,066 disabled people moved from incapacity benefit (and ESA) to Job Seekers allowance will lose £994 million
http://www.scope.org.uk/news/disabled-people-hit-by-welfare-cuts

Given your statement cited above, could you provide some evidence or references to support your contention as opposed to the right wing drivel in your post. Or do you maintain that Scope was merely referring to seniors?

Sue I’m too tired and unwell to add anything useful here. I would go into details about how being declared fit for work, the breakdown and waiting 10 months for tribunal and 8 weeks for reinstatement and now waiting for the next medical forms to fill in and the next test where I get lied about unless anything has changed and how stressed the thought of it being the same assessor again and it being worse than if it were the man who raped me, who at least wasn’t being paid for out of tax payers money to degrade me. Oh the taxpayers money wasted on bad assessments and tribunals, the extra money cost to the nhs. The horrific human price of further debility due to the process of begging for a pittance. Being turned down for help through the cuts, which the man from social services told me would have been there if they had assessed me when they were supposed to 4 years ago…I may be well enough to pay tax now had I been properly supported years ago. The support has been too hard to access for many years, they are making it more difficult. You see people who are genuine are the ones not well enough to jump through the hoops, the minority who are pulling a fast one have the mental capacity to know what to say and how to say it. If you are genuine and doing your best to get better so you can work, rest and play on a regular basis then you are declared fit for work even when you can’t bathe as much as you would like or sleep upstairs in a clean bed due to your health….sorry I am emotional, this is affecting me and many more and Sue knowing you are fighting for all of us when it costs you so dear in energy is inspiring and you know many of us appreciate it.

To Anon E Mouse

You claim over and over again that you are a minimum wage tax payer. What job exactly is it that you do that ennables you to post on here ALL DAY and other days when you keep attacking Sue??? Does your boss know how much time you spend on here? Or perhaps this is your job.

I am disabled. I can assure you that what Sue says is very real. The disabled are constantly attacked in the media and it is always as a result of regular press releases from the DWP with deliberately innacurate information. Both the Mail and Telegraph have recently had to print retractions and been admonished by the Press Complaints Commission. Regurgitating press releases without checking the facts is not journalism it is propaganda – aimed at people like you – who swallow every word of it.

This has nothing to do with wanting to elect a Labour government. The disabled will never forget that it was they who first started the legislation for the Work Capability Assessment, now in full flow. I have never voted Labour in my life. I now many disabled people who have always been Conservative voters but they swear never again. We have a dilemma , shared by the country as a whole, in that people have been disenfranchised. There is no party fit to vote for. If you think performing fake medicals on truly sick and disabled people is a good way to save money, then just be prepared that tomorrow or next year, it could be your turn. Being a tax payer does not exempt you from sudden illness or accident that will change your life forever, just as it did mine. That is something that most people in favour of all these cuts to the disabled never like to think of. Sickness and disability like earthquakes, is always something that happens to someone else.

No one is defending the few cases where people are getting huge sums in housing benefit to live in large houses. But this number is extremely small and over exaggerated in the press for effect. The “mansion” case was in fact a large family of asylum seekers and the local authority had a duty to house them under the law. No one with common sense sees that as a fair way to deal with the over immigration to this country. But what you must realise is that the vast majority of the Housing Benefit bill is actually made up from people in low paid work, such as you claim to be, who need help to make up their rent.

Why do you not campaign for more social housing to be built?Capitalism is supply and demand. Rents will fall when the supply is adequate. The doubling or even tripling in some areas of house prices in just over 12 years is the real cause of the high cost of housing benefit. Every Tom, Dick and Harry was encouraged to become a Buy to Let landlord – artificially inflating the housing market again – in the hope of a rent to pay the mortgage while reaping in the reward of thousands in property price increases. Rents become proportionate to the value of the house price.Greed as always is at the centre of everything.

Of course nothing will be done to increase the supply because this would lead to a fall in house prices which those who have them want to see increase still further. It is insanity. The young can no longer get on the housing ladder. Penalising the disabled will not help this situation one bit.

