On your bike
Current Affairs The Conservative Party
- Thread starter Ashtonian
- Start date
- Status
On your bike
Jib in lad
Player Valuation: £25m
Tories dismiss charity's claim there is a rise in those using food banks. They would, wouldn't they.
Food bank charity gives record level of supplies - BBC News
Food bank charity gives record level of supplies - BBC News
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
I don’t see any dismissal there? There’s the point that it’s easy to say ‘Benefits!’ but that then ignores a raft load of other issues- cost of housing, lack of career prospects in parts of the country, failure/don’t know how to budget, lack of maturity, learned hopelessness for a few.
The BBC omitted this from it's report, "A Department for Work and Pensions spokesperson, however, defended the government’s welfare initiatives, saying the findings were merely based on “anecdotal evidence.”
“This research is based on anecdotal evidence from a small, self-selecting sample of less than 0.04 per cent of current Universal Credit claimants, whereas Universal Credit is working for the vast majority who claim it".
It is not surprising that the state controlled, censored BBC omitted it. It was reported in RT though - the above bit.
It is not the rich that go to food banks but the poor -working or not -, vulnerable, disabled and weak. All the people the Tories take great store in attacking and making them poorer with their austerity. Hence the rise in food bank usage.
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
Yeah the BBC have omitted it as it’s also in The Guardian. DWP do have a very valid point though - it’s an absolutely minuscule representation of how the system actually works. With it being self selected it’s also a problem as only those who have an issue are likely to respond. It’s indicative that there might be a problem, but it actually needs deeper digging first and foremost.
Interestingly, the percentage of those coming in from benefit changes actually dropped from the year before. Doesn’t support its own narrative...
"The other main primary referral reasons in 2017-18 were benefit delays (24%) and benefit changes (18%). New data about the types of benefit change driving foodbank use is clear: whilst referrals due to ‘benefit sanction’ have declined over the last year, those due to ‘reduction in benefit value’ have the fastest growth rate of all referrals made due to a benefit change, and those due to ‘moving to a different benefit’ have also grown significantly.
Universal Credit is not the only benefit people at foodbanks are experiencing issues with, but it is a significant factor in many areas. New analysis of foodbanks that have been in full UC rollout areas for a year or more shows that these projects experienced an average increase of 52% in the twelve months after the full rollout date in their area. Analysis of foodbanks either not in full UC areas, or only in full rollout areas for up to three months, showed an average increase of 13%.*
It was benefit sanctions referrals that declined. Which is a Tory vicious attack on the poor, weak, disabled and vulnerable led by Duncan Smith.
Dismissing evidence due to 'a small self-selecting sample' is typical Tory speak for 'things are getting worse so let's dismiss it and attack someone else'. Any 'survey' is self-selecting including the governments unemployment figures.
"How is unemployment measured UK?
The answers lie with the Labour Force Survey, the huge continuous survey that ONS uses to measure unemployment (along with employment and economic inactivity). The unemployment figures use an internationally-agreed definition. ... Each quarter the LFS covers 100,000 people in 40,000 households chosen randomly by postcode". A survey, 100,000 people is 0.25% of the working population. I'll give you it is higher than 0.04 but still 'small. Whether it is self-selecting' I don't know but still a small survey.
The rise in those using food banks is down to this government's deliberate policy to attack the poor, vulnerable, disabled and weak. And the state controlled BBC will continue to omit some things on behalf of the government.
Why did the BBC omit the dismissal?
'Covert corruption’: MPs call for HMRC to be investigated over refusal to probe ‘biggest’ Tory donor
The scandals, sleaze and corruptions of this Tory lot are worst that when Major was in power. Labour should call for a vote of no confidence in this lot.
The scandals, sleaze and corruptions of this Tory lot are worst that when Major was in power. Labour should call for a vote of no confidence in this lot.
You're sounding dangerously like Mandy Richards with all this BBC conspiracy stuff.
zzr45
#MURDERINGSCUM
I don’t know? Because if I was trying to discredit a report (as you suggest they are) that’s the first thing I’d be on to.
