Posts Tagged ‘Election’

Corbyn Storms It, While ‘Strong and Stable’ May Collapses

June 12, 2017

Okay, it wasn’t an outright victory for Jeremy Corbyn. But it wasn’t a defeat either.

Like many people, I was surprised and delighted by last week’s election result. I’d gone to bed early Thursday night, as I couldn’t bear to watch the election coverage. I was afraid that, despite the polls showing that Labour had cut the Tory lead down to only one per cent, there would still be a Tory landslide, or at least a workable majority.

I was, therefore, highly delighted to wake up to find that May had lost her overall majority, and was therefore looking around for anyone or anything that would shore up her government by going into coalition with her.

Unfortunately, she has found one in the Democratic Unionist Party, founded by Ian Paisley in 1986 to oppose the 1986 Anglo-Irish agreement. The DUP is socially Conservative and deeply sectarian. They back teaching Creationism in schools, denying climate change, keeping abortion banned in Ulster and violently denounce gay rights. This goes back to when Ian Paisley in the 1970s founded S.U.S. to oppose the legalisation of homosexual acts between consenting adults. The organisation’s name stood for ‘Save Ulster from Sodomy’. This always struck me as an hysterical reaction. It’s as if he was afraid that Northern Irish people’s heterosexuality was so fragile, that the moment homosexuality was legalised every man and woman in the province would immediately turn gay. Or else he had some kind of nightmare that gays from across the world were massing at the Irish border or just across the Irish Sea, ready to charge in like an invading army.

Just as worrying is the party’s hatred of the Irish Republic and Roman Catholicism, and its links to a series of Loyalist paramilitary terrorist groups, most notably the UDA. It’s leaders have posed with Kalashnikovs in their mitts, and wearing the uniform of Loyalist terror groups. These links remain strong, despite the DUP’s official rhetoric condemning terrorism in Ulster.

In short, they’re the type of organisation, which several Protestant Ulster people I know came to Britain to get away from. Just as I know Irish Roman Catholics, who don’t want to go back to Ulster because of the same violent prejudice in their communities.

May hasn’t exactly gone into coalition with these clowns. She’s trying to hammer out a ‘supply and confidence’ agreement, in which the DUP will support the government on a bill-by-bill basis. And even that’s looking rocky, and she made the mistake of annoying her new partners in government by announcing the alliance before it was to be formally arrange on Tuesday.

May’s formation of government with these bigots is also something of a problem for many Conservative MPs. About 19, according to Mike, are openly gay, and so put in a very awkward position through this alliance with a rabidly homophobic party. Ruth Davidson, the gay head of the Conservative party, and who is going to marry an Irish Roman Catholic, has already Tweeted her displeasure. Not that this may make any difference. Despite Cameron’s attempts to make the Tories look nice and friendly to minorities – pro-gay, anti-racist, more women MPs – this alliance shows the real nature of much of the Tory party. They’re reverting to type. As for the 19 gay Tory MPs, given the entrenched hypocrisy of the Tories, where the say one thing and do another, it’s likely that they’ll swallow their principles and troop through the ‘Yes’ doors to support the government anyway.

Even with the DUP on board, the Tories only have a bare majority of two. That means that they’ll have to do as Labour did when they only had a majority of five in the mid-70s: cram every single one of their members into the chamber to support them. To the point where they sent the whips round to check no-one was in the toilets.

Far from being ‘strong and stable’, May’s position looks very, very precarious. The Bow group, a Tory think tank, are considering holding leadership elections and there are murmurings from the backbench 1922 Committee. Unfortunately for the Tories – but good for us – all the other contenders for the leadership are actually more unpopular than May. The leading figure is Boris Johnson, but while 23 per cent of people said that he was more likely to make them vote Tory, 33 per cent stated that he’d put them off.

People have started discussing the possibility that there might be another election in October. Mike has put this forward, and suggested that it could be as early as August. And May herself may not last the week.