Do you not find it odd that with nearly a million 16-24 year olds without employment, the government is only investing £60 million in apprenticeships. yet the cost of assessing the disabled as fit for work is £500 million per year to a foreign owned computer company? Plus all the cost of tribunals to correct their decisions, where 40-70% of appeals are succesful. Then there is the contracts with the mostly private work provider companies who will be paid £14,000 for every disabled person they place in a job. All this to get a million disabled into “work” they cannot do and are becoming even sicker under the sheer terror of knowing their means to live is being taken away. If a million healthy young people cannot find employment, why do you think billions are being spent trying to force the disabled into work? It is simply government policy to start the privatisation of the welfare state. As a low paid worker, you should be worried. The next step is to make everyone take out private income protection insurance – companies like UNUM are already in place to do so. national Insurance will no longer cover you should misfortune befall you, no matter how many contributions you have paid. If you paid attention you would know that in the last 2 years many workers like yourself have become ill and then found they were refused any help and signed as fit for work even if terminally ill or awaiting operations.

You really do need to wake up to the fact that the government is using you to pit the working poor and middle classes against the sick and disabled and each other. No one is attacking the bankers anymore are they? Or blaming the world recession which began in the subprime mortgate market of the USA. No, like you, attention has neatly been diverted into attacking the sick and vulnerable. Shame you have fallen for it. You don’t honestly think your taxes are going to go down do you?

How about you blog on a site calling for corporate tax evaders to pay their tax, instead of just the minions who do the actual work for them, like you? That would solve the national debt and plenty to spare. You are attacking the wrong people, just like you have been brainwashed to.

@62 Bill

It was the OP who decided to obsess over a spurious “homelessness” issue regarding young, disabled, adults (my military record would confirm that I used to be one of them, though I’d be the first to concede I’ve been fortunate to have been able to move on without issues). I’m not sure why it would offend people so much that I point this out.

I dealt specifically with this gross misrepresentation. I did not suggest that the cuts would be without ill effects.

With regards cuts to the other benefits that it is obvious will be to the detriment of those who receive them, the simple fact is that virtually no-one in the country is better off after Brown’s maleficence as never-elected Prime Minister. Unless you have a vaccine with which to inoculate every single interest whiner against Labour’s maladroit carnage, the economic reality is that they will, like the rest of us who have had tax increases and seen real incomes diminish, tighten their belts.

I say this with the proviso that (and especially since this will be done on medical advice) migration of those able to work, from a category that encourages them not to to one which compels them to attempt to do so, is a good thing for all genuinely disabled people.

2.Anon E Mouse what a horrible way to think. It is not those that are sick and disabled who caused the greed and incompetence of the bankers. Yet if this useless government wanted to cut Housing Benefit bills it would not target those who need to claim.

It would make the limit of what is paid binding on the landlords so they cannot set rents above the means of the average amounts. No person should be forced to lose their home for the sake of ideology. For that is what this is really about. Forget the billions and billions swindled from the British people by rich tax dodgers. No instead focus on those who already live hand to mouth who struggle to get by. Demonise them and treat the like dirt just so Cameron and Osborne can deflect from their rich tax dodging chums.

£9.2 billion is what those with the least are going to lose. Yet Vodafone alone was left of in paying £6 billion in unpaid tax by George Osborne. So no it’s not those who are sick and disabled who should pay the price but the criminals who have money but think they are too important to pay any tax.

Well done Sue another brilliant piece sadly ruined by small minded people who are not interested in what you have to say but just want to have an arguement to satisfy their small minds. How can anyone not see how the governments cuts are affecting everyone? Except the richest people in the country who have made record profits on their millions!! My next door neighbour is a lovely disabled lady who has had her council property modified and adapted for her needs. She has been left in tears since the letter from the council arrived telling her the increase in rent and the stopping of her daily carer who helps her manage to live on her own. She was a nurse for 46 years and paid her taxes for what? The local meals on wheels service has had to close and the day centre she looked forward to attending twice a week has shut due to council cuts. The prognosis of her situation is bleak. She has been happy living in her home for 36 years and with the meals on wheels and her carer she has been able to manage to keep living in her property. She is now having to face the prospect of selling her possessions and moving into a council run home. The cost of this compared with the carer and meals on wheels is completely outrageous. How can the government not see that they may be making savings one way but in the long run the costs will escalate the other way. In addition, surely she has paid enough taxes to secure her the right to live the end of her days in the way she wanted, in the home she has lived in for so long.