Commonwealth immigration
'I felt like dirt': disabled Canadian woman told to leave UK after 44 years
Margaret O’Brien’s treatment by Home Office suggests scandal goes beyond Windrush generation
Amelia Gentleman
@ameliagentleman
Tue 24 Apr 2018 14.26 BSTLast modified on Tue 24 Apr 2018 19.23 BST
Margaret O’Brien’s benefits were suspended because she was deemed an illegal immigrant. Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
Margaret O’Brien, 69, moved from Canada to Wolverhampton in 1971, got married, had three children and worked for the local council for more than 25 years as a dinner lady, meals on wheels driver, lollipop lady and cleaner.
A spinal injury a few years ago meant she had to give up her job, leading her to apply for benefits for the first time. In 2015, she was told her disability payments had been suspended because she was an illegal immigrant.
O’Brien received a letter stating: “Home Office records indicate that you do not have permission to be in the UK. You should make arrangements to leave without delay.”
The letter informed her “of our intention to remove you from the UK to your country of nationality if you do not depart voluntarily. No further notice will be given”.
If she decided to stay, the letter warned, “life in the UK will become increasingly difficult”; O’Brien was liable to be arrested, prosecuted and face a possible six-month prison sentence.
Her case is significant because it shows the Home Office’s treatment of longstanding Commonwealth-born UK residents is not restricted to the Windrush generation, but is likely to extend to people from other Commonwealth countries.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
A deportation letter received by O’Brien, who came to the UK from Canada in 1971, before the Immigration Act. Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
The letter arrived a few days after her son’s wedding. “I tried to call the telephone number provided, but it was absolutely impossible to get through. My son was on honeymoon in New York. I didn’t know what to do,” she said. O’Brien sought legal advice, but she was told it would cost £900 for initial work. “I’m a disabled pensioner. I didn’t have that kind of money,” she said.
Not long afterwards, she was issued with a letter headed “notification to a person who is liable to be detained”. Her photo was above the words: “You are a person without leave who has been served with a notice of liability to removal.”
She gathered a large number of documents as evidence that she had lived in the UK before the 1973 Immigration Act came into force, and was in the country legally. After more than a year of trying to convince officials, she was allowed to meet a Home Office decision-maker in person. She was ready to show him her documents, but he simply asked if there was anyone in Canada who could house her.
Q&A
Have you been affected by this story?
“I don’t know whether they get brownie points for the number of people they can send back to their own country,” O’Brien said. She felt the man was looking at her and thinking: “Is this someone I can take in?”
O’Brien’s account stands out as shocking even among the deluge of revelations about Home Office behaviour, but she said two years of getting by without disability benefit is nothing compared with stories of detention and forced exile in Jamaica. “I was humiliated, but there are so many people in situations much worse than mine,” she said.
She found the requirement to report every three months at the Home Office very difficult because of her disability. O’Brien walks with a frame and has to be accompanied by someone when she goes out, because she has a health condition that makes her prone to collapsing unexpectedly.
The 25-mile journey via bus, train and tram to the Home Office reporting centre in Solihull takes about two hours each way. On one occasion, she arrived only to be told the office was closed for a training day. On another, she queued for more than two hours before being asked to come back another day.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
O’Brien on her wedding day. She only had her right to remain confirmed after a case worker found a passport stamp. Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
The waiting room was like a cattle market, she said, crammed with about 200 people, among them babies – and sometimes adults – crying. People branded overstayers, illegal immigrants or refused asylum seekers had to hand over all sharp objects, pens, pencils and keys, as well as mobile phones, at the door. Chairs were screwed to the floor.
“It was very degrading. I’m a disabled woman. Sometimes, I was in a lot of pain,” O’Brien said. Travelling to the centre cost about £40 each time for herself and her grandson or one of her children. “I thought fine, I will just explain my situation. You hope miracles will happen and someone will just listen to you,” she said.
Her daughter, who was not allowed in and had to wait outside, once saw a group of people being bundled into a van, presumably to be detained. After that, both of them feared she might be next. The security guards on the door were always kind to her. She thought they felt sorry for her because she was finding it physically difficult to make her way to the office.
