Why We're Withdrawing from Lobbying Work

Last night I saw Edwina Curry on a television programme about food banks. Her opinion was that food banks are unnecessary, and people on benefits just need to learn to budget better.

Food Banks and Benefit Sanctions

If you're on benefits, you risk a 'sanction' if you don't comply with all the rules. This can mean your benefits are cut for up to three years. Last year 133,000 sanction decisions were overturned on appeal, as administrative errors were responsible for the sanctions having been made. Recovery of unpaid benefits takes weeks. During this time, people starve. That's the reality of our current benefits system, and why food banks have become necessary. We'll see their use increase, as meals on wheels are to rise in price by 56% with benefits limited to only a 1% rise.

A friend of mine recently had his ex-wife die, and his children come to live with him. My friend is disabled and on benefits. It was three weeks before benefits were adjusted, and during this time period his choice was using a food bank and relying on friends' help for food to feed himself and his children. These are the people referred to by our current Government as scum.

Dear Edwina's comments may be better focused on the 77 MPs who haven't paid their Westminster food and drink bills and owe £140,000. No sanctions for them, or three years without a Parliamentary salary for breaking rules. Remember, 75% of MPs are millionaires, and the rest earn a fairly decent salary (topped up by generous expenses).

Demonising the Disabled and Poor

Phrases such as 'workers and shirkers' used to demonise the poor and disabled to win public support for the aggressive benefits cuts are abhorrent. On 22 May 2013, a landmark decision by the courts in a judicial review brought by two individuals with mental health problems ruled that the Work Capability Assessments were not fit for purpose, and that they substantially disadvantage people with mental health conditions. The department of Work and Pensions have admitted that 55% of people who lost their disability benefits after assessments with the french IT company were unable to find employment. 30% were relying on other forms of benefit and only 15% had found a job. A follow up survey of 590 claimants found 43% were still without any form of income. Work Capability Assessments have found patients with brain damage^, terminal cancer, severe MS, and Parkinson's Disease to be fit for work. On 24 April 2013, a woman who was a double heart and lung transplant patient died in her hospital bed only days after she was told, after a Work Capability Assessment, that her allowance was being stopped and that she was fit for work. Government statistics reveal that between January 2010 and January 2011, 10,600 sick and disabled people people died within six weeks of their benefits having been ended.

Bedroom Tax

The LibDems are little better. Their party voted against the bedroom tax at conference but their MPs shafted them when it came to the vote in Westminster. It may interest you to learn that at a tribunal appeal in Liverpool, a father has recently won his case that the bedroom tax breached his and his children's human rights to family life. His children had homes with both himself and his ex-wife. Not legal precedent, but a start...

Lord Freud suggested on radio that non-resident parents have their children sleep on a sofa bed when they stay overnight. A father asked him whether it was appropriate to have his two boys and daughter share a single sofa bed. The stuttering Lord hadn't thought of this (parents having more than one child), but being out of touch and not thinking through the impact of knee jerk changes is at the heart of this Government's policy.

Opportunity Cost

There is an opportunity cost with any Government spending, and in a decent society protecting the poor, disabled and vulnerable should come before other commitments. 

The argument that the Government can't afford the current benefits bill is fatuous. It's a choice. MPs' portraits (£8,000 for Ken's wrinkled shirt), expenses, subsidised lunches, pay rises, junkets and more come at the price of making 90 year olds unable to cook for themselves having to cut back back on food. Failed IT projects (the BBC, DWP, MoD to name but a few departments involved) have cost hundreds of millions of pounds.

Children and Families Bill

The Children and Families Bill is a classic example of feckless Government thinking and waste. The Conservatives committed to shared parenting before the last election. The changes in the Bill have been so watered down as to be meaningless drivel which change nothing. The wording supports some form of parental involvement but leaves it open to be anything from a Christmas card to overnight staying contact so long as there is no risk of harm. What change from the current legislation? Child Arrangements Orders replace contact and residence, but the bill talks in terms of the parent with whom the child lives and parent with whom the child visits (oh, you mean residence and contact then). Tortuous amendments to the wording which actually change nothing at all, but will cost a fortune in new guides, forms, and all rushed in at the last minute as nothing more than (failed) Government spin. Another Conservative promise broken as they wriggle to justify having done nothing other than increase the administrative burden on the courts, legal profession, legal advise services and HMCTS (not to mention confusing the hell out of litigants-in-person).