As for Corbyn, he’s increasingly looking like a prime minister in waiting. This has been the biggest movement towards Labour for the past forty-five years. And it has roundly refuted the claims of his critics that he was ‘unelectable’. Instead, it has confirmed the worst nightmares of the neoliberal establishment – that he is only too electable. The Blairites now have absolutely no grounds for their intrigues against him. Indeed, if Corbyn can do so well despite their attempts to unseat him, it’s probably fair to say that if the Blairites had done the decent thing and supported their leader and the broad mass of the party’s members and supporters, he’d probably be in Number 10.

His success shows that a very large section of the British people are sick of austerity, sick of Thatcherism, sick of the privatisation of the NHS and private ownership of utilities, sick of exorbitant rents, the threat of homelessness, stagnant wagges and a harsh and callous attitude to the poor, the sick, disabled and the unemployed, which has seen them thrown off benefit, to die in misery and despair.

Tony Greenstein, one of the great people, who comments on Mike’s blog, has written on his own that the one thing that Corbyn should not do is water down his policies to make them more acceptable to those inclined to vote Tory. And he’s right. Not only would this leave some of the causes of Britain’s misery in place, it would weaken his own position electorally. People are heartily sick of a Labour party which does its best to emulate the Tories. This was the reason why New Labour lost five million of its supporters from 1997 to its fall, and why Ed Miliband lost the 2015 election.

Corbyn now needs to keep the pressure up – to continue his attack on the Tories. According to Survation, he’s now several points above them in the polls. Let’s hope and do what we can to maintain and increase this lead, until the government falls and we can have a real, Socialist, Labour leader in Downing Street.

For further informed comment, see the following blogs and posts:

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/06/09/may-spoke-of-the-coalition-of-chaos-now-shes-going-to-form-one/

https://buddyhell.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/oh-what-a-night/

https://buddyhell.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/the-tory-dup-pact/

http://azvsas.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/general-election-2017-7-weeks-ago-this.html

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/06/11/downing-street-mistaken-over-dup-deal-this-inspires-no-confidence-over-brexit/

And male feminist vlogger and general scourge of the far right, Kevin Logan, has produced this video showing precisely how deeply unpleasant the DUP are:

Advertisements

Young Folks, If You Want a Future, Vote Labour

May 9, 2017

Mike today has put up a post citing a report that young people are far more left-wing than their elders. According to Guardian writer Alan Firth, if a third more young people vote, it would mean Labour would win handily on June 8th.

He makes the obvious point: that if you’re young and aren’t rich, you have NO future under the Tories. And if you don’t vote, you are effecting also giving your vote to them.

So register to vote.

The Tories have tried to make it more difficult, by changing the rules, but he gives the internet address which will allow you to register to vote. This is

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

The deadline in 22 May.

He concludes

Don’t forget – there’s nobody stupider than someone who could have avoided trouble but didn’t, because they couldn’t be bothered.

See http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/05/09/if-youre-young-and-you-want-a-future-register-to-vote-and-vote-labour/

Majority Report’s Michael Brooks Urges Brits to Vote Labour against Odious Theresa May

April 30, 2017

In this clip from Sam Seder’s Majority Report, the host Michael Brooks urges British voters to support Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party against the Tories and their right-wing agenda. The Majority Report is an American progressive internet news programme. Brooks notes that May has called this snap election, despite lying that she wouldn’t. He also correctly says that she’s claiming its about getting enough support for her to win a strong Brexit. However, the real reason is that the Tories are decimating Labour in the polls. In Brooks’ opinion, this isn’t because Corbyn lacks a strong left-wing programme, but because of strategic mistakes by his campaign team and his own failures in trying to get his points across.

However, Brooks also says that in this speech in the House of Commons, Corbyn is precisely right. He plays a clip showing Jeremy Corbyn attacking the Tories for standing for the rich few against the many poor, for their massive mishandling of the economy, their deliberate incompetence in running down the NHS, and for creating a situation where millions are struggling to make ends meet. The Labour leader sums up their attitude, spearing May’s pretensions to be a strong leader: ‘They are strong against the weak, and weak against the strong’.