“They told me ‘you shouldn’t be here’,” O’Brien said. Inside the building, Home Office staff were less friendly. “To them, it is just a job. Maybe they have to meet numbers, meet a certain number of people a day. You’re just treated as a number,” she said.
O’Brien had first been informed that she had a problem with her paperwork when the council pointed out in about 2008 that her Canadian passport had expired, and asked her for an alternative document.
She had never applied for a British passport and was not planning a holiday, so decided to explain to council staff that she had been in the UK for decades and did not need to prove a right to reside. This was several years before the introduction of the “hostile environment” policy, and staff immediately let the matter drop.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
O’Brien at her home in Wolverhampton. She said: ‘My treatment by the Home Office was terrible.’ Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
She was puzzled by the Home Office’s decision to target her. “I did feel British. When I came to England, Canada was part of the Commonwealth. It was so simple. I went to the jobcentre, was issued with a national insurance and got a job. I was always in work,” O’Brien said.
By the time she retired, she was juggling three jobs. When she thought she might be deported, she remembered wondering whether she would get a refund of the money she had paid in taxes.
O’Brien’s life savings were eaten up during the period that she was without money, and she had to rely on her children.
Her case worker at the Refugee and Migrant Centre, Daniel Ashwell, helped her find an indefinite leave to remain stamp in her expired Canadian passport that instantly proved she was in the UK legally. She had never noticed it, or realised its significance, and was profoundly grateful for his help.
After the Home Office received this evidence, her right to be in the UK was confirmed and her benefits were paid.
“My treatment by the Home Office was terrible. I felt like dirt,” she said.
Ashwell said: “The case of Ms O’Brien is a stark example of the consequences of the hostile environment experienced by many of our clients. The case demonstrates the way in which immigration policy has encouraged Home Office officials to treat those going through the immigration system with distrust and a lack of human dignity.”
In an emailed statement, the Home Office said: “The new dedicated team helping the Windrush generation will be on hand to assist undocumented long-resident Commonwealth citizens.”
'I felt like dirt': disabled Canadian woman told to leave UK after 44 years
Margaret O’Brien’s treatment by Home Office suggests scandal goes beyond Windrush generation
Amelia Gentleman
@ameliagentleman
Tue 24 Apr 2018 14.26 BSTLast modified on Tue 24 Apr 2018 19.23 BST
Margaret O’Brien’s benefits were suspended because she was deemed an illegal immigrant. Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
Margaret O’Brien, 69, moved from Canada to Wolverhampton in 1971, got married, had three children and worked for the local council for more than 25 years as a dinner lady, meals on wheels driver, lollipop lady and cleaner.
A spinal injury a few years ago meant she had to give up her job, leading her to apply for benefits for the first time. In 2015, she was told her disability payments had been suspended because she was an illegal immigrant.
O’Brien received a letter stating: “Home Office records indicate that you do not have permission to be in the UK. You should make arrangements to leave without delay.”
The letter informed her “of our intention to remove you from the UK to your country of nationality if you do not depart voluntarily. No further notice will be given”.
If she decided to stay, the letter warned, “life in the UK will become increasingly difficult”; O’Brien was liable to be arrested, prosecuted and face a possible six-month prison sentence.
Her case is significant because it shows the Home Office’s treatment of longstanding Commonwealth-born UK residents is not restricted to the Windrush generation, but is likely to extend to people from other Commonwealth countries.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
A deportation letter received by O’Brien, who came to the UK from Canada in 1971, before the Immigration Act. Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
The letter arrived a few days after her son’s wedding. “I tried to call the telephone number provided, but it was absolutely impossible to get through. My son was on honeymoon in New York. I didn’t know what to do,” she said. O’Brien sought legal advice, but she was told it would cost £900 for initial work. “I’m a disabled pensioner. I didn’t have that kind of money,” she said.
Not long afterwards, she was issued with a letter headed “notification to a person who is liable to be detained”. Her photo was above the words: “You are a person without leave who has been served with a notice of liability to removal.”