About the Writer

Am I some radical socialist opposed to Conservatives? No. I have a background working for blue chip companies in management positions... public school educated... have enjoyed shooting and fishing... so am good, traditional Conservative stock but appalled at that party's immorality and ashamed at having voted for them previously. I won't make that mistake at the next election.

My apology for this rant rant, but dear Edwina's TV piece followed by my own MP's asking me to help convince the Scots to stay part of the Union were the final nails in a coffin on opinions on this Government. If I were Scottish, I'd want to be more than geographically removed from Westminster, and removed from a Government which ridicules those who are vulnerable and denies the evidence put forward by those who seek to point out how its policies harm the most vulnerable.

A party for families? Don't make me laugh! 

Withdrawing from Lobbying

If the above matters aren't sufficient motivation to withdraw from lobbying, the final straw was attending the launch of 'Tackling the Advice Deficit' report by the Low Commission at Westminster. Portcullis has a vast, sectioned off area where those in the club can natter... near empty at the time of the presentation. Attendees at the launch were packed into a baking hot room (no seating for the disabled or questions with invitations about the needs of disabled attendees) reminiscent of sheep crammed into a lorry off to the abattoir (another sign of nonsense is a sign on the entrance door reminding people that handguns are not allowed... one wonders how much that cost).

LibDem Lord McNally, one of the speakers at this event jovially poked at audience members concerning funding for services for the vulnerable (the audience included many from charities and advice agencies). "I recognise many of you as people I've said no to" was accompanied by his chortle. What thought to those attending of the impact on them of turning people away who need help, seeing colleagues lose their jobs, and their organisations risk closure and failure as a result of his humorous withdrawal of their funding. Personally, I hope he chokes on his next subsidised steak in one of Westminster's subsidised troughs.

We're withdrawing from lobbying work. What point, when you're dealing with attitudes such as his. Members of Parliament laughing during the food bank debate compounded our opinion that our dear MPs not only don't care, but draw humour from the suffering of others. If they'll ridicule those who point out children and the elderly are starving, they'll hardly be bothered about family welfare.

Please don't vote for them in 2015, and as for the Scottish issue... RUN HAMISH... RUN

Staying contact - not for children of the low paid, disabled or unemployed

Glued to our home page until election day! Remember, remember, 12th of November...

Last night's (14th November 2013) vote in the House of Commons saw the Government protect its coveted bedroom tax, and in doing so, irreparably harm their manifesto commitments to support shared parenting. The consequences for children of separated parents is likely to be severe.

The bedroom tax affects many people, but today I am focusing purely on the impact on children of non-resident parents and children whose parents share care and need housing benefit.

The consequences for these children and parents is likely to be severe.

Many parents need housing benefit. They may be low paid, unemployed or disabled. If these are non-resident parents, they will see their benefits cut to pressurize them into moving to a one bedroom property or bedsit. Consider too, that even resident parents, where residence is shared, may have this restriction on their accommodation.

The big question... will CAFCASS deem this accommodation to be unsuitable for staying contact?

Not long ago, Lord Freud advised parents affected by the bedroom tax to buy a sofa bed for their children when they stay as the tax would mean they no longer have a bedroom. A parent responded, asking if it was appropriate for his two sons and daughter to share a single bed. The Minister didn't have an answer.

Is it right, that a child's right to family life will be protected if you are wealthy, but not if you are poor, low paid or disabled and on benefits?

The Coalition promise of shared parenting being introduced in law is all but dead. The Children and Families Bill has had that wording removed. A 'presumption of meaningful involvement' for both parents has seen the word meaningful removed, and even now, the presumption of any involvement is being opposed in the House of Lords.

The case for both parents having a full involvement in their children's lives... being parents, having their children stay in their homes... children considering the parent's house as their home... children having a bedroom and their 'own space' is fully supported by child welfare research.

David Davies MP recommended the parents of these children, disabled, on low income, or unemployed, be put in chains for not being able to afford a bedroom for their children. Easy for 75% of MPs to have a withering view of the less fortunate, when they themselves are millionaires. John Major commented last weekend that the Government was at risk of being out of touch and elitist. It is out of touch and elitist.

