Russell Brand, Ed Miliband & Critical Thinking

From an e-mail from Trevor Hoyle

RUSSELL Brand urges voters to vote Labour.  This is what Brand said:

“One thing I agree very sincerely with Ed on is that politics doesn’t rain down on us, it comes from below… movements putting pressure on governments. We don’t know what the limitations of a Labour Administration are going to be but we have just heard the leader of the Labour Party saying that he welcomes and wants pressure from below… what I heard Ed Miliband say is ‘If we speak, he will listen’…. what’s important is this bloke will be in parliament and I think this bloke will listen to us.”

 

However, when it comes to Ed Miliband and the Labour Party, Brand throws any critical thinking out the window. With this in mind it is worth recalling Miliband’s actions on some issues that are of concern to millions of people across Britain, issues that campaigners have been pressing the Labour Party – trying to apply “pressure from below” in Miliband’s parlance – to act the right, humane way on.

 

• --- In January 2015 Miliband voted for the Government’s Charter for Budget Responsibility, which included plans to slash public spending by a further £30 billion.
• --- In November 2014 The Guardian reported “The Labour front bench has accepted over £600,000 of research help from the multinational accountancy company PricewaterhouseCoopers to help form policy on tax, business and welfare… The support to shadow ministers including Ed Balls, Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt comes after the Guardian revealed PwC’s role in establishing potentially favourable tax structures for hundreds of companies around the world – including many British businesses – in Luxembourg.”
• --- In March 2014 Miliband supported a national cap on benefit spending which limited each household to a maximum of £26,000 in benefits, a policy Save the Children said would push 345,000 children into poverty in four years.
• --- In March 2013 Miliband abstained from a parliamentary vote on a bill that would prevent 250,000 “exploited” jobseekers from receiving £130m in rebates.
• --- Miliband backed the 13-year war in Afghanistan, the disastrous 2011 intervention in Libya and the on-going bombing of ISIS in Iraq.
• --- Miliband supports the retention of Trident nuclear weapons, which the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament estimates will cost around £100 billion over its 40 year lifetime.

On these issues Miliband did not welcome, listen to or act on pressure from below. Rather he ignored the voices of protest and concern.

As Brand has been influenced by Noam Chomsky, let’s leave the American dissident thinker with the final word. Speaking about Obama in 2009 Chomsky reiterated Galeano’s truism, explaining“It is wise to attend to deeds, not rhetoric” because “deeds commonly tell a different story.”

This entry was posted in Protest/activism, UK Domestic Politics and tagged Ed Miliband, Eduardo Galeono, election, Green Party, Labour Party, Noam Chomsky, Russell Brand on May 6, 2015.

'Constitutional Coup' Claim by People's Assembly

Dear Friend, The Tories and their supporters in the press are preparing a post election plan to stay in office even if Labour and the SNP have more seats in Parliament. They are planning to declare that they are the legitimate government and have the right to form an administration. This was the meaning of the recent Times editorial which urged Cameron to 'Occupy Downing Street'. This will be a 'constitutional coup' against the wishes of the electorate. That's why we are calling for an immediate protest if this happens: Assemble: Saturday 9 May 1pm, Downing Street. We cannot allow the Tories to get away with using a flagrant abuse of power to impose the most severe austerity this country has seen since the Second World War. We will use this facebook event page to keep you updated about any changes to the time of the demonstration depending on the outcome of the election. Watch this space and, please, invite your friends and share the facebook event page. More info: Seumas Milne in the Guardian: "The Tories are plotting a coup in the name of legitimacy" Owen Jones in New Statesman: "if the Tories get more seats than Labour, get ready for a Very British Coup" Whatever happens, the People's Assembly 'End Austerity Now' national demonstration on Saturday 20 June is more important than ever. Please keep spreading the word and lets make sure the new government feels the full force of the anti-austerity majority in Britain out on the streets in just six weeks time. Tell the new government: End Austerity Now National demonstration, Saturday 20 June Assemble: 12pm, Bank of England Invite your friends The People's Assembly Against Austerity http://www.thepeoplesassembly.org.uk/

