Posts Tagged ‘DPAC’

Vox Political: DPAC Says Disabled Stronger and Safe inside the EU

June 22, 2016

Mike over at Vox Political has also put up a piece from DPAC – Disabled People Against Cuts – arguing very clearly that many of the regulations that have kept disabled people safe from poverty and discrimination, and given them better opportunities than previously, have come from European legislation, particularly in the last 15 years. These gains and the opportunities they represent may be lost. DPAC point out that there are 11 million people living with some form of disability or long term illness in Britain, and that the relationship between this and poverty is very well established. They point out, however, that so far there has been little coverage of the advantages given to disabled people through EU membership in the current debates.

See the article: http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/06/22/disabled-people-stronger-and-safer-inside-the-eu-dpac/

This is another very good point, but one that has been lost in the general screaming about sovereignty and immigration. Don’t be mistaken: the same politicians and newspapers that are hostile to immigration are also very hostile indeed to great rights for disabled people. I can remember the outcry ten years ago when the Labour government started introducing legislation to give disabled people greater rights to work, and force public buildings and institutions to become more physically accessible for disabled people. Newspapers like the Mail and the Spectator started whining about the cost this would place on employers. And remember, Boris Johnson, the Tory politico, who decided a few weeks ago to thrown in his lot with the Leave campaign, was the Speccie’s editor. Conditions are desperate now for many disabled people, thanks to the system of benefit cuts and stupid welfare-to-work regulations also introduced by Bliar and Broon, but enthusiastically retained by Cameron and the rest of his upper class crims. They will be even more desperate if Britain leaves the European Union.

Advertisements

Cameron Raises Costs of Freedom of Information Requests 60X ?

October 4, 2015

I heard last week that the government was intending to raise the fees charged for requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act from £10 to £600. I really don’t know if this is true or not, but if it is, it shows that the government is very worried. In fact, from this it seems that they’re actually terrified witless of people finding out what’s really going on and how their policies are wrecking lives and killing people.

I’ve no doubt that if challenged, the Tories would probably try to justify this exorbitant rise with some flim-flam about it representing the real costs of finding the information, and that searches for it take civil servants away from their real job, which is getting the country back on its feet after decades of Labour misrule… and so on. The lies, excuses and prevarications they use are pretty much the same across the board, regardless of the issue, so you can practically predict what Cameron and his androids are going to say.

And I don’t believe a word of it.

The real reason seems to be that people filing requests for information under the FOIA have seriously embarrassed the government, particularly Mike over at Vox Political and the other disability rights activists and bloggers. People like Johnny Void, Guy Debord’s Cat, DPAC and so many others. They’ve tried turning down these requests as ‘vexatious’, and been overruled. The disability activists have not been cowed into submission, or deterred. And it’s clearly hurt. So much so that the information they released to Mike was not the information he requested. It’s now any attempt to stop information reaching the public at any cost. But obviously it has to be very expensive, and the burden must fall on the person making the request.

To paraphrase the slogan for the ’80s horror movie, The Fly:

They’re afraid.
They’re very afraid.

And have absolute contempt for the principles of open government.

At Last! Vox Political Wins Legal Challenge to Force DWP to Release Death Numbers

May 4, 2015

I’m afraid I’m a bit late covering this, for which I duly apologise. Mike over at Vox Political has finally won his appeal before the Information Commissioner for the DWP to release the stats for the number of people, who have died while claiming Invalidity Benefit and ESA between November 2011 and May 2014.

Mike’s article reporting his victory, Victory for Vox Political: DWP ordered to give details of benefit-related deaths, states that the government now must release the figures within 35 calendar days of April 30th. The statistics must also be broken down into the following categories.

◾Those in the assessment phase,
◾Those who were found fit for work,
◾Those who were placed in the work-related activity group,
◾Those who were placed in the support group, and
◾Those who had an appeal pending.

The Information Commissioner ruled

“It appears … that the DWP has had reasonable time to prepare for publishing [the] information and that disclosure was not so novel or unusual given the previous requests and disclosures made.

“DWP have not supplied any detailed or convincing evidence about the time needed and what preparation would need to be undertaken during this time or what the specific impact of disclosure would be… The DWP has previously published similar information.

The decision notice continued: “It is not reasonable for the DWP, having had enough time to extract the information and prepare internally for publication, to seek further time to provide the information requested.

“The Commissioner also finds that delaying publication is not reasonable in light of the requests DWP have received from the public and the fact that the previous statistics published were around two years old at the time of the request.”