Brooks states that’s exactly right, and also mocks May’s wails that she’s ‘strong’, and her bizarre laugh. He also states that Brits should go in for damage limitation and vote Labour, as the Tories will bring in an even harsher austerity regime, which will leave millions much poorer, all for the benefit of the rich corporations. Just as the right has done over in his homeland, America. He also recommends that people in marginal constituencies should vote Green, SNP or Liberal to stop the Tories.

He’s right about Jeremy Corbyn’s analysis of the Tories’ attitude to the poor. They are bullies, who fear and hate the weak and vulnerable, and wish to create an impoverished working and lower middle class, who will be desperate to accept any kind of work, no matter how exploitative, from their lords and masters.

I don’t agree, however, with his analysis of Corbyn’s leadership. It has not been for want of trying that Corbyn trails in the polls. He has been consistently undermined and attacked by the Blairites in Labour, and the press. Corbyn has and is campaigning much harder than May, but you won’t know about this, because the press and the biased BBC won’t report it. Similarly, you won’t hear much about his policies either, in the same way that Tony Benn’s and Ken Livingstone’s policies weren’t properly reported in the 1980s. The press than simply attacked them as dangerous Commies from the ‘loony left’, despite the fact that both were highly rational men, who very carefully considered their policies. And unfortunately it was effective. One of the books I bought on media bias begins with the description from one woman how she was told by a friend that she wouldn’t vote for Tony Benn. This was despite the fact that she shared all of Benn’s beliefs, including getting British troops out of Northern Ireland. When the lady pointed this out, and asked her friend why she wasn’t voting for him after all this, the woman replied that it was because Benn ‘was mad’. The press said so, so it has to be correct.

The press lies, and the campaign against fake news is simply the mainstream press trying to stop their competitors in the new media from spoiling their lies by telling the truth.

Brooks is also wrong when he advises people to vote Lib Dem, SNP and Green in marginal constituencies. I don’t think the Greens are strong enough electorally to be able to get an MP into parliament, even with tactical Labour votes. As for the Lib Dems, I’ve seen no indication that, if people vote for them, they won’t do what they did last time and immediately jump in bed with the Tories. I also very strongly believe that if people return to voting Labour in Scotland, not only will it strengthen the left throughout the UK, it’ll also drive the Tories finally out of Scotland completely.

Vox Political on Tory Claim that He Was Approached by 3 Anti-Corbyn Plotters

August 21, 2016

Mike’s also put up another piece commenting on an article in today’s Torygraph by Kate McCann. This reports the claim by the Tory MP, Andrew Bridgen, that he was approached by three Labour MPs, who support his demand for a snap general election. They hope that Labour will lose the election, and this will give them they excuse they need to oust Corbyn as leader. Mike reports that none of the MPs are named, so the article could well be the product of McCann’s fevered imagination. As for Bridgen, Mike’s article has a picture of him, which was clearly taken at some posh function. It shows him in a dinner suit with another, similarly dressed young man in the background, standing in the kind of pose politicians adopt when they’re trying to be a Churchillian ‘man of destiny’. It’s the kind of posture Jim Hacker used to adopt in Yes, Minister, when he was consciously trying to be a statesman of similar Churchillian proportions. It looks pompous, and Bridgen himself appears in the photo to be, er, ‘tired and emotional’, as Private Eye put it to avoid libel suits.

Mike states

The possibility that any Labour MP would stoop so low as to try to sabotage their own party – and doom the UK to another five long years under Conservative rule – to rid themselves of a leader who stands for Labour values is nothing short of an abomination.

Perhaps it would be best to try to kill it before it can be put into operation.

If you have a Labour MP, please contact them (preferably by Twitter so their answers are public) and ask if they would rather have Labour “wiped out” in an election than accept him as democratically-elected leader.