The People's Assembly Against Austerity · United Kingdom

'Love in the Garden' at the Cervantes

Théâtre Sans Frontières presenta el espectáculo 'Lorca: Amor en el Jardín', una producción original de 'El amor de Don Perlimplín con Belisa en su Jardín' de Federico García Lorca. Théâtre Sans Frontières presents the performance 'Lorca: Amor en el Jardín (Love In The Garden)', an original production of 'El amor de Don Perlimplín con Belisa en su Jardín' by Federico García Lorca. 11/05/2015 & 12/05/2015Lunes/Martes - Monday/Tuesday, 7:30 pmZ-arts (M15 5ZA, Hulme, Manchester) £14/£12/£7 Tickets: 0161 2261 912 / Z-arts  Una exquisita velada de espectáculo, poesía y música Imagine un jardín en Andalucía, impregnado en fragancia, engaño y deseo... Con una evocadora música en directo, personajes inmortales y la poesía de Lorca, déjese seducir por esta surrealista historia de engaño y obsesión. La obra se desarrollará en español por un reparto internacional y estará subtitulada al inglés. (+)  A luscious evening of performance, poetry and music Dream of a garden in Andalucía, drenched in fragrance, deceit and desire... With evocative live music, larger-than-life characters and Lorca's poetry, you'll be seduced by this surreal tale of deceit, disguise and obsession. Performed in Spanish by an international cast with English subtitles.

Internal Report Showed Up Ukip Danger

AN internal report written by Alison Spencer-Scragg, the Regional Political Officer for Unite the Union in the North West of England last October, argued that in last year's by-election in Heywood and Middleton  '(Ukip) managed to poll over 11,000 votes with very little activity on the ground.'  Ms. Spencer-Scragg wrote that:  'Apart from initial leafleting and flying visits from Nigel Farage, actual campaigning on behalf of UKIP activists was minimal.'


This finding suggests that the threat to the Labour Party from John Bickley, the UKIP candidate in Heywood and Middleton, may be significant tomorrow.  Some Labour supporters have even privately admitted to me that they wished that Mr. Bickley was standing for the Labour Party. 


After their close result in the by-election last year Alison Spencer-Scragg wrote:
'The 36-point increase in UKIP support is itself one of the biggest surges ever recorded in a by-election.  Only in six previous contests in Great Britain has a party enjoyed a larger increase in vote share than UKIP managed in Heywood and Middleton.'


It will be interesting to see how Mr. Bickley  and UKIP performs tomorrow in Heywood and Middleton, and whether he can close the gap on the current Labour MP for the constituency, Liz McInnes.  Ms. McInnes is a member of the Unite union.
 

Brother of Karen Danczuk has his bail extended

LAST week Michael Burke, who earlier this year was accused of historic sex abuse by his sister Karen Danczuk the wife of the Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, has had his bail extended until the 4^th, June 2015.  As yet, Mr.Burke has not been charge with any offence!  Yesterday, a  spokesperson for the Greater Manchester Police told Northern Voices that Mr.Burke had been bailed pending further investigations. 

Boycott Workfare Action Weeks. Keep volunteering, VOLUNTARY!

We are publishing below recent briefings from 'Boycott Workfare':

"Saturday 2nd May, 12noon – 1.30pm, Salvation Army International HQ by Millennium Bridge, London

Praised by the government for “holding the line” on workfare, the Salvation Army is one of the few national charities still to use compulsory unpaid work placements.

Being involved in workfare means being responsible for sanctions – benefit stoppages which leave people with nothing to live on. Sanctions are driving food poverty in the UK. So it’s a mystery how Salvation Army – which also runs foodbanks – can justify its involvement in the sanctions regime.

On Saturday 2nd May, come and shame Salvation Army into joining the tens of charities to pull out of workfare. Take part in a visual action outside their international headquarters by millennium bridge near St Paul’s between 12 noon and 1.30pm.

Bring a placard or poster with a sanctions story, fact or example. Show just what a grotesque system the Salvation Army is supporting!

Please help spread the word and invite people to the Facebook event!

This week’s the Week of Action vs Sanctions and Workfare with daily online actions. If you haven’t had a chance to do so yet, please take a minute to:

• Lobby Greenwich and Bexley Community Hospice shops to withdraw from workfare
• Sanction B&M Stores who we’ve been told are replacing paid workers with workfare
• Ask the British Psychological Society to challenge psychological coercion in the benefits regime
• Tweet the leaders of the main political parties to challenge their unanimous support for workfare

Today we’re supporting the Keep Volunteering Voluntary campaign’s call for people to contact the charities and voluntary organisations you support to invite them to pledge to shun workfare too. Read on for more info, and follow Keep Volunteering Voluntary on twitter and facebook.