Mike describes what initially moved him to campaign for the release of the information – an interim government report in 2013 Incapacity Benefit (Deaths of Claimants), which contained information on 10,000 + people, who had died. The report claimed that the amount they had been claiming was sufficient to give them sufficient to live on. Mike states he was sceptical, as there was later information suggesting that many had died because of unsympathetic treatment by a government determined to clear as many people off its books as possible, no matter how many casualties this would incur.

He describes the considerable difficulty he had in obtaining the information from the DWP, including their ruling that his request was ‘vexatious’. The DWP can still appeal the decision, but Mike believes that this would be unsuccessful. When he was first turned down by the Information Commissioners, they stated that they were sympathetic to his case. It was that comment that convinced him that a second attempt would be successful.

He is highly suspicious, however, of the delay in releasing this information. He feels it has been done for political reasons, as if the true number of deaths of people on Invalidity Benefit and ESA were made known – and these could be as high as 60,000 – it may deter many people from voting for the Tories and their Lib Dem collaborators. He then questions the validity of an election result if the details of the numbers of people dying while claiming benefits is not known.

The article’s at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/05/01/victory-for-vox-political-dwp-ordered-to-give-details-of-benefit-related-deaths/. Go there for more information.

It is a great victory for Mike, after his long struggle trying to get this information out the DWP and the serial liars Iain Duncan Smith, Esther McVile and the public school bullies and thugs. They have indeed tried nearly every trick in the book to avoid releasing these figures. And it hasn’t just been Mike requesting them – many others have too, and been given the same feeble excuses, or simple flat denials.

And I’ve no doubt that Mike’s right when he says that the release of this information has been deliberately delayed until the very last minute in order to save the government from embarrassment. Others have been given the same treatment and shown the same attitude when making different, but similar requests for government information that should be freely available. Johnny Void and the other anti-workfare campaigners have tried to get the DWP to release details of the firms, that have enrolled on the scheme to use such forced, unfree labour. The DWP have turned down his and the others’ requests for the information flat. Why? Because they actually admit that if they released the information, it might stop people from using the firms involved. They would then be forced to pull out, and the scheme would fail.

Which also shows that the Tories and Lib Dems have absolutely no shame, and freely acknowledge that the scheme is unpopular, and wouldn’t go ahead if people actually knew more about it and the firms backing it.

It also shows the absolute contempt Cameron, Clegg and their oligarchic clique have for public opinion, despite all the mouthing they have done about democracy and expanding choice. They despise the poor and weak, and sneer at any genuine concern for them by the opponents of their exploitation.

In the case of the information on the number of deaths due to their benefit reforms, they have a bit more self-awareness, and realise that adopting the same attitude would just spread contempt and disaffection for them and their policies. So they have simply resorted to excuses such as the information wasn’t ready yet; or it didn’t need to be released right now, because it was already being prepared for publication in due course. Of course, their first, and risible response was simply that it would take too long, and the request was ‘vexatious’. By which they meant it wasn’t genuine, and was just done to cause trouble.

It’s a good excuse, as it does recognise that the request was made in order to question and challenge the welfare reforms and the policy of sanctions that forms a part of them. It also tries to dismiss this, as not being a serious request. There’s no need to take it seriously or release the information. It’s just some troll causing trouble for the fun of it. Now get back to work.

But it is a serious request, no matter how badly Cameron, IDS and their circle have tried to shrug it off. It’s good that Mike’s now got a ruling in his favour, but it is also marred by the fact that this information probably won’t be released in time for the election.

Apart from Mike’s success in finally getting a positive court ruling, I’m also touched and heartened reading and hearing about the many messages of support he’s had from people reading his blog. A huge number of people all across the country have wanted this information to be released, and are glad that someone is campaigning against the policy, even if it’s only in a small way.

You can see just how many people back the critics and protestors against the Coalition’s attempts to degrade, humiliate and destroy the very poorest sections of society reading the comments not just on Mike’s blog, but also over at Tom Pride, Johnny Void, the Angry Yorkshireman, Disabled People Against Cuts and so many others.

In the run-up to the election, the government will trying telling everyone that their policies are wonderful, and have almost unanimous support. They’re even manufacturing letters from business and charity leaders to present this mirage. There has also been comments posted on left-wing blogs supposedly by welfare claimants, saying how wonderful and positive the government’s policies have been and how they’ve worked for them. These have also looked suspiciously like fakes coming from someone at Tory Central Office. Particularly now as Wikipedia has accused Grant Shapps, AKA ‘Michael Green’, fraudster, of editing his Wikipedia entry and those of this political colleagues.