Dame Shirley Williams, stalwart of the LibDems admits the bedroom tax is a 'mistake'. Charles Kennedy, previous leader of the LibDems voted against the bedroom tax at the party conference, but then abstained when it mattered. Nick Clegg too abstained. Poor Nick seems to have over-applied the yellow colour of his party, as a streak down his back. The ex and current LibDem leaders were joined in this display of poor memory by Vince Cable and another 19 LibDem MPs. How can you know what they stand for, when they themselves don't seem to know?

The United Nations have criticised the bedroom tax. A spokesman on Radio4 said the tax represents a "danger of a retrogression in the right to adequate housing" in the UK and has been designed "without the human component in mind". They recommend its suspension.

The Coalition has handed a powerful weapon to the hostile resident parent who seeks to interfere with children's relationships with the other parent. Court measures to counteract this, defined in case law in cases such as A v A and D v D are now made impractical for the marginalised in society.

Broken contact will increase, parental alienation become easier to manipulate, and the court's options be reduced.

The greatest perversity is that Ian Duncan-Smith founded an institute, the Centre for Social Justice, and their research  found fatherlessness to be a primary cause of Broken Britain. A few years later, IDS introduces a policy which pours petrol on the fire.

Today's Guardian headline, that the LibDems joined Labour in opposing the tax, is a joke. Only two MPs did. Amazingly, John Hemming, the MP who Chairs the 'Justice for Families' campaign group was not among them. He tells opponents that people affected by the bedroom tax can rent out their spare room. For non-resident parents, one wonders how acceptable this would be, for an unveted stranger to be in the house, with the children or parent sleeping in the living room (or should the children and lodger share?). It appears Mr Hemming isn't considering the reality for families affected by a policy he supports, or proposes an arrangement jeopardising child safety.

Only two of John Hemming's fellow LibDem MPs opposed the tax last night, while the rest ignored the majority opposition to the tax expressed at the LibDem conference. One has to question who this man and the rest of the LibDem MPs (bar two) represent. Not their party or his campaign group!

John Hemming does not trust social workers. He believes them to unreasonably interfere in family lives, and sever child/parent relationships. Bizarre then, that he'd seemingly empower them to find thousands of parents' homes to be unsuitable for children to live in. He seems a man with confused agendas.

Andrew George and Tim Farron were the only two LibDem MPs who consider child welfare, and vote with their conscience. Andrew George said:

"The spare room penalty/bedroom tax victimises the most marginalised in our communities, it undermines family life, it penalises the hard working low paid for being prepared to stomach low paid work, it masks the excessive cost and disruption caused to those disabled people who have to move from expensively adapted homes and is Dickensian in its social divisiveness.

I hope that those Ministers who live in multiple spare room mansions and who strenuously oppose the Liberal Democrat "Mansion Tax" will be prepared to look the victims of this policy in the eye. Even where those affected are prepared to move to up root themselves from a long standing family home to a smaller property they tell me they can't find anything within 20 - 30 miles. So to escape the bedroom tax they would have to move many miles from their community, their work place, local school, family and social networks, church etc. and re-establish themselves in a place which they may consider to be completely alien. Or of course they could choose a property in the private sector and cost the taxpayer more!"

I couldn't agree more.

So the unemployed, disabled or low paid non-resident parent has another choice. They can move further away from their children, making contact even less likely. It makes involvement in schooling almost impossible. So much for the DfES research which shows children benefit from both parents being involved with the school.

There is another argument put forward that welfare cuts have to happen. Sure they do, but there is an opportunity cost in any decision. I would point out that Iain Duncan-Smith, the Minister who came up with the bedroom tax, is also responsible for £140million being wasted on the Universal Credit System. That money would pay 10,000,000 weeks of bedroom tax.

Consider too, that the decision to cut the upper tax rate, and decision not to introduce a mansion tax is made possible by the Government forcing children of the marginalised to sleep on floors, or in the worst cases, out of one parent's life completely.

Some MPs didn't vote at all, and I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. The ones who did break their promises, are listed below.

Remember both parties made manifesto commitments to support shared parenting. Please don't vote for these named MPs again. It's not a party political matter, but a child welfare matter, and a matter of trust and priorities.

Not so much 'NONE OF THE ABOVE', but 'NONE OF THE BELOW' come election time.