There are a lot of organisations who have said they won’t take workfare, but still a lot who do. We want all voluntary work to be freely chosen, not a means for private companies to make profits or Jobcentres to force people off benefits. Keep Volunteering Voluntary (KVV) have set up a pledge and already over 450 organisations have signed!

You can help to encourage organisations to sign up to Keep Volunteering Voluntary in several ways. Firstly check whether they are already on the list of sign-ups.

• If you use or support a charity, try to find out whether they use workfare, and in any case ask them to sign up to KVV.
• If there is a local charity shop, go in and talk to the people there: find out whether there is anyone there on workfare, and ask the organisation to sign up to KVV.
• If you work or volunteer at a voluntary organisation, try to get them to sign up.
• If a place you work or volunteer at has any links with a voluntary organisation, try to contact them too.

Download or order leaflets from Keep Volunteering Voluntary to take into charity shops, or adapt this template letter as an email to send to a voluntary organisation.

Some responses you may get and some tips on how to reply:

“We’ve already signed up.” – great, well done!
“We don’t have anyone on workfare.” – so you won’t mind signing up to KVV then.
“We’re helping the unemployed gain experience.” – that’s not of much value if they don’t want to be there.
“What’s wrong with (unpaid) volunteers.” – there’s no objection to genuine volunteers, but to compulsory schemes and coercion.
“The people on placement want to be here.” – that’s fine, but they shouldn’t be threatened with sanctions.

If you can get any kind of statement from an organisation, that’s always useful – a way in to further dialogue, or good publicity for the campaign. Let Boycott Workfare know and we’ll pass it on to KVV as well.

Some charities – such as Age UK – have a national office but each local area branch is ‘independent’ and may sign up separately. So if you see a local branch signed up but not your area, that’s an added incentive for your local to sign up too.

Without charities’ support, workfare schemes will collapse. That’s why every extra new organisation to sign up is so important – helping build consensus in the voluntary sector that workfare is completely at odds with its aims and values.

Perhaps you’d like to take the opportunity to contact some persistent workfare-using charities with your concerns too?

• See if there are any charities local to you on our list of workfare exploiters
• Ask hospices how they can reconcile caring for the community with sanctions. Contact North London Hospice shops or other charity hospice shops too
• Contact Groundwork UK – which hosts hundreds of placements and a DWP sub-contractor for the schemes
• Contact YMCA – which releases reports condemning sanctions, but then helps sanction people on Mandatory Work Activity

And don’t forget to check out the list of actions taking place across the UK today and tomorrow as part of the Week of Action vs Workfare and Sanctions.

Election Special: How the Political Parties stand on 'workfare' a.k.a. State Sponsored Slavery!

We are publishing below a recent briefing from Boycott Workfare:

"It is a disgrace that the three main political parties (and UKIP) support workfare and sanctions.  This consensus has allowed the introduction of policies that are causing ill health, hunger, homelessness and deaths.  All three parties have some responsibility for this and they all have questions to answer.

So today we’re asking you to take action online and help us break the election silence on workfare and sanctions.  It is unlikely that these issues will even get a mention during tonight’s Election Leaders Special edition of Question Time.

Help us to make sure these issues do get talked about, and tweet up a storm about workfare and sanctions using the #bbcqt hashtag.  And tweet your unanswered questions to @Ed_Miliband @nick_clegg and @David_Cameron…

Here’s the low-down on the political parties that support workfare and sanctions:

Vote Labour: Get Workfare

Shamefully it was the last Labour government who introduced workfare with the Welfare Reform Act of 2009.  Under Labour’s Flexible New Deal thousands of hours of unpaid work was handed out to businesses like Primark and claimants were forced to work without pay in hospitals and local councils.  The last Labour government also introduced the hated Work Capability Assessment and extended benefit sanctions to include disabled people and lone parents.  Over the last five years there has been a complete absence of any opposition from Labour to any of the workfare and sanctions policies introduced by the coalition.  Labour’s support for the retrospective Workfare Bill was particularly disgraceful.