The rest of the article also claims that around 6,000 Labour party members have been reported to the NEC for on-line abuse, anti-Semitism and supporting other political parties. This quotes an unnamed ‘senior source’, claiming that the party is no longer safe for women or Jews. Mike notes that the source isn’t named, and the official investigation concluded that the Labour party was no better or worse in that regard than the Tories or even, for that matter, the Torygraph. He also makes the very good point that the article does not say from which section of the party these 6,000 come from. If they even exist. As the Eye might say, ‘Perhaps we should be told!’

See Mike’s article at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/08/21/how-can-anyone-try-to-have-labour-wiped-out-at-an-election-and-still-claim-to-be-acting-in-labours-interests/

This clearly comes after three Lambeth councillors were caught in the week writing emails to Tories and Lib Dems, trying to get them to join the party to oust Corbyn. This gives Bridgen’s claim some verisimilitude. Or it could simply be that it supplied the basis for a deliberately destabilising lie. This is, after all, the Torygraph, the newspaper that told its Tory readers to join the Labour party and vote for Corbyn, in order to render the party unelectable. Now they’re claiming that unnamed Labour MPs are approaching
Tories to make the party unelectable, and so oust Corbyn. There’s a variation on a theme here.

As for the anti-Semitism claims, so many of them have been made against Jews and avowed anti-racists – Jackie Walker, Tony Greenstein, Red Ken Livingstone, Rachel Nesbitt, to name only a few, that many of them lack any validity. It’s just the boy crying ‘wolf!’ by the Israel lobby, in order to smear and destroy its opponents. Israel’s founders, Chaim Herzog, David Ben Gurion and others had absolute contempt for the Jews, who preferred to stay in their traditional European homelands, and adopt a highly racist policy of segregation against the Mizrahim, Arab Jews. They were European cultural supremacists, who were afraid that their superior western culture would be diluted by contact with these culturally inferior orientals. And so Arab Jews were kept away from European Jews, given the lowest, worst jobs. And there’s also a scandal currently unfolding in Israel about the theft of Mizrahi babies after Israel’s establishment, who were given to childless European Jewish couples to raise, in order to make sure the children had the approved cultural upbringing. As Counterpunch pointed out, this is exactly what was done to indigenous children in America, Canada and Australia. It was also done to the children of political prisoners during Argentina’s ‘Dirty War’, and to the Poles by the Nazis. The Israel lobby has absolutely no business accusing anyone of racism.

Vox Political: DWP Charging Premium Rates for Helpline

February 20, 2016

More of the sheer malice the Tories have towards the poor and needy. Mike has this report from the Independent on the way the DWP is continuing to charge premium rates of 45p per minute for mobiles, 12p per minute for landlines, on its helplines. With the long delays claimants can suffer when trying to telephone the Department for help, this means that, according to the head of the foodbank charity, the Trussell Trust, David McAuley, many claimants will be forced with a stark choice between eating and sorting out their claim. See http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/02/19/how-much-dwps-helpline-will-break-the-bank-for-benefit-claimants/.

One of Mike’s comments, Spamlet, has pointed out that this violates equalities legislation as many claimants are disabled. He also has personal experience of being hit with an enormous phone bill for an afternoon’s call to the DWP. He writes

Under the Equality Act, the DWP is required to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ not to discriminate against disabled people. A large proportion of those forced to use this service will be disabled people. It is not reasonable to force them to use food money waiting for hours in the hope that they might eventually get through! I once had a £17 phone bill for one afternoon calling help lines, just trying to find the right person to complain to about lack of service.

This is more of the ‘less elibility’ Maggie hailed as one of her ‘Victorian virtues’: you make welfare and poor relief so tough that it deters all but the most desperate to take it. Mind you, the Tories aren’t the only people, who’ve done this trick with expensive phone lines. In the 1990s, the permatanned talk show, Robert Kilroy-Silk got into Private Eye for the exorbitant rates calls to his programmes charged when they decided to make an edition on homelessness. The Eye reasonably thundered against this, asking rhetorically home many homeless people could afford the charge. Now the Tories are trying the same stunt. It could even be cooked up by the same people, given the way BBC news personnel seem to shunt back and forth between the Conservative party and our supposedly impartial broadcaster.