Conservatives

• Adams, Nigel, Mr
• Afriyie, Adam, Mr
• Aldous, Peter, Mr
• Arbuthnot, James, Rt Hon
• Bacon, Richard, Mr
• Baker, Steve, Mr
• Barclay, Stephen, Mr
• Baron, John, Mr
• Bellingham, Henry, Mr
• Benyon, Richard, Mr
• Beresford, Paul, Sir
• Bingham, Andrew, Mr
• Binley, Brian, Mr
• Blackman, Bob, Mr
• Bone, Peter, Mr
• Bottomley, Peter, Mr
• Bradley, Karen, Ms
• Brady, Graham, Mr
• Bray, Angie, Ms
• Three line Aye
• Bridgen, Andrew, Mr
• Brine, Steve, Mr
• Burns, Conor, Mr
• Burns, Simon, Mr
• Burt, Alistair, Mr
• Byles, Dan
• Cameron, David, Rt Hon
• Carswell, Douglas, Mr
• Cash, William
• Chishti, Rehman, Mr
• Chope, Christopher, Mr
• Clappison, James, Mr
• Clark, Greg, Mr
• Clarke, Kenneth, Rt Hon
• Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey, Mr
• Coffey, Thérèse, Ms
• Collins, Damian, Mr
• Colville, Oliver
• Cox, Geoffrey, Mr
• Crabb, Stephen, Mr
• Crouch, Tracey, Ms
• Davies, David T C, Mr
• Davies, Glyn, Mr
• Davies, Philip, Mr
• Dinenage Caroline, Ms
• Djangoly, Jonathan, Mr
• Dorrell, Stephen, Rt Hon
• Doyle-Price, Jackie, Ms
• Drax, Richard, Mr
• Dunne, Philip, Mr
• Ellis, Michael, Mr
• Ellison, Jane, Ms
• Ellwood, Tobias, Mr
• Elphicke, Charlie, Mr
• Eustice, George, Mr
• Evans, Graham, Mr
• Evans, Jonathan, Mr
• Evennett, David
• Fallon, Michael, Mr
• Field, Mark, Mr
• Freer, Mike, Mr
• Fuller, Richard, Mr
• Garnier, Edward, Mr
• Garnier, Mark, Mr
• Gibb, Nick, Mr
• Gillian, Cheryl, Rt Hon
• Glen, John, Mr
• Goodwill, Robert, Mr
• Gove, Michael, Rt Hon
• Grant, Helen, Ms
• Gray, James, Mr
• Grayling, Chris, Mr
• Green, Damian, Mr
• Griffiths, Andrew, Mr
• Gummer, Ben
• Gyimah, Sam, Mr
• Hammond, Stephen, Mr
• Hancock, Matthew, Mr
• Hands, Greg, Mr
• Harper, Mark, Mr
• Harrington, Richard, Mr
• Harris, Rebecca, Ms
• Hart, Simon, Mr
• Hayes, John, Mr
• Heald, Oliver, Mr
• Heaton-Harris, Chris, Mr
• Hendry, Charles, Mr
• Herbert, Nick, Mr
• Hinds, Damian, Mr
• Hollingbery, George, Mr
• Hollobone, Philip, Mr
• Holloway, Adam, Mr
• Hopkins, Kris, Mr
• Howarth, Gerald, Mr
• Howell, John, Mr
• Hunt, Jeremy, Rt Hon
• Jackson, Stewart, Mr
• James, Margot, Ms
• Javid, Sajid, Mr
• Jenkin, Bernard, Mr
• Johnson, Gareth, Mr
• Jones, Andrew, Mr
• Jones, David, Mr
• Jones, Marcus, Mr
• Kelly, Chris, Mr
• Knight, Greg, Mr
• Kwarteng, Kwasi, Mr
• Lancaster, Mark, Mr
• Lansley, Andrew, Rt Hon
• Latham, Pauline, Ms
• Leadsom, Andrea, Ms
• Lee, Jessica, Ms
• Lee, Phillip
• Lewis, Brandon, Mr
• Lewis, Julian, Mr
• Liddell-Grainger, Ian, Mr
• Lidington, David, Mr
• Lopresti, Jack, Mr
• Lord, Jonathan, Mr
• Luff, Peter, Mr
• Main, Anne, Ms
• Maude, Francis, Rt Hon
• May, Theresa, Rt Hon
• Maynard, Paul, Mr
• Mccartney, Jason, Mr
• Mccartney, Karl, Mr
• Mcintosh, Anne, Ms
• Mcpartland, Stephen, Mr
• Mcvey, Esther, Ms
• Menzies, Mark, Mr
• Miller, Maria, Ms
• Mills, Nigel, Mr
• Mordaunt, Penny, Ms
• Morgan, Nicky, Mr
• Morris, David, Mr
• Mosley, Stephen, Mr
• Mowat, David, Mr
• Mundell, David, Mr