I feel extremely disgusted at the way this country is treating the old, infirm, disabled, students and any other category that is feeling the attack by the government and the people who feel they have more right to services than others. The media propaganda has worked brilliantly for the government by turning people againgst each other and as the above negative posts have shown there is a lot of people who are not prepared to listen to the real truth about how the cuts are affecting everyday people. I totally agree with Douglas above who says would they be happy if we all were shot? Who would they pick on then? probably each other!!

Please dont get disheartened Sue by such ignorant people who are not prepared to take the time to read up on facts and fiqures but read the daily mail and believe the government induced lies. You are a voice for hundreds of pople that live in this country without a voice and I look forward to reading your next report with interest.

scandalousbill – Despite Sue Marsh’s attempt to work the statistics to allow her hand wringing, wailing and negative ‘opinion’ to be taken as fact (and in my assessment to try to differentiate between people with disabilities and those able bodied instead of being inclusive) tell me how many people you think will be “thrown on the street” by actions of this coalition government.

Give me a number scandalousbill – we both know this is nothing more than this author trying to forward her Labour agenda. Again. As for the research what do you expect from a report from Demos?

As for the young person in Dorset priced out by the rich would those toffs include Harriet Harman, Polly Toynbee, Luciana Berger, David Garrard or Gulam Noon?

DavidG – You asked me about socialism and got your answer.

At no point have I passed any comment on the disabled – just the fact this author is using disability as a means of promoting her Labour Party views and then refusing to answer any question put before her and finally doing the ignoring trick – “I disagree with you so I’m refusing to respond”. Throw in a bit of smearing and the suggestion that I have something against the disabled, which is far from the truth and Sue Marsh seems to have all the qualifications to be a Labour MP in a Brown style government. A government she voted for.

You yourself DavidG are trying to say that you and I are different and I just don’t see that. Some people are able bodied and some less so. You live with your victim mentality if you wish but do not accuse me of something I haven’t said – it is dishonest.

Regarding your offensive “Ethnic Cleansing” remark try this: http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/africa-atrocities-pictures/15969

That’s why I find your comment truly disgusting to compare some government cuts to those poor human beings. Shame on you sir.

You have a weird sense of right and wrong DavidG. But I bet you ignore the point anyway. Again…

Anon,

You say:

“Give me a number scandalousbill – we both know this is nothing more than this author trying to forward her Labour agenda. Again. As for the research what do you expect from a report from Demos?”

Do you read the Ops before commenting?

Sue cites the estimate given by Crisis that has predicted 11,000 disabled persons face homelessness.
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pressreleases.php/448/11000-disabled-people-face-losing-their-homes

Crisis cite Government statistic, among other sources, as the basis for their calculations and projection:

“These figures come from an Equality Impact Assessment of the measure published by the Department for Work and Pensions this month: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/eia-hb-shared-accommodation-age-threshold.pdf “

Do I feel that the impacts Crisis describe will occur once the legislation takes effect? Absolutely. In fact I fear these figures may well be conservative. I think that the unit cost basis indicated by Grayling in the exchange between him and Timms on Welfare Reform, that I previously referenced, implies that greater the disability of the individual the more that person will suffer. For me, this is a most pathetic way to obtain “savings”.

BTW, 13 eastie, this is far from your notion of belt tightening. Reduction of care to the most vulnerable differs strongly from going out to dinner less often for “savings”; it translates directly into the enforced suffering of those less able. I am not sure if your comments on this topic reflect your demonstrated insensitivity or simply an underlying bigotry.

scandalousbill – I don’t believe it. Never believed there would be a double dip recession either – it’s just negative Labour supporting scaremongering. Nothing more.

The clue is in the headline “could lose their homes”. ‘Could’ is the operative word here. Not ‘will’. No one is going to lose their home. Forget “Jennifer’s Ear”, the Tories won’t do it.

To forward her agenda, Sue Marsh is citing these reports as gospel and they simply cannot be taken as such.