Labour’s manifesto promises to introduce a Compulsory Jobs Guarantee for young people and the long-term unemployed. Previous statements indicate that the compulsory jobs would be paid at 25 hours of minimum wage and involve an additional 10 hours unpaid “training” each week. Those unable or unwilling to accept the compulsory jobs will be sanctioned “in line with the existing sanctions regime”.  Labour have also pledged to withdraw unemployment benefits completely from young people and replace them with a Youth Allowance paid at the same rate.  This allowance would be means tested and conditional on young people being in “training”.

Vote Liberal Democrats: Get Workfare

The Liberal Democrats have supported every workfare and sanctions policy introduced by the Conservatives over the last five years (including the retrospective Workfare Bill) and must share responsibility for the ill health, hunger, homelessness and deaths caused by coalition policies.  Nick Clegg’s Youth Contract created thousands of unpaid workfare placements resulting in millions of hours of unpaid work. In their manifesto the Lib Dems say they will expand the availability of unpaid work placements into new sectors.

Vote Conservative: Get Workfare

The last five years of Conservative-led government have seen a proliferation of workfare schemes and a huge increase in the number of benefit sanctions.  Claimants can now be forced to work for 6 months without pay.  Benefits can now be stopped for up to 3 years.  Predictably these policies are having disastrous consequences.  With the introduction of Universal Credit the Conservatives are seeking to extend workfare and sanctions to low paid part-time and self-employed workers.

Their manifesto promises more of the same, with an unspecified £12 billion of cuts to the welfare budget.  There are pledges to send Jobcentre advisors into schools to provide routes into unpaid work; tougher “Day One Work Requirements” for young claimants; the ending of housing benefit for young people; and sanctions for claimants who refuse “recommended treatment”. Like Labour, they say they will replace JSA for young people with a Youth Allowance.  This would be limited to 6 months – after which young people will be forced onto apprenticeships, unpaid traineeships or community work.

And finally…

Vote UKIP: Get Workfare

At the last election UKIP’s policy document on social security was entitled “From Welfare to Workfare”.  This was an incredibly offensive tract which cited the Daily Mail as evidence and described claimants as “a parasitic underclass of scroungers”. Tellingly, one of the workfare proposals suggested was that claimants should be forced to work without pay to build prisons (presumably for themselves).  This time around it seems that UKIP have decided that workfare is no longer a vote winner and have disappeared the policy from their manifesto.  It should be noted though that workfare was endorsed at their last conference and is still listed on their website as one of the reasons to vote for UKIP."

Wakefield Socialist History Group

COMRADES,

Manningham Mills dominated Bradford's skyline in the late 19th century.  It employed 5000 low paid non-unionised works. Many were women. In 1890 an 8% dividend had been issued to shareholders.  But on 9 December 1890 Samuel Lister, the millionaire owner, posted a notice outlining reductions in pay of between 15 and 33% for weavers, pickers, spoolers and winders.  Some 1,1000 workers in all would be hit (Dominguez 2013).

Company director Jose Reixach justified the move, saying that the workers concerned had been being paid "unnaturally high" wages. There was outrage on the factor floor. Though few were in a union at this stage they called in officials from the Weavers' Textile Workers' Association.  By the end of March 1891 some 5000 were out on strike.

The strikers faced hostility from Liberal and Tory councillors, from the courts, the press and the police.  But they also rallied massive public support -one mass protest meeting on 19 April attracted up to 90,000 people.

 

The dispute lasted four months in all.  And although the strikers were finally starved into submission it changed politics forever.  The strike leaders saw the need for the workers' to have their own political party.

 

The Bradford Labour Union was formed, followed by the Bradford ILP.  And then in January 1893 120 delegates met in Bradford to set up the ILP (Independent Labour Party) as a national party.

 

Alan Stewart

Convenor, Wakefield Socialist History Group

07931927451

 

p.s. the next meeting of the Wakefield Socialist History Group is on Saturday 9 May 2015, 1-4pm at the Red Shed, Vicarage Street, Wakefield WF1.  The topic is THE STORY OF THE ILP -AND LESSONS FOR TODAY.  The speakers are Iain Dalton (Socialist Party) and Barry Winter (Independent Labour Publications).  The chair is Kitty Rees. Admission is free and there will be a free light buffet.

Asbestos in Schools from Joe Bailey

AiS and JUAC Key Recommendations for Asbestos in Schools  #IWMD15 

1. There is a major problem of asbestos in schools. 86% of schools in the country contain asbestos, it is now all old and there is extensive evidence that in some schools it is regularly disturbed so that children and school staff are exposed. The inevitable result is that people are dying. 