Silk vanished from the public eye after becoming involved with anti-European Union, anti-immigrant politics. He first joined UKIP, then left and formed Veritas with Joan Collins. His career finally imploded after he went on a long rant against the Arabs in his newspaper column. One of the least offensive things he said there was that they hadn’t done anything constructive since the 12th century. This was about the same time the public was treated to the spectacle of him campaigning for UKIP. He was shown on live television asking a Frenchman working in this country why he didn’t go home tomorrow, and have ordure poured over him by Muslims. This was one violent attack in Britain by members of that faith that people of all faiths and none supported as a moral act.

Silk, fortunately, is gone, but less happily the Tories remain.

Blogging and the Tory Victory

May 12, 2015

As you probably noticed, I had a short break from blogging over the past few days. The reason’s simple: the Tory victory left me so bitterly angry and depressed, that quite simply I couldn’t face writing about it. And I was afraid that if I did try to put fingers to keyboard, anything I did write would simply be an angry stream of coarse invective and obscenity against an obscene, exploitative and murderous government that had been returned yet again by a majority of the people of England and Wales.

Bristol was one of the places where the Labour candidates won. It’s a local victory, that has led to three new Labour MPs, all women entering parliament. But this seemed to be little comfort to the broader political picture. There were a few further, minor compensations in that the Lib Dems saw themselves virtually wiped out, reduced to about eight MPs, while the Fuhrage over in Thanet signally failed to get elected.

I was up visiting friends in Cheltenham Friday as the news of the Tories’ victory began to sink in. One of them showed me the tweets he was getting over the mobile from others, equally disgusted with the decision of the British electorate. Many of them were of the type asking if they should now go to Canada, or New Zealand, or Norway and Denmark – anywhere, in short, where the political elites still had some respect for the people in whose name they govern, and have humane, sensible welfare policies and are dead set on dismantling their state health service for personal profit and that of the multinationals.

One person on Twitter simply said that it was the English voting once again out of spite and cruelty towards the poor and unemployed. Another wrote simply ‘England – Burn it down’.

I talked to one of the local small businessmen, who was also depressed and disgusted at the Tory victory. He stated that in the coming years, he’d probably stop giving to overseas aid charities, because there would be real poverty and starvation here in Britain, which equally deserved his money and attention.

It was an opinion shared by one of my friends, who took immediate action. He went out and spent a tenner of his benefit money on food to give to the local food bank, ready for the next influx of the poor and genuinely starving, thrown off benefit to save corporate vultures like Murdoch, Rothermere, Lebedev and the Barclay twins from the indignity of having to pay tax like the ‘little people’.

The Tories definitely will not have it their own way over the next few years. They’ve got a wafer thin majority of about three or five. That’s about the same as Labour had during their minority government in the mid-1970s. My friend pointed out that there are about 23 – 30 bye-elections every parliamentary turn, so this majority could easily vanish. It won’t be easy. Things certainly will get harder, much harder, for the poor, the sick, disabled and unemployed. But he felt that it would prevent them from doing the really horrific stuff, like selling off the health service.

Let’s hope so. In the meantime, let’s keep the pressure up every step of the way. It’s been pointed out that the Tories owe their victory to only 20 per cent of the vote. Which is an argument for proportional representation. We need to fight them constantly if we are ever to keep them from destroying any more lives, and preserve anything of the welfare state.

Interview with Miliband: When Did BBC Journos Take Their Questions from the Republican Party?

May 6, 2015

I haven’t really been following the news about the election all that closely, as watching too much Cameron and Clegg tends to annoy me, as does the attitude of some of the BBC journos towards Miliband. There was a fine example of this yesterday, when one of the BBC’s journos on the 6 O’clock news interviewed Ed Miliband. He tried to challenge Miliband’s ability to govern by questioning him whether he had run, or worked in, a profit-making organisation.

This line was more or less a straight lift from the Republican rhetoric against Obama. They denounced Obama as unfit for government, as he had never run a business, and had only been a ‘community organisers’. Which shows you how far down in the order of priorities they give working to improve the community and conditions for the less well-off, compared to making a profit.