No one can make the statement that Crisis did that: “Applying this lower rate to single people under 35 will mean average losses of £41 per week for those affected, with the vast majority losing their homes”.

To make that statement as definitively as that person does, ignoring the “Well they would say that wouldn’t they”, is tantamount to idiocy. How can Crisis possibly know the outcomes of 11000 individual people?

They can’t. It can only be an opinion, not a fact. And I reiterate the stance I have taken throughout regarding Sue Marsh and her sycophantic love of the Labour Party and her wish to forward her agenda of getting that throughly discredited party back into power. Because that’s what she’d like.

That’s all this is and I concur with Robert I’m afraid…

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://bit.ly/k784xj

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://bit.ly/k784xj

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://bit.ly/k784xj

@72 Bill

However inconvenient it might be to admit, living in a shared home is not the same as being homeless.

And it is quite disingenuous to suggest that ALL those receiving benefits will be affected similarly by ALL changes in the way that you and Sue have attempted to do.

You know full well that, as with changes to other benefits, much of the “cutting” is to be achieved by getting people off benefits who should not be receiving them in the first place i.e. targeting the LEAST vulnerable.

P.S. I hope you don’t think that calling people names adds any kind of weight to your other comments…

13 eastie,

You say:

2You know full well that, as with changes to other benefits, much of the “cutting” is to be achieved by getting people off benefits who should not be receiving them in the first place i.e. targeting the LEAST vulnerable.”

And you sir, know perfectly well by even the most cursory glance at the numbers involved that your above statement complete and total falsehood. A deliberate politically motivated fabrication,

Hypothetically Bill are you in favour of cuts being applied to the benefits of the least vunerable or do you oppose all cuts. If it is the former could we not all unite to focus attention on the clear missuses of benefit money – give the government a clear run on that for the sake of the country and perhaps they would have more time left over to establish more safety nets for the very hardest off.

Many thanks to Sue for her article and tireless campaigning on behalf of the disabled. Many thanks too to DavidG, Barbs, Douglas and Jenna for their informed responses. I’m astounded and by some of the drivel that’s been posted on here. I can reiterate what has been said, only far more eloquently by those names mentioned above. If Mouse wants to attack anybody, s/he should be attacking the bankers who are now back to paying themselves obscene bonuses. S/he should be attacking the tax evaders and avoiders which dwarfes benefit fraud. S/he should be attacking the MPs who fiddle their expenses. Benefit fraud is about as low as it gets, you will never get a system that is 100% free of fraud. There are also millions UNCLAIMED in benefits every year.
The fact that the old chestnut about people ‘living in mansions’ on benefits suggests to me that the readers have indeed been swallowing chunks of the Daily Hate Mail or its ilk. Most of the press are Tory-owned, with the exception of The Guardian, The Observer and The Independent. If you want to know the facts, instead of propaganda, then I suggest you read these.
As for likening of this situation to Nazi Germany. It was, in fact, the disabled who were the first group to be targeted by the Nazis. It began with the propaganda. This makes it easier for governments to justify their attacks ie if they have the Daily Mail reading public on their side. Above the gates of Auschwitz was the sign Arbeit Macht Frei.
As for talk about being a taxpayer on the minimum wage. Many people on the minimum wage won’t even come into the tax bracket. Does that make them any less of a taxpayer? So it is with people on Incapacity Benefit. They are taxpayers too which the government and the Tory Hate Press conveniently forget. Oh and before you accuse me (I can only speak for myself) about wanting a return to New Labour. For those of us old enough to remember, New Labour were more right-wing that Ted Heath’s government on the 1970s. They have bought into the whole market and global economy. Successive governments now are different shades of the same blue and are slaves to the market and monetarist economics. Each according to his ability each according to his needs comes from the true Socialists who have absolutely nothing to do with Labour. However, old Labour were much nearer the idea of social justice than anybody we have seen post-Thatcher

Kate – I have attacked all those things you mention and will continue to do so. When Gordon Brown claimed £12500 in cash and no receipt to pay to his brother for cleaning a flat he had never lived in I was livid, Really was.

Any paper like the Guardian that criticises bankers for their offshore accounts and tax avoidance whilst doing exactly the same themselves on a greater scale I have no time for. It’s called hypocrisy.