Go and read the comments on Mike’s and the other blogs to see how far this piece of spin very definitely does not correspond to reality. Despite their lies and spin, the Tories know very well how unpopular their policies are with the very people they’ve inflicted it on. Hence the attempts to shut them up by denying them information on just how destructive and pernicious these policies are.

Equal Lives Protest Against Sanctions Tomorrow in Norwich

April 19, 2015

DPAC (Disabled People Against Cuts) have announced on their website that Equal Lives are holding a demonstrations against sanctions tomorrow from 12.30-1.30 pm. at the Kiln House Jobcentre Plus in Pottergate. The notice also includes a contact email for all media inquiries.

This is right over the other side of the country to me. I wish them all the best for their demonstration, and hope they get the point across that sanctions are destroying lives. We have regularly seen the news of yet another poor soul, who has starved to death, or committed suicide due to the deprivation and misery built into Iain Duncan Smith’s wretched welfare reforms. Stilloaks, Tom Pride, Johnny Void, Mike over at Vox Political, myself and many others have posted the lists and biographies of some of those, who have died. The last time I counted it was over 40. It’s gone way beyond that by now. Mike over at Vox Political has estimated that at least 52,000 people are dying per year due to IDS, Cameron, Clegg and their vile chequebook genocide of the poor, the sick and the disabled.

And the Conservatives and their Lib Dem collaborators have even demonstrated their complete lack of shame or self-awareness by using the infamous words above Auschwitz, ‘Arbeit Macht Frei’, ‘Work Makes You Free’, in their self-serving articles justifying workfare and sanctions.

The time is long past that they were gone. Vote them out and make sure they stay out on May 7.

Vox Political on the Day of Action against Maximus

March 2, 2015

Mike over at Vox Political has also published a piece supporting the day of action against the new administrators of the Work Capability Test, Maximus,It’s time to take a stand against the Coalition’s new benefit-reduction enforcer. This gives the location of the protest in Cardiff and Edinburgh. It begins

Today’s the day, people! It’s time to show the government what you think of its new Work Capability Assessment company – Maximus.

Demonstrations against the American insurance provider, which is said to have a long history of denying the existence of medical disability in claimants (in order to avoid paying out on claims), are taking place up and down the United Kingdom.

This writer has been asked to mention the campaign outside the Atos/Maximus assessment centre on St Agnes Road, Heath, Cardiff CF14 4YJ, taking place between 1pm and 4pm. Readers from Cardiff or parts nearby are urged to go along and show the strength of their feelings about this firm.

The main demonstration is in London, at the address in the image at the top of this article.

In Edinburgh, it is at Argyle House, 3 Lady Lawson Street, Edinburgh, EH3 9SJ.

Maximus has been hired by the Coalition Government after ending the contract with Atos due to “significant quality failures”. The contract is worth no less than £595 million over three years – nearly £200 million per year. No doubt public sector employees could have provided the service cheaply and more efficiently but right-wing ministers like the Tories always prefer contracting-out; it means they have someone to blame when things go wrong.

He points out that the company has been involved in a number of costly fraud cases in America, where it was sued by the government for falsifying Medicare claims, and for discrimination against the disabled. He points out that claimants and disability groups and campaigners here are upset that the government has hired this company, as it shows they have reneged on the duty of care the government owes to the disabled. He points out that the disabled and those suffering from long-term illness have also paid their taxes, and so are owed their benefits.

And as Johnny Void has said in the article I’ve just reblogged, Maximus in Australia are no better. They too have been caught falsifying benefits in order to get people sanctioned.

Mike’s article is at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/03/02/its-time-to-take-a-stand-against-the-coalitions-new-benefit-reduction-enforcer/. There’s also a link to DPAC, so you can see if there’s a protest against them in your area you could join.