Miliband tried pointing out that you didn’t need to work in business, to know how to run the economy or know what conditions businesses need to grow.

The incident just shows how far the journalists take their cues from the Republicans across the Atlantic, whenever a politician even slightly left of raging Neo-Liberal raises their head.

But if they thought it was a good question to ask Miliband, it’s a pity they didn’t ask the Tories or Lib Dems, as the same question can be equally asked of them. Like the chancellor, George Osborne. His only real job has been as a towel-folder for Harrods. What does he actually know about running, or even starting up a business.

It’s the same with David Cameron. Cameron’s another aristo, whose position and fortune comes from inherited wealth. He was actually asked by the royal family if he’d like to work for them. He certainly has not worked hard to set up his own business, nor had to worry about its failure, or whether it will make enough money to support himself and his family. Most businesses fail within their first year. Cameron has never faced that prospect, nor the danger of having to declare bankruptcy, lose his home and business, and start signing on at the dole queue.

Which is another issue. Johnny Void has pointed out that the politicians never address the unemployed themselves. They make claims that they will raise employment, but never directly address them, their issues and concerns. Labour in their manifesto says they will make some reforms to benefit them. The Tories and Lib Dems don’t say anything about them at all.

Their silence speaks volumes. To give Andrew Marr due credit, he did ask Cameron if he knew how hard his policies were hitting ordinary people, and was finally rewarded by Cameron claiming that he thought it entirely right that people should be punished with sanctions if the didn’t comply with the DWP’s requirements.

Which showed he doesn’t care two hoots about people like David Clapson and the many others his reforms have killed.

But so far, I have not seen one journalist ask the politicos whether they themselves have ever had to sign on. It’s important. If Miliband can be challenged over his suitability for office on the grounds of an apparent lack of experience running a business, then Cameron, Clegg and the other ConDems should also be challenged about their ability to legislate for the poor, when they have no experience of poverty, and none of unemployment.

When was the last time Osborne, Cameron, Clegg, RTU or McVile signed on? Have they ever had to go through the humiliating chore of sending out application after application, and having to show they’ve done so to their ‘work coach’ or the clerk in the Jobcentre. Have they ever been threatened with sanctions, and faced with the prospect of going without food, or electricity, because they don’t have the wherewithal to pay?

Of course not. They have never had to suffer such indignities. And when asked to try to live like the unemployed, as IDS has been, they shrug it off as a ‘publicity stunt’. They know they can’t, but definitely don’t want to show it. They see themselves as the nation’s rightful leaders, with some kind of eugenically determined right to govern us, because of their position as aristocrats, or captains of industry. This makes them automatically fit to govern. The rest of us, those who have to struggle to make our daily bread, are just there to take our orders.

And we shouldn’t have the cheek to ask them how much they know, and by what knowledge or experience, they have the right to rule us.

Simply asking that question is seen as immensely impertinent. When Paxo asked Cameron this question, it reduced him, ion the word of Private Eye, ‘to silent, puce fury’. It was like his fag at Eton talking back.

They need to be asked those questions, however. And it’s a profound failing of the media that, with few exceptions, they aren’t.

More Memes Against Conservative-Lib Dem Killing of Disabled from Vox Political

May 6, 2015

Mike over at Vox Political has produced a couple more memes against Cameron’s and Clegg’s mass murder of the sick and disabled through their benefit reforms. Mike posted up a piece last Friday, letting his readers know that the Information Commissioner had finally ruled in his favour. The DWP was now required to release the information to him on the numbers of people, who died between 2011 and last year, while claiming invalidity benefit and ESA.

These figures give the lie to the Tory claim that those willing to work are being helped into employment, while those who can’t are being given the support they need.

These people died in misery, poverty and desperation, because the benefit simply wasn’t enough. If they were fortunate enough to get it, of course. Many didn’t. They were sanctioned for the most trivial and contrived of reasons.

Since being informed of the Commissioners’ decision, Mike has received now word from the DWP itself. They have not sent him the information he requested. He therefore states on his blog that he feels they intend to make him wait the full 35 days before sending him the information.