When am organisation pays for the Wikileaks information whilst condemning phone hacking and employing the dreadful Polly Toynbee can’t really be taken seriously.

I voted Labour my whole life until Brown and I never mentioned any Nazi’s you did. That’s just your smearing and spin against people who don’t share your twisted views on the world.

Sue Marsh is a Labour tribalist, who according to Robert is putting her desire to get Labour re-elected before the needs of people with disabilities. She does the people she claims to represent a disservice but in terms of her own self promotion she seems to be doing alright.

Finally before you praised DavidG who compared government cuts to Ethnic Cleansing did you actually click the link: http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/africa-atrocities-pictures/15969 and see that wretched human being?

Because if you believe that the two are the same Kate then shame on you as well…

Excellent article as usual Sue. Well done.

Here is some more evidence of the effects of the ConDem Government’s ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing aimed at the lower social orders, and those who are too sick, ill and disabled to work – from the picket and protest outside the Atos interrogation bloc in Glasgow, which was holding a recruitment evening -

“We got a clearer idea of the future some of us face as we chatted to some homeless people waiting for the Salvation Army food van who had also had their disability benefits cut despite having serious physical and mental health problems.”

Report of the Atos Recruitment Evening Picket Glasgow
Disabled People Against Cuts
07 June 2011

“Sue Marsh is a Labour Tribalist”

I still have absolutely no idea how that affects the argument I make in the article. I’m a cricket fan too and quite obsessive about Elvis Presley. I adore shellfish and Shakespeare.

As I made the same arguments abut the sick and disabled under a Labour government, perhaps anyone with an aversion to the bard might like to start a little discussion here too?

“Sue Marsh is a Labour Tribalist”

I still have absolutely no idea how that affects the argument I make in the article. I’m a cricket fan too and quite obsessive about Elvis Presley. I adore shellfish and Shakespeare.

As I made the same arguments abut the sick and disabled under a Labour government, perhaps anyone with an aversion to the bard might like to start a little discussion here too?

Never let Anon E Mouse say I’m not generous. I saw this and thought he might be interested.

http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.com/2011/06/minimum-wage-workers-who-rent-privately.html

Sue Marsh – You missed off the end of the very line I used: “Sue Marsh is a Labour tribalist, who according to Robert is putting her desire to get Labour re-elected before the needs of people with disabilities”

So I am not alone in my assessment of your position Sue Marsh and I’m sure there are many others who feel the same as I do but are afraid of voicing an opinion here for fear of smearing in a Labour Party style.

Your articles are coloured by your tribalism, it’s as if your hatred of any political party other than Labour prevents you from being able to differentiate between what is right and wrong.

Then when I look at the thousands of innocent people killed overseas in Labour’s desperate need to support George Bush with their warmongering bloodlust (which I supported I’m ashamed to say) I realise just how bad Labour actually were and when their activists, like yourself start rewriting history it just isn’t credible.

You have an attractive writing style – you are articulate and show an intelligent approach to the content of your articles and then the whole thing is spoiled by your obvious support for the Labour Party and whatever idiot you allow to write your headlines. Labour needs critical friends and not sycophantic supporters.

To comment that Chris Grayling said: To summarise, his answer was “I don’t care, we can no longer afford it…”

When in fact it was qualified in his statement: “We have had to take difficult, challenging and ongoing decisions about how we bring down the level of spending to one that we can afford, and this is one of them.”

At no point can I remember any member of ANY government saying they “didn’t care” about the plight of anyone.

What you stated Grayling said is not true and even if it that is your opinion you should have made that clear by qualifying it with “In my opinion he has … blah blah”. What you said in “summary” was nothing more than your opinion.

That’s the problem with Labour tribalism – it’s just dishonest and you should be trying to bring people onside not alienate them with dishonesty.

(Regarding Elvis try and listen to Brian Setzer and the BSO version of Mystery Train from “Live in Japan” (surely the kings finest hour). It’s probably on youtube somewhere or

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Brian-Setzer-Orchestra-Live-Japan/dp/B00008Y4JG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1307519461&sr=8-1

You’ll love it I guarantee…..