2. 291 school teachers have died of mesothelioma since 1980, with 158 dying in the last ten years. School cleaners, cooks, caretakers, teaching assistants and school secretaries are also dying. But they are the tip of the iceberg as for every teacher there are twenty to thirty children who are more vulnerable to exposure to asbestos than adults, the younger the child the greater the risk. It is estimated that each year between 200 to 300 people will die from their asbestos exposure as a child at school. The estimate was made based on exposures in the 1960s and 1970s, but all the asbestos is now old and many schools have not been well maintained – so the exposures continue. 

3. The following are key recommendations of the Asbestos in Schools Group and the Joint Union Asbestos Committee:

* The increased vulnerability of children to asbestos must underlie all future asbestos policies for schools. 

* A risk benefit analysis should be carried out, and made public, that assesses how many staff and pupils are likely to have died and will die from their asbestos exposure at school. It should assess how much it costs to manage asbestos in the nation’s schools and how much a long term strategy of asbestos removal would cost.  As part of that the Government should assess the extent of the asbestos problem in schools.

* Asbestos can be one of the most expensive items in maintaining, refurbishing or demolishing a school. But the Government is unaware of the scale of the asbestos problem in schools and they specifically, and inexplicably, excluded asbestos from the £20 million audit of the condition of school buildings. Because of this any future financial forecasts will be meaningless. AiS has always recommended that there should be an audit of the extent, type and condition of asbestos in the nation’s schools so that long term policy can be set, financial forecasts made and those schools with the most dangerous asbestos can be identified and priority given for the removal of asbestos.  

* Asbestos insulation board that is accessible to children in schools should never be classed as ‘low’ risk. It should at the very least be enclosed, but AiS recommend that it should be removed.  

* Asbestos training should be mandatory for school governors, headteachers, teachers and all support staff with the training tailored to their role. 

* As the majority of schools will have to manage their asbestos long into the future a system must be reintroduced that ensures they are maintaining effective and safe standards of asbestos management. AiS recommends that proactive inspections of the standards of asbestos management in all schools should be reintroduced. They should carried out by HSE. 

* There has always been a lack of openness over asbestos in schools. It is not acceptable that a few should know the facts and for those facts to be kept from others. AiS has always recommended that a policy of openness is adopted so that people are told the truth.

* So long as asbestos remains in schools it is inevitable that it will be disturbed and damaged so that children and staff are exposed. AiS recommends that the government adopts a long term strategy for the removal of all asbestos from schools, with priority being given to those schools that contain the most dangerous asbestos. Only then will the problem of asbestos in schools be finally eradicated.
AiS and JUAC Statement for International Workers Memorial Day  28 April   #IWMD15
Asbestos in Schools, AiS : www.asbestosexposureschools.co.uk  Joint Union Asbestos Committee, JUAC: www.juac.org.uk/

Wee Ginger Dug & the SNP!