The reason? If they give him the information now, it might cost them the election. Too many people could be swayed by the horrifying fact that Cameron, Clegg, Iain Duncan Smith and Esther McVile have killed an estimated 60,000 or more with his wretched benefit reforms.

There has also been little interest in this information from the mainstream media, although he says there have been some encouraging signs from certain editors.

He’s therefore produced these two memes to help get the word out to the public. He’s encouraging people to share them, so please, feel free to print ’em off, and post them up, whether in hard copy or on the Net.

The first meme shows how the number of people, who have officially died while receiving benefits, is probably on the tip of the iceberg.

tipoftheiceberg

The second meme lays out the case that for the disabled, voting Tory or Lib Dem in the election is like certain poultry voting for a certain seasonal feast.

DWPturkeys

Vox Political Defends Piece Attacking Labour for Allowing WCA Deaths

March 12, 2015

Earlier this week I reblogged a piece by Mike, in which he attacked the Labour party for continuing to allow disabled people to die due to the Work Capability Test. He was incensed at what Liza van Zyl, a fellow campaigner against the WCA, had been told by the Labour MP Owen Smith. Smith stated that Labour would not consider scrapping the WCA before the election, because of the fear that the right-wing press would torpedo their chances of getting elected with the charge that Labour were ‘soft on welfare’. They might, however, review the situation after the election.

Mike criticised this policy on the grounds that it was absolutely immoral and unjust for disabled people to continue to die because of the test just so that Labour could get elected. He pointed out that the party would get far more support by openly appealing to disabled people, their relatives, friends and supporters, by openly opposing the test. He also makes the point that if Labour did scrap or modify the test after the election, without any previous announcement that they would do so, they would be guilty of the same deception and mendacity as the Tories and Lib Dems, a cynical attitude that has done so much to put people off politics and politicians.

In order to encourage the party to do the right thing and scrap the test, Mike offered to write a letter to one of the right wing papers making the above arguments.

The piece was immensely controversial, garnering 92 comments. Mike says that most were supportive, but he also received some criticism. Amongst other accusations, he was told that he was working for the Tories in order to destroy Labour’s chances at the election. Mike here defends his comments, stating clearly that the purpose of the WCA is to give money to the private firms that administer it while throwing the disabled themselves off benefit. Many of these have consequently died of starvation and despair. As he says, ‘death surrounds the process’.

Mike also attacks the way Liza van Zyl has been hounded off Facebook and Twitter because of her piece reporting what she had been told by Owen Smith. Mike states that Smith’s comments could be a fudge, or he might be serious about Labour reviewing the situation after the election. Either way, it’s the kind of deception practised by the Tories and their Lib Dem lackeys, of which the public are well and truly sick.

He provides further proof just how mendacious and duplicitous this government is by repeating, once again, how the DWP is refusing to release the figures showing how many people have died due to the WCA. He then argues that there is a desperate need for Labour to scrap the wretched test, because Labour is the only party that stands any chance of getting the Tories out.

Mike’s article’s entitled Work Capability Assessment fuss shows Labour must change its ways. It begins

Yesterday’s article on Labour’s attitude to the Work Capability Assessment (WCA), used on people applying for incapacity or disability benefits, was probably the most controversial to be published by this site.

Look at the article‘s comment column and you will see the strength of support for this writer’s planned open letter. It calls for Labour to accept that the public opposes the continued use of a system that is responsible for as much death as the WCA undoubtedly is.

You will also see a few critical comments, and it is fair to say that there have been quite vicious attacks on the other social media, including Facebook and Twitter. Let’s try to address some of those.

Some claimed this writer was some kind of agent provocateur who had timed an attack on Labour to ruin its chances – a curious suggestion, considering the report was about someone else’s response to the ill-considered comments of a Labour shadow cabinet member, over which Yr Obdt Srvt could not have had any control.