DPAC Day of Action against Maximus Tomorrow

March 1, 2015

Tomorrow, March 2nd, DPAC – Disabled People Against Cuts – are launching a national campaign of protests across the country against Maximus. The details are on their website in the article Your all-in-one guide to the Maximus National Day of Action 2nd March #ScrapWCA #Maximarse at http://dpac.uk.net/2015/02/your-all-in-one-guide-to-the-maximus-national-day-of-action-2nd-march-scrapwca-maximarse/. The page includes details of the protests in various cities up and down the UK, artwork and videos to share about the protest. the demonstration in Bristol is at

Medical Assessment Centre,
Government Buildings.
Flowers Hill,
Brislington,
Bristol,
BS4 5LA

George Berger on Gordon Waddell and the Origins of the Work Capability Test

February 9, 2015

A few weeks ago I blogged about a piece on Mike’s site, Vox Political, by Mo Stewart describing Unum’s role in formulating the fitness for work test. This is the prize piece of pseudoscience used by the DWP and Atos to deny people welfare benefits on the grounds that, no matter how ill or disabled they are, they are still somehow ‘fit for work’. In the most extreme cases, this has resulted in terminally ill people having their disability benefit removed and blandly informed that they will have to be reassessed. Just in case, you understand, that they get better.

One of the commenters on the piece was George Berger, who kindly informed me of his piece on the DPAC website tracing the origins of the fitness for work test in the bizarre theories of Gordon Waddell. Mr Berger commented:

It seems that the historical source is Waddell’s work on back pain and non-organic signs. That was imaginatively extended to “invisible illnesses.” The back pain work was heavily criticised by medical people in his specialism, yet he seems to have been protected by Aylward and maybe others. I did not know about the purely medical critique when I wrote this.

http://dpac.uk.net/2014/09/gordon-waddells-biopsychosocial-attack-on-disabled-people/

As you can see from the link, it’s entitled Gordon Waddell’s Biophysical Attack on Disabled People.

Gordon Waddell was a highly respected orthopaedic surgeon, who drew on George Engels’ holistic theories of the origin of disease. Engels believed that for patients to be made better, the healer should address all aspects of their condition, including its social and psychological components. Waddell, however, perverted this into the current government policy that sees patients as essentially malingerers. In his papers ‘Nonorganic Physical Signs in Low-Back Pain’ (Spine, volume 5, number 7, 117-125); and ‘A New Clinical Model for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain’ (Spine, volume12 number 7, 632-644), published in 1980 and 1987, Waddell stated that there were symptoms in lower back pain that had no physical cause. He believed these were entirely psychological in origin. These non-organic symptoms in turn produced depression, a feeling that treatment hadn’t worked, and encouraged the patient to adopt a ‘sick role’. Mr Berger quotes from Waddell’s 1998 book, The Back Pain Revolution, ‘that illness behaviour quite often ‘focuses on money and implies malingering,’ and that it ‘may depend more on… psychologic events than on the underlying physical problem’ (1998: 216, 227).’

George Berger states that Waddell’s scientific methodology is simply wrong, and that it was strongly influenced by Skinner’s Behaviourism, which in turn has been categorically demolished by none other than that great American radical, Noam Chomsky, amongst others.

Despite its falsity, it has been seized upon by New Labour and Tory governments determined to cut the welfare bill. Waddell’s ideas on pain and malingering were taken up by Atos at a conference in 2004. Another doctor, Christopher Bass, used his biopsychosocial theories to explain chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, chronic low-back pain, repetitive strain injury and non-cardiac chest pain, as all essentially psychological malingering. Waddell’s ideas were taken up by UnumProvident, the American insurance fraudster, whose head, John LoCascio, attended a conference at Oxford on malingering and illness deception. The corporation then set up the UnumProvident Centre for Psychosocial and Disability Research at Cardiff University. Finally, in 2006 Waddell and A. Kim Burton wrote that ‘Work is generally good for health and well-being’, a line now repeated ad nauseam by the cretins now stuffing the DWP under Esther McVile and Iain ‘Tosser’ Duncan Smith.

There’s far more over in George Berger’s original article, and it’s definitely worth reading for anyone interested in a very scholarly destruction of this pernicious piece of pseudoscience.

Vox Political: Government Making PIP Applications More Difficult

February 8, 2015

Mike over at Vox Political also has another story about the government moving the goalposts again to stop disabled people claiming the Personal Independence Payment. It’s PIP reviews and tribunals: The DWP keeps piling on the pressure. It’s partly a follow-up to Mike’s previous post about how Atos told Mrs Mike that she had to come for an assessment, which on inquiry nobody seemed to know anything about. He goes further, and reports the experiences of two of his commenters, who have tried to claim PIP, one of whom was called before a tribunal. It begins

Further to yesterday’s article on the hoax letters being sent out by (in this case) Atos, summoning benefit claimants to non-existent “assessment” meetings, a couple more developments have come to light.

Firstly, Mrs Mike has received a new letter stating that her assessment has been cancelled and she doesn’t have to attend. This writer shall be going in any case – just to make sure.