The hope of the wow

from Trevor Hoyle

Apr27 by weegingerdug

Who needs the Vow when we’ve got wow? We’ve not only got wow, we’ve got utter gorgeousness. Eat yer heart out George Galloway. A couple of opinion polls were published on Monday, one a proper actual opinion poll of voters in Scotland with a representative sample and everything. The other was possibly somewhat less scientific, being an online poll of horny Edinburgh gay guys looking for a shag on Grindr.
This is of course tautological, as being on Grindr means that you are by definition a horny gay guy looking for a shag. And these days it’s also getting tautological to state that opinion polls of Scottish voting intentions show that Labour has been totally screwed, nailed to the wall, whammed, bammed and no thank you jam. The poll discovered that 62% of horny gay guys in Edinburgh plan to vote SNP. Proof, as if any proof was needed, that voting SNP means you get sexy, and that the SNP has got the gay vote pretty much in a glamorous clutch bag.
Grindr, for those of you of a shy and retiring heterosexual disposition, is an app for gay men who are looking for a random shag. It doesn’t tend to be used by men who are looking to settle down and get a labrador together. Most guys who use Grindr claim to have unfeasibly large wullies, because profiles on Grindr are about as accurate as Labour party manifesto promises and likewise invariably end in disappointment.
The guy who carried out the poll did a similar poll just before the independence referendum, and got a result which was pretty much spot on in terms of the actual vote. Which only goes to show that horny gay guys are more representative of the population at large than UKIP would care to admit.
The proper poll, carried out for TNS, showed that the SNP currently has the support of 54% of Scotland’s voters. On these figures, and given a uniform national swing, Labour will be left with just one seat in Scotland. Which would mean that Wee Wullie Bain would be Secretary of State for Scotland in a Miliband government because he’d be the only Labour MP left.
Unfortunately for Wee Wullie, the only certain thing about a universal national swing is that it’s entirely mythical. Swings are never uniform, and the swing to the SNP looks like it’s much stronger in the Glasgow area, where some figures suggest the SNP could hoover up 60% of the vote. So Wee Wullie would be out on his ear too. I recently spent some time with Anne McLaughlin, the SNP candidate in Glasgow East, interviewing her for an article for Newsnet Scotland – and it’s fair to say that Wee Wullie doesn’t look like he’s got very many fans on Grindr. This is despite the fact that Labour really does have an unfeasibly large dick in the shape of Jim Murphy.
Jim is now bereft of ideas. He’s tried to bombard us with promises of jam. Whatever happened to the Vow Plus? Gordie gets trotted out with alarming regularity to vow things that get quietly forgotten about a few days later when they’ve been slapped down by the Labour leadership in London. Over the weekend the promise to give a wee bit of jam – quite literally – to food banks in Scotland evaporated like spilt milk in the sunshine, leaving nothing behind but a stain and a bad smell. And the promise to abolish “exploitative” zero hours contracts collapsed in the contradiction of a Labour council which employs 2000 workers on zero hours contracts. So they’re not exploitative when Labour uses them. Labour is the party of do as I say not do as I do. They are out of ideas, out of inspiration, out of hope. Labour is the no-trick pony. They’re just pony.
But it doesn’t matter any more when no one trusts a word you say, and that’s Jim’s real problem, and because of that fact he’s staring an extinction level event in the face. There’s an asteroid on a collision course with the Labour party in Scotland, and the only defence Jim has got left is a tattered umbrella saying SNP bad. The dinosaur complains about the shortcomings of mammals as the fireball lights up the sky.
Jim was at it again today, standing beside Ed Balls and repeating SNP bad to a small audience of Labour activists and press representatives. And this is another example of tautology because Labour never has any other kind of audience these days. If Jim Murphy or Gordie Broon ever did give a speech to an audience of ordinary non-party affiliated Scottish people that really would be news. But that’s as likely to happen as a horny gay guy on Grindr being honest about the size of his wullie.
A part of me weeps that it has come to this. Labour is the junkie child, a product of Scottish communities. But Labour is a part of the family who has gone bad. The only recourse remaining is to kick the badjin out and let it fend for itself without sooking off expenses accounts, because otherwise it just keeps hurting us, it keeps sticking in the knife and turning it. And Labour does that because it takes us for granted like it always has done. Even now, on the edge of extinction it can’t believe that it won’t be forgiven and all its sins forgotten. It’s not like we’ve not given it fair warning. It’s not like we’ve not given it chances, but Labour keeps nicking the cash from our purses and the faith from our hearts. It’s beyond redemption.
Last year the independence referendum showed voters in Scotland that we can still hope of things getting better. We can still hope that our voices will be heard and our opinions count. That is what this election is about for Scotland, hope. We’ve learned how to hope and we’re not going to squander it on Labour’s Grindr profile. Hope is what is driving the opinion polls, but Project Fear is determined to put us back in our shortbread tin. Jim had pinned all his hopes on a late swing, and there is a late swing, it’s just not in the direction Jim was hoping for.
This time it isn’t going to work – there is an army of us spreading the message that hope still lives. We need to keep up the pressure, but we’re in for a rocky ride over the next few days. Let’s keep working, let’s keep hope alive. We’ve got the hope of the wow.


https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/the-hope-of-the-wow/
>

Labour's workfare shame: How Labour abandoned support for the poorest over illegal sanctions!

Jonathan Reynolds MP

In February 2013, the Court of Appeal quashed ‘The Jobseeker’s Allowance (Employment, Skills and Enterprise) Scheme’. The three Judges, Lord Justice Pill, Lady Justice Black and Sir Stanley Burton, ruled that the 2011 Regulations were ultra vires of section 17A of the Jobseeker’s Act 1995 because they failed to prescribe a description of the various schemes launched in August 2011 or the circumstances in which, a person can be required to participate in those schemes or the period during which, participants are required to undertake work on those schemes.