Some claimed that Labour’s attitude to the WCA has already been addressed by Rachel Reeves’ promise to reform it – even though it cannot be reformed. It is beyond rehabilitation. The Work Capability Assessment serves a twofold purpose: It shovels taxpayers’ money into the hands of private, profit-making firms, and in return those firms do their best to disqualify claimants from receiving payments. If there was no intention to pervert the benefit system, governments would rely on the word of claimants’ GPs and the specialists working on their case. The responsible course of action is to get rid of it – before it kills anyone else.

It’s at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/03/11/work-capability-assessment-fuss-shows-labour-must-change-its-ways/. Go and read it. It makes sense, which is more than the WCA ever has.

Vox Political: Labour Should Not Let Disabled People Die Just to Curry Favour with Press

March 11, 2015

This is another piece of Mike’s that needs to be reblogged. In his piece, Why are disabled people being asked to die for Labour’s election hopes, Mike reports how Liza van Zyl, a campaigner against the work capability assessment system and the deaths it has caused, was told by the Labour MP Owen Smith that Labour did not support any change to the current work capability assessment. They were afraid that it would damage Labour’s chances of getting into power by allowing them to be attacked as soft on benefits. The article begins

… Especially when it won’t improve those hopes?

Extremely disturbing news has reached Vox Political, courtesy of Liza Van Zyl on Facebook. Extremely long-term readers may recall Liza was the lady who received a visit from police who claimed she had committed a criminal act against the Department for Work and Pensions, just before midnight on October 26, 2012 – being that she had been highlighting the deaths of sick and disabled people following reassessment by Atos and the DWP for Employment and Support Allowance.

Fortunately for those who still have to undergo these assessments, she was not discouraged and has continued to fight for those who cannot stand up for themselves. However, she is currently suffering severe disenchantment with the Labour Party, as she recounts below:

“We heard from Owen Smith MP today [Saturday, March 7] (a member of the left wing of the of the Labour Party leadership) that it is important for disabled people to continue to die, lest any commitment by Labour to scrap the Work Capability Assessment generate a negative response in the press and affect Labour’s general election chances.

“He said that while he personally doesn’t like the WCA, his Labour colleagues will not support scrapping it because of fears it will play badly with the right wing press and damage Labour’s electoral chances… I’ve since been contacted by other disabled people who’ve raised the issue with their Labour MPs, and the response has been: Yes, the WCA isn’t nice but if Labour commits to scrapping it, it would appear to be ‘soft on welfare’.

“The similarities of these responses (and given that Owen Smith is a frontbench shadow sec of state and therefore presumably is up to date on party strategy) indicates that this is an agreed line or represents an actual decision. This is profoundly disturbing, given that a great many Labour MPs know in detail exactly what suffering and deaths the WCA is responsible for among their own constituents: Tom Greatrex organised a powerful meeting of Labour MPs with Chris Grayling two years ago. Dame Anne Begg is herself a disabled person, as are other MPs.

Mike asks the question when this decision was taken, and why didn’t left-wing MPs like John McConnell, Dennis Skinner and Jeremy Corbyn protest?

He also makes the good point that this policy will not benefit the Labour party, but will actually harm it. Disabled people and their friends and families also vote, and they won’t support a party that continues to let their loved ones die, all for its own cynical political advantage. The opinions of the right-wing press can be discounted. Their readers won’t vote Labour, and so there is no point courting them.

He also points out that if, as he hopes, Labour does decide to scrap the work capability assessment, then its silence on this policy in order to win the election also makes it guilty of the same misrepresentation and lies that have resulted in public distrust of politicians generally as self-interested liars.

Mike also points out that he has written to Rachel Reeves, Labour’s shadow minister for welfare, and Ed Miliband about this issue before, only to be met with stony silence. He has suggested that people should write to the very same right-wing press, of which Labour seem so afraid, to point out how their refusal to change the WCA will stop then and others like them from voting for the party. He himself is perfectly willing to draft the letter.

Mike’s article is at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/03/10/why-are-disabled-people-being-asked-to-die-for-labours-election-hopes/. Go there to let him know what you think about this policy.