Secondly, it seems matters get worse if you are unlucky enough to be denied benefit after an assessment. What follows refers to Personal Independence Payment. First, let’s hear from a commenter who had to go through the ‘mandatory reconsideration’ procedure:

“With the help of my local CAB (Citizens Advice Bureau), I made an application for PIP. As is normal, they refused it. The CAB explained they would, and requested a ‘Mandatory Review’.

“Under the old system, they would write a letter stating their reasons why the decision is wrong. Now, though, Atos will not accept this.

Atos has now resorted to phoning up PIP claimants unexpectedly at different times of the day, so that they will have to present their case unaided and without representation. This is obviously in order to make it easier to turn the claimant down.

The other commenter provides a grim portrayal of the stress caused by their appearance at an Atos tribunal, and the complete inability of the woman, who turned down their application for benefit, to understand even the most basic facts about mental illness. Such as that you can plan ahead, but later changes in the condition may mean you forget. This commenter states

“For anyone with mental health issues to have to go through the PIP claim process, Atos assessment and ultimately a tribunal, it is unbelievably cruel and careless. I have been extremely distressed today.

“I am also not going to find out for a few days due to my appointment time being so late in their working day, which is also upsetting.”

It’s worth checking out the comments on Mike’s blog, because many of the commenters have experience and technical knowledge that can help others. This piece is no exception. Particularly useful are the comments from Beret54 and Levinas.

PIP: Derby Mental Health Group Want to Hear From You

Beret54’s comment is that a mental health group, Derby, is appealing for information from people, who have undergone the PIP assessment. He writes

THE mental health action group derby is shortly to launch a survey form on experiences of PIP and present evidence to DWP will post link to survey when its launched soon,
Mental Health Action Group Co-ordinators
Room 312, Kelvin House
RTC Business Park, London Road
Derby. DE24 8UP

Tel: 01332 345966 ext 5
http://www.mhag.org.uk
Check out our Facebook page “Mental Health Action Group Derby”!

Levinas on Legal Challenges to Atos

Levinas also provides this advice for the two claimants:

The first claimant should invoke the Equality Act and reasonable adjustments in that it is discriminatory to the claimant to expect them to
1- Make representations using a device that in and of itself puts them at a disadvantage due to their disorder/difficulties and
2- to do so without representation they’ve secured being there to represent them. Again invoke EA to secure their presence.

They won’t like it, will argue against it but stick to invocation of reasonable adjustments under the EA to refuse the use of a telephone for contact and lack of representation Equate the representation to the use of a wheelchair or crutches to expose how discriminatory it would be to refuse, comment that it opposes justice to have this thrust upon them. They could also send an email revoking any consent given to release Atos from the DPA and reassert their rights, ergo Atos is not lawfully allowed to hold, nor use your home phone number-All communication therefore will have to be via letter as address is all they can hold. This is how I tackled Atos and WCA for ESA, I’ve not had the hurdle of PIP yet.

Second claimant-Is it usual to have the decision maker at the tribunal? Again I’ve only had to attend ESA tribunal hearings but this sounds somewhat ominous to me. Were they on the panel? I doubt they could legally be if independent and wonder if sent by DWP to oppose the claimant? I’ve had DWP turn up to oppose, think it might be usual when there’s a big award at stake. Again argue the case, hopefully with representation and support, to give you breathing space from the DWP rep.

This is proof that Atos and the DWP are as nasty as ever, and if anything getting worse. But hopefully pressure from groups like DPAC, the Disability News Service and the new Derby people will keep the pressure up and force them either to change, or make things so difficult for them they’ll want to lose the election.

Wildthing66 also advises claimants to get angry with the assessors and threaten them with leaving in a body bag. It worked for them at the Jobcentre, apparently. I wouldn’t go that far, as it wouldn’t surprise me if they tried to charge anyone, who adopted quite such an aggressive approach with threatening behaviour. However, they are bullies. One of the DWP whistleblowers has said that quite, meek individuals will get sanctioned, whereas a 6 foot brickie won’t, because they’re obviously physically afraid of the brickie. So, it’s important to stand your ground and not allow yourself to be walked over, as difficult as that may be.

Vox Political: Labour MPs Asks Civil Service to Enquire into Benefit Deaths

February 8, 2015

Mike over at Vox Political has this story MP asks civil servant to check whether DWP to blame for benefit deaths – Disability News Service about the Labour MP, Debbie Abrahams, request to a senior civil servant to look into this issue. Mike’s article begins

A senior civil servant has been asked by an MP to examine whether any of the 49 secret reviews into benefit-related deaths concluded that the government had been partly to blame, writes John Pring for the Disability News Service.