The case centred on whether the Secretary of State was able to create programmes and schemes at a whim rather than issuing Parliament with full details of the myriad of schemes in operation. It was declared that the Secretary of State, Ian Duncan Smith, had not given unemployed people sufficient information about their rights to appeal against being made to work up to 780 hours unpaid and the penalties they would face if they refused. The effect of the ruling meant that almost all of the Government’s work-for-your dole employment schemes were unlawful.

The Court of Appeal ruling meant that thousands of unemployed people (approximately 44,000) who had been unlawfully sanctioned (had their benefits stopped) for not participating in these schemes, were entitled to a refund of their benefits of around £130 million. On 30 October 2013, the decision of the Appeal Court was upheld by the Supreme Court.

The Department of Work & Pensions (DWP) stated that they would resist paying out rebates until all legal avenues had been exhausted. However, following the Court of Appeal ruling, the Government introduced emergency legislation -  ‘The Jobseeker’s Allowance (Schemes for Assisting  Persons to Obtain Employment) Regulations 2013’ and the ‘Jobseeker’s (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013’  that was fast tracked through Parliament with the support of most of the opposition.

What both measures sought to do was to validate the 2011 Regulations retrospectively and undo the decision of the Court of Appeal. This did have the effect of retrospectively making unlawful benefit sanctions imposed under the 2011 Regulations lawful in order to deny people rebates.

When these measures were introduced in Parliament in the spring of 2013, some 44 Labour MPs voted against these measures. However, the Labour Party official line was to ‘abstain’ so the Government could get the legislation through.

One of the MPs, who abstained, was Jonathan Reynolds MP, who represents the constituency of Stalybridge and Hyde. In May 2013, he wrote to a constituent to explain why he’d abstained on the Government’s Jobseekers Bill. According to Reynolds, the DWP’s back to work schemes (2011 Regulations), were struck down – not because they were unlawful – but on a technicality, because the DWP had not provided sufficient information to jobseekers about the penalties involved in refusing to participate in their schemes. He added, “The legal judgement was not about the legality or ethics of so-called workfare schemes (which were introduced by the last Labour government). These will always be political, not legal, matters.” He stated that he thought it only reasonable that people should have their benefits stopped if they won’t try to find work. However, he points out that Labour had demanded two crucial concessions: first, that people can appeal against mistakes by the DWP; “We can’t have carte blanche retrospective legislation of sanctions.” Second, there should be an independent review of the sanctions regime.

What Reynolds fails to mention and must have known at the time, is that in supporting this nasty little bill, money illegally taken from jobseekers who had been illegally sanctioned, would not be paid back to them. Labour’s support allowed the Government to backdate changes to the law so they could steal money from the poor.

Even right-wing think tanks like Civitas,were appalled by this shocking move. They asked, is the Government above the law? Moreover, what is the point in taking the Government to court, when they can simply move the goal posts and ignore the ruling, by introducing retrospective legislation that validates it?

Though Labour and Jonathan Reynolds MP, supported the Tory Government, the High Court subsequently found that retrospective legislation designed to render lawful benefits sanctions that were issued under the 2011 Regulations, was ‘incompatible’ with the right to a fair trial. The court called the move ‘draconian’, stating it was not explained or justified and “incompatible with the European Convention on human Rights.” After the ruling, the Government announced that it would appeal to the Supreme Court.

A Blairite and Labour friend of Israel, Jonathan Reynolds was elected to Parliament at the 2010 General Election, following the resignation of his mentor and predecessor, James (work-or-lose-your-dole) Purnell, who turned the seat of Stalybridge & Hyde into a marginal. According to Labour NEC member, Tom Watson MP, Reynolds was not initially put on the NEC’s shortlist, having failed to impress. However, Watson told ‘The Times’, that Reynolds was put on the shortlist of candidates for the vacant seat, following intervention from James Purnell and Peter Mandelson, who wanted him elected.

Psychobabble to be used by Tories to get people back-to-work. Is this mind control?

We are publishing below a recent briefing received from 'Boycott Workfare':

"On top of punishing claimants with sanctions that leave people destitute, the Government now has plans to use psychological treatments to force people into work.