• Murray, Sheryll, Ms
• Murrison, Andrew, Mr
• Neill, Robert, Mr
• Newmark, Brooks, Mr
• Newton, Sarah, Ms
• Nokes, Caroline, Ms
• Nuttall, David, Mr
• O'Brien Stephen, Mr
• Ollernshaw, Eric
• Opperman, Guy, Mr
• Ottaway, Richard, Mr
• Paice, James, Mr
• Parish, Neil, Mr
• Patel, Priti, Ms
• Penning, Mike, Mr
• Penrose, John, Mr
• Perry, Claire, Ms
• Phillips, Stephen, Mr
• Pickles, Eric, Rt Hon
• Pincher, Christopher
• Poulter, Daniel, Mr
• Prisk, Mark, Mr
• Pritchard, Mark, Mr
• Raab, Dominic, Mr
• Randall, John, Mr
• Redwood, John, Rt Hon
• Rees-Mogg, Jacob, Mr
• Reevell, Simon, Mr
• Robertson, Hugh, Mr
• Roberston, Laurence, Mr
• Rosindell, Andrew, Mr
• Rudd, Amber, Ms
• Ruffley, David, Mr
• Rutley, David, Mr
• Sandys, Laura, Ms
• Scott, Lee, Mr
• Selous, Andrew, Mr
• Shapps, Grant, Mr
• Shelbrooke, Alec, Mr
• Shepherd, Richard, Mr
• Simpson, Keith, Mr
• Skidmore, Chris, Mr
• Smith, Henry, Mr
• Smith, Julian, Mr
• Soames, Nicholas, Hon
• Soubry, Anna, Ms
• Spelman, Caroline, Rt Hon
• Stanley, John, Rt Hon Sir
• Stephenson, Andrew, Mr
• Stevenson, John, Mr
• Stewart, Bob, Mr
• Stewart, Iain, Mr
• Streeter, Gary, Mr
• Stride, Mel, Mr
• Stuart, Graham, Mr
• Sturdy, Julian, Mr
• Swayne, Desmond, Mr
• Syms, Robert, Mr
• Tapsell, Peter, Mr
• Timpson, Edward, Mr
• Tomlinson, Justin, Mr
• Tredinnick, David, Mr
• Truss, Elizabeth, Ms
• Turner, Andrew, Mr
• Tyrie, Andrew, Mr
• Uppal, Paul, Mr
• Vaizey, Edward
• Vara, Shailesh, Mr
• Vickers, Martin, Mr
• Walker, Charles, Mr
• Wallace, Ben, Mr
• Wharton, James, Mr
• Wheeler, Heather, Ms
• White, Chris, Mr
• Whittingdale, John, Mr
• Wiggin, Bill, Mr
• Williamson, Gavin, Mr
• Wilson, Rob
• Wollaston, Sarah, Ms
• Wright, Jeremy, Mr
• Yeo, Tim, Mr
• Young, George, Sir Rt Hon

LibDems

• Norman Baker (Lewes)
• Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)
• Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington)
• Jeremy Browne (Taunton Deane)
• Malcolm Bruce (Gordon)
• Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam)
• Lorely Burt (Solihull)
• Sir Menzies Campbell (Fife North East)
• Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland)
• Edward Davey (Kingston & Surbiton)
• Don Foster (Bath)
• Stephen Gilbert (St Austell & Newquay)
• Duncan Hames (Chippenham)
• Sir Nick Harvey (Devon North)
• David Heath (Somerton & Frome)
• John Hemming (Birmingham Yardley)
• Martin Horwood (Cheltenham)
• Simon Hughes (Bermondsey & Old Southwark)
• Mark Hunter (Cheadle)
• Norman Lamb (Norfolk North)
• Michael Moore (Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk)
• Tessa Munt (Wells)
• John Pugh (Southport)
• Dan Rogerson (Cornwall North)
• Bob Russell (Colchester)
• Sir Robert Smith (Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine)
• Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove)
• Jo Swinson (Dunbartonshire East)
• John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross)
• Steve Webb (Thornbury & Yate)
• Stephen Williams (Bristol West)