The question came as Conservative employment minister Esther McVey was giving evidence to an inquiry into benefit sanctions policy.

Labour MP Debbie Abrahams, a member of the work and pensions committee that is conducting the inquiry, told McVey there was “an increasing… and a worrying number of deaths that are being associated with sanctions”.

McVey’s response was the usual government reply to anyone, who dares tell them the truth about their cruel, malicious and lethal policies: she lied, and told her opponent they were wrong to ‘politicise’ and ‘inflame’ the issue.

Mike’s article is at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/02/07/mp-asks-civil-servant-to-check-whether-dwp-to-blame-for-benefit-deaths-disability-news-service/

DPAC also have a report on the incident, which I will also cover later today. This goes into some detail about McVey’s mendacious and highly evasive response to Abrahams’ questions. I’ve avoided blogging on it so far, as it annoyed me so much. So be warned – if you have any sense of fairness and compassion, McVey’s answers and general demeanour will send you through the roof.

From 2011: Private Eye on Emma Harrison and the Failures of A4E

January 21, 2015

I’ve posted up a number of articles from Private Eye recently detailing the failings of one of the government’s welfare-to-work providers, A4E, and the massive salary nonetheless enjoyed by its boss, Emma Harrison. Here’s another article about this from Private Eye for the 2nd – 15th September 2011.

Welfare to Work
A4E, B for Balls

No sooner had the last Eye published details of the mediocre inspection reports of “benefit-busting” company A4E than David Cameron announced that A4E’s boss, Emma Harrison, was central to his “fight-back after the riots.”

Arguing that the disorder was caused by family breakdown, Cameron said he had “asked Emma Harrison to develop a plan to help get these families on track” and was now putting “rocket boosters” under the scheme.

Emma Harrison’s company needs more than rocket boosters to get airborne. Out of 12 A4E job-finding schemes inspected by Ofsted, only two were found to be “good”; the rest were merely “satisfactory”. By comparison, Ofsted finds around half of schools to be “good” or even “outstanding”. According to the inspectors, A4E hasn’t been mostly “good” since 2008.

The worse news is that Harrison’s A4E is particularly bad at dealing with unemployed people with more complex problems: auditors described A4E’s involvement in Pathways to Work, a scheme to get people from incapacity benefit into employment as “universally poor”.

The only good news is that Cameron was wildly overstating Harrison’s role. In his post-riot speech, the PM referred to plans to help 120,000 families. Harrison’s programme called “working Families Everywhere”, which she personally manages, aims at finding jobs for just 50 parents in Blackpool, Hull and Westminster.

While the scale was exaggerated by Cameron, Harrison’s company did win more business last month – five contracts to deliver the “New Enterprise Allowance” for the jobless. The old Enterprise Allowance in the 1980s allowed unemployed people to keep receiving benefits while they set up small businesses. The Conservatives were keen on the scheme because it spread the “enterprise culture”. Lots of the new businesses didn’t make it but lots did, including Superdry Clothing and Viz magazine.

The old Enterprise Allowance was run by civil servants on the Manpower Services Commission. The new one is being “delivered” by private “partners”. Many of them are local chambers of commerce, which makes some sense. But the qualifications of benefit-busting companies such as A4E, or fellow contract winner Avanta, are harder to grasp: they deal with employment rather than self-employment, and their performance to date, as measure by inspection reportsd, is pisspoor.

This puts some of the controversy surrounding the British education system into perspective. Despite the government’s desperation to privatise schools, and the continuing stories of failing schools that have to be taken into special measures or over by a private scholastic company, most of the schools Ofsted inspects are ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’. A4E, one of the government’s favoured outsourcing companies, by contrast, is responsible for poor service as judged by Ofsted’s inspectors.

The complaint that A4E cannot cope with the special requirements of the disabled has been blogged about many times, by Johnny Void, Mike, Jayne Linney, Glynis Millward and the DPAC people, to name only a few.

As for the replacement of the Enterprise Allowance, this seems to follow standard Tory malpractice. A reasonably effective scheme run by the state is privatised, and given to companies, who have absolutely no knowledge or experience of it. But it’s private, so obviously to those blinded by Hayekian hype, it has to be better.

It ain’t, and the failures continue. But as the Tories and private industry are making money out of it, they don’t care.