You’re just digging yourself a bigger hole Mr Mouse when it’s clear from almost every other comment that my politics in no way colours this issue.

You sound silly and aggressive when I’ve done nothing but try to engage with you. In fact it does your whole argument a disservice, because people will read this thread and just think you unreasonable and unwilling to engage with the actual points. It also gives lots of other people a chance to answer you and put intelligent, factual comments in reply, widening the debate and meaning that much more info is shared here. So I suppose should say thank you for that.

Sue Marsh – I don’t see anything agressive in my stance at all – you’re being too precious.

Remember on this very page DavidG compared government cost cutting to Ethnic Cleansing and so far I haven’t seen you condemn it once: http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/featured/africa-atrocities-pictures/15969

Also, despite your link, you won’t tell me if you think it’s fair a minimum wage worker like myself is forced to pay to keep others in a luxury unaffordable to me.

All you are doing is the normal Labour “outrage” over small niggling points and ignoring the real issues in your personal hatred of another political party you don’t support.

Your issue is “coloured” where you make something up, such as a comment a person didn’t say in your case and then condemn them for the thing YOU made up.

To be clear. You lied about what he said, which is why your response is about me personally and not the comments YOU made up.

But do listen to Brian Setzer and the BSO Live in Japan. I’m right about that as well…..

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/Ts6p8w0 #ConDemNation

It’s not just the forcible ethnic cleansing of poor, defenceless British people, who are facing arbitrary cuts in their housing benefits because the posh want to take over their property and home, whom mousey supports. Here is mousey, in comment 6 on the following thread on this blog, showing their support for violent and racist Israeli ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians on the West Bank -

6 “Great article – spot on and about time.

The sooner the BBC stop calling the West Bank Palestine the better…”
Comment by Anon E Mouse on February 3, 2011 at 1:29 pm
http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/02/antisemitism-in-the-uk/

It will be interesting to see how much force and violence the British authorities use in carrying out the Etonian Tory policy of ethnically cleansing poor people from homes and property the powerful and rich find desirable.

As for supporting George Bush, mousey’s new pals in the Tory Party all voted for war with Iraq in the British Parliament back in 2003, except 15 – whereas 139 Labour Party MPs rebelled and 20 abstained. Maybe mosey can save some of their foam-flecked vitriol for their new buddies at Tory Central Office who were even more enthusiastic supporters of Bush than the New Labour Party was at the time.

Keep up the great work Sue.

You’re not going far enough, Sue. Bring back rent boards, and accommodation standards. If they want to raise rent, they need to improve the property!

Slash the housing benefit budget by reducing rents to what properties are worth paying for. Shared flats, like the one I live in, which are draughty and have single glazing, should be cheap, period.

Also, Sue, on the issue of shared housing – while I agree in concept with people up to 35 getting the single-room rate (I strongly /prefer/ to share, for several reasons I won’t get into), there could easily be exceptions to this where medically appropriate, for recipients of disabled benefits. It’s not always appropriate, of course, and in some cases they might do better sharing with others.

joe kane – The Labour government, that you know I supported until Brown was forced on the country, lied in the commons. And the enquiry being demanded about the death of David Kelly, smeared by the Labour government will show that. We all know joe kane.

To blame the Tories for voting on facts that were actually Labour government lies is typical of the dishonest lickspittle actions of tribal supporters like you.

If you can honestly say you looked at that poor human being in my link and can compare that with government cuts then your value system is way off.

You have also claimed that I somehow support ethnic cleansing because I called the West Bank what it is – the West Bank but that is your clear antisemitism joe kane and says more about you than the comment.

I am frankly horrified that you can show so little humanity and empathy towards an innocent human being in that link and that you seeming agree that it is OK to lie in the commons which results in the deaths of thousands of innocent people overseas.

That is a shameful position to advocate joe kane. What kind of upbringing can lead a human being to believe what you have posted? At least Sue Marsh and co don’t have the gall to suggest that picture was the same as government cuts as you seem to have.

Next you’ll be saying it’s OK to murder disabled babies (as long as they are black and live in Africa) to save the state money joe kane and may I suggest that if your shocking position is indicative of other Labour activists then the party is in a bad bad way.