George Osborne’s budget announced measures to ‘improve employment outcomes’ for people with mental health conditions. These include online cognitive behavioural therapy (change the world by changing how you think) for people on ESA or JSA and putting psychologists in JobCentres.
Unemployment is being redefined as a psychological disorder and the main purpose of psychological therapy will be to force people off benefits.  Or to promote yet another specious reason to cut people off benefits.

Meanwhile, the Tory Manifesto states that claimants who ‘refuse a recommended treatment’ may have their benefits reduced. This is an assault on the human rights of people on benefits and an attempt to co-opt medical professionals as state enforcers.

We’re hearing more and more reports of the misuse of psychology to coerce, bully and punish claimants into ‘getting the right mindset’: “all new starts must attend an initial two week course to develop their confidence”.

Change your attitude

The ‘change your attitude’ message of positive psychology is enforced in mandatory ‘employability’ training courses promising to help with ‘self-esteem, self-confidence and motivation’ and in unsolicited ‘positive thinking’ emails.  Making people take part in various pointless and humiliating psycho-group-activities e.g. building paper clip towers to demonstrate team work, or take completely meaningless and unethical psychological tests to determine their ‘strengths’.

The Department for Work and Pensions issues contracts worth hundreds of thousands of pounds (Focus the Mind, Achieve your Potential) designed to ‘address negative perceptions’ and ‘instil a positive attitude to work‘.  A programme for JSA/ESA claimants over 50 aims to persuade people that age discrimination doesn’t exist:

“to challenge perceptions that employers discriminate on the grounds of age”.

Fraud

These fraudulent programmes don’t result in real paid work you can live on. The companies that run them are making millions out of a big con: that with a total personality makeover, anyone can get a job.  That positive thinking can change the low pay, no pay UK economy.

Psychological resistance to work

In another scheme claimants will have interviews to assess whether we have a ‘psychological resistance’ to work, along with attitude profiling to judge whether we are ‘bewildered, despondent or determined’. If they decide you are ‘less mentally fit’ you’ll be sent on ‘more intensive coaching’, while those who are ‘optimistic’ can be placed on less rigorous regimes. This is how they will decide who is to be punished with ‘extra support’ i.e. forced to spend 35 hours a week at a JobCentre.

Sanctions

The growing use of psychology, with practically every JobCentrePlus manager an expert in the topic, is not helping people with mental health problems whose suffering at the hands of this system has been well documented - with more than 100 people a day with mental health problems losing their benefits through sanctions.

The newly privatised Behavioural Insights Team has trained over 20,000 JobCentre staff in ‘behavioural techniques‘ with DWP managers regularly sending out positive psychology tweets to ‘motivate’ staff to meet targets. Targets that result in escalating sanctions.

Positive psychology

Positive psychology messages are so stupid, they are laughable. But being told day in, day out, that it’s our fault we’re unemployed or in such low paid work that we have to claim benefits  can really get to people. The language of workshy scroungers is a deliberate attempt to put people down and undermine support for hard won welfare rights.  Claimants are expected to show a positive attitude to being exploited or be sent on 6 months Community Work Placement for ‘lack of motivation’ or be referred to a psychologist for questioning your job coach.

BPS inquiry

Before Christmas, the president elect of the British Psychological Society  Jamie Hacker Hughes responded to our concerns by promising to hold an inquiry. That was then. Inspite of repeated reminders, there is nothing on the BPS website about the inquiry. No terms of reference. No information about how people who’ve been through various workfare psycho-interventions can submit their testimonies. All we’ve had from BPS on the issue of psychology, workfare and ethics so far is a press release saying that it’s fine to test claimants for ‘psychological resistance to work‘ as long as the person doing the tests is ‘qualified’.

We’re not holding our breath for the BPS inquiry. In the meantime, we welcome your own testimony on how psychology is used to manipulate, blame, punish and coerce people on benefits.

What you can do

Let the British Psychological Society know we won’t stand for compulsory positive psychology and mandatory psychological treatment. We expect them to speak out. You could also ask them what happened to the inquiry into psychology and workfare promised by their President Professor Jamie Hacker Hughes back in November 2014?

Twitter

Facebook

Lobby members of the newly established ‘Mental Health Task Force‘ . This includes Mind, Age UK(well known workfare exploiters) and Rethink

Ask Psychologists against Austerity to keep up the pressure. Tweet them here "