To go through it’s proud history since 1900 and to end up with someone advocating your disgraceful position would make any real Labour supporter recoil in horror. Shocking.

joe kane – Since you deliberately misrepresented my point and after checking some of your previous blog posts I realise that you do indeed appear to be antisemitic and actually show some sympathy to the Nazi’s who murdered people on an industrial scale. You said:

>snip

“it wasn’t that long ago the Jews not only refused to inter-marry, but were even so hostile to the western society all around them and its western values, that they wanted to take it over in order to destroy it.

And any poor Nazi who dared point out these Jewish crimes, was called an antisemite.

Comment by joe kane — 29 April, 2010 @ 12:06 am”

>snip

Seems to me that your views are indeed as disgusting as I have described above. No wonder the sight of that unfortunate human being meant nothing to you. Even more shocking…

blah blah blah mousey.

Everybody knew Blair was lying. Nobody supported the Blairites except the Tories without whose crucial support there would have been no Iraq war. You believed his lies at the time which puts you in a fanatical minority along with Blair’s allies in the Tory Party.

You support the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Mousey, why don’t you use images of ethnic cleansing caused by British Government foreign policy and the British empire?

Your using images of dead human is revolting. It proves nothing except how revolting you Tories are and the tactics you’ll stoop to in order to degrade and prevent decent, honest, civilised public debate which is critical of the Tories.

Whatever they quotes are they aren’t mine, but nice try zionist racist ethnic-cleanser mousey.

Keep up the great work of mousey. I couldn’t agree with you more. You Tories are so intellectually and morally bankrupt you do have to resort to degrading public discourse and public discussion by any and all means possible.

joe kane – I have never supported the ethnic cleansing of anybody and really think we need to move on from the old British Empire and dated terms like “zionism”. Grow up.

As readers can see you have compared genocide with government cuts and have shown you are antisemitic. You have condemned the views and opinions of members of a religion as “crimes” – basically thought crimes and you have actually excused “poor Nazi’s” as you call them for the holocaust.

If we didn’t know you were a socialist I wouldn’t be surprised to see you voting BNP, along with others that hold your inhumane, racist and fascist views.

You are sick in the head joe kane and the Labour Party really doesn’t need support from people like you. It’s time to move on now…

I do so love mousey’s attempts to deny reality.

Ethnic cleansing isn’t genocide mousey. Try again.

I don’t accuse Judaism and Jewish people of the crimes of the Israeli state. Only zionists like you claim the crimes of Israel are the responsibility of Judaism and Jewish people everywhere. To blame innocent Jewish people of crimes they have never committed and have never been involved in in any way, and don’t support, is typical antisemitism.

I am not a Nazi and have never expressed the opinions which you claim I have. Those aren’t my own words. They are your lies and your invented defamations – which is the only method you know of how to deal with the intellectual and moral arguments of others. Throw mud and hope some of it sticks.

Mousey supports the violent racist ethnic cleansing of Palestine and Palestinians by the war crimes racist zionist state of Apartheid Israel.

Like his fellow Tories, Mousey supported the Blair British Government when it committed the supreme crime of “unprovoked aggression” against Iraq. Without a UN mandate, the Tories voted in the clear knowledge they were committing the “supreme crime” of international aggression. Nazis were hanged by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal for committing this exact same crime.

As you are a keen autobiographer mousey, which is mostly what your comments are comprised of, as they seem to be some sort of talking psycho-therapy of you telling everyone what you hate most about yourself, I don’t vote for or support the Labour Party. This thread is actually meant to be an intellectual discussion and debate about government housing benefit cuts and their effects on disabled people, and is not about me and my support for whichever political party.

Keep on foaming Daily hate Mail Mousey. Your are a typical tory. Always in a constant, perpetual state of outrage and personalised indignation about everything really. Intellectual, abstract, neutral, sociable interaction with others is completely beyond you.

The more vile filth and lies you pore out in public forums, the more people see how morally and intellectually bankrupt you Tories are.

Keep up the great work mousey. We can’t do it without you. You are a great example of a typical Tory for us all to point to –
- and Sue Marsh and the way she carries herself in public debate, despite the appalling abuse she receives on unmoderated blogs like this, is a great example to us all and convincing that her arguments are indeed correct and unanswerable.

joe kane – You need help…

Comment 91 by mousey -
“It’s time to move on now…”
- Even that is a lie.
On an unmoderated blog mousey is simply unable to show any self-discipline.

Coment 93 by mousey -
“joe kane – You need help…”
- The childish playground tauntings of a morally and intellectually bankrupt tory supporter of a democratically bankrupt party that stole the British general election through lies and fraud.

joe kane – you REALLY need help…

“You are actually proposing that people on minimum wage like myself should pay”

So now you’re on minimum wage, are you Mickey Mouse? Wherever you go, you make up a life style and occupation (or not, which is actually your case – and yes, you might hide on here, but your guard slipped elsewhere long long ago) to suit your line of argument. You are nothing but a sad, attention-seeking fantasist.

“and is essentially involved in self promotion” Mickey Mouse, summmed up in his very own words.

Richard – If I was a “sad, attention-seeking fantasist” as you put it, involved in self promotion I’d hardly be using this site as a vehicle to achieve that aim would I?

Furthermore I take a salary which is at the minimum wage so I am effectively a minimum wage worker.

What you don’t like Richard is that people like me can see the truth about the chances Labour have under the useless Ed Miliband and it colours your opinion. Every week at PMQ’s you must look at the mauling Ed Miliband regularly gets and wince. And just as I predicted what would happen if Brown stayed as leader the same will happen with Miliband.

I’d wager that you actually voted for the hopeless Gordon Brown and thanks to you Richard, people like myself will not vote Labour again until they admit where they went wrong.

The fact is Tony Blair never lost an election and Gordon Brown never won one. Instead of being insulting in blogs why don’t you try to offer something positive about Labour and stop supporting their lies and spin – it does not do the party any favours when people like you keep defending the un-defendable and rewriting history.

This post was supposed to be about Sue Marsh and her comments on Chris Grayling. I read her link and she misquoted him then condemned his comments which he had never made. If you think that will endear people to the party you are sadly mistaken and the sooner they start being honest and ditch the hapless leader the better.

This country deserves a credible opposition party and with Ed Miliband it hasn’t got one and you know I’m right Richard and that’s your problem…

mousey’s phlegm-spattered, white-eyed bulging, weeks long tory hate-fest against Sue Marsh personally, amounts to the fact she didn’t accurately quote Grayling but sort of paraphrased him, as her blog article can be interepreted as.

The tory rodent is endless entertainment.

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/T7fdZVC

Good heavens. How this completely encapsulates the daily battle in which the disabled have to engage. Sue Marsh begins with the facts and is immediately beset with vitriolic nonsense. Anyone can find themselves sick or disabled and challenged in their daily lives in ways they would not have imagined. The sign of a civilised society is the manner in which we treat and speak of our sick and disabled – and of course the converse is likewise true.

I am both disabled myself and have personal experience of being a carer.I have also stood as a Parliamentary candidate. There are two obvious steps which would remedy the situation here:
1.) Increased supply of social housing, which is more affordable for those on low incomes, whether in or out of work, able bodied or living with disabilities.
2.) Restore the Fair Rent Tribunal, abolished under the Thatcher government, which has allowed slum landlords to profit at the expense of the taxpayer, as housing benefit is claimed by those in work as well as unable to work if their wages are low.

The abolition of the Fair Rent Tribunal and the introduction of the 1988 Housing Act were followed by a burdgeoning of Buy to Let investing, in which landlords expected tenants to pay their morrtage + costs + profit, meaning that private renting woudl alost always cost more than buying your own home.

I do not see wht the state should support privater investors building up a property portfolio.

However measures to corect this should not unfairly and unequally penalise vulneraable tenants such as those with disabilities. People do not choose to be disabled; it is not a ‘lifestyle’.

[...] achieve savings as pressures will only be shifted to the NHS or social care provision.They will increase homelessness, mental illness and poverty amongst this most vulnerable group of allThey will leave many in [...]

The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/QmSUnq2

RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled http://t.co/rtPTRPBv