She gathered a large number of documents as evidence that she had lived in the UK before the 1973 Immigration Act came into force, and was in the country legally. After more than a year of trying to convince officials, she was allowed to meet a Home Office decision-maker in person. She was ready to show him her documents, but he simply asked if there was anyone in Canada who could house her.
Q&A
Have you been affected by this story?
“I don’t know whether they get brownie points for the number of people they can send back to their own country,” O’Brien said. She felt the man was looking at her and thinking: “Is this someone I can take in?”
O’Brien’s account stands out as shocking even among the deluge of revelations about Home Office behaviour, but she said two years of getting by without disability benefit is nothing compared with stories of detention and forced exile in Jamaica. “I was humiliated, but there are so many people in situations much worse than mine,” she said.
She found the requirement to report every three months at the Home Office very difficult because of her disability. O’Brien walks with a frame and has to be accompanied by someone when she goes out, because she has a health condition that makes her prone to collapsing unexpectedly.
The 25-mile journey via bus, train and tram to the Home Office reporting centre in Solihull takes about two hours each way. On one occasion, she arrived only to be told the office was closed for a training day. On another, she queued for more than two hours before being asked to come back another day.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
O’Brien on her wedding day. She only had her right to remain confirmed after a case worker found a passport stamp. Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
The waiting room was like a cattle market, she said, crammed with about 200 people, among them babies – and sometimes adults – crying. People branded overstayers, illegal immigrants or refused asylum seekers had to hand over all sharp objects, pens, pencils and keys, as well as mobile phones, at the door. Chairs were screwed to the floor.
“It was very degrading. I’m a disabled woman. Sometimes, I was in a lot of pain,” O’Brien said. Travelling to the centre cost about £40 each time for herself and her grandson or one of her children. “I thought fine, I will just explain my situation. You hope miracles will happen and someone will just listen to you,” she said.
Her daughter, who was not allowed in and had to wait outside, once saw a group of people being bundled into a van, presumably to be detained. After that, both of them feared she might be next. The security guards on the door were always kind to her. She thought they felt sorry for her because she was finding it physically difficult to make her way to the office.
“They told me ‘you shouldn’t be here’,” O’Brien said. Inside the building, Home Office staff were less friendly. “To them, it is just a job. Maybe they have to meet numbers, meet a certain number of people a day. You’re just treated as a number,” she said.
O’Brien had first been informed that she had a problem with her paperwork when the council pointed out in about 2008 that her Canadian passport had expired, and asked her for an alternative document.
She had never applied for a British passport and was not planning a holiday, so decided to explain to council staff that she had been in the UK for decades and did not need to prove a right to reside. This was several years before the introduction of the “hostile environment” policy, and staff immediately let the matter drop.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
O’Brien at her home in Wolverhampton. She said: ‘My treatment by the Home Office was terrible.’ Photograph: Andrew Fox for the Guardian
She was puzzled by the Home Office’s decision to target her. “I did feel British. When I came to England, Canada was part of the Commonwealth. It was so simple. I went to the jobcentre, was issued with a national insurance and got a job. I was always in work,” O’Brien said.
By the time she retired, she was juggling three jobs. When she thought she might be deported, she remembered wondering whether she would get a refund of the money she had paid in taxes.
O’Brien’s life savings were eaten up during the period that she was without money, and she had to rely on her children.
Her case worker at the Refugee and Migrant Centre, Daniel Ashwell, helped her find an indefinite leave to remain stamp in her expired Canadian passport that instantly proved she was in the UK legally. She had never noticed it, or realised its significance, and was profoundly grateful for his help.
After the Home Office received this evidence, her right to be in the UK was confirmed and her benefits were paid.
“My treatment by the Home Office was terrible. I felt like dirt,” she said.
Ashwell said: “The case of Ms O’Brien is a stark example of the consequences of the hostile environment experienced by many of our clients. The case demonstrates the way in which immigration policy has encouraged Home Office officials to treat those going through the immigration system with distrust and a lack of human dignity.”
In an emailed statement, the Home Office said: “The new dedicated team helping the Windrush generation will be on hand to assist undocumented long-resident Commonwealth citizens.”
The Tories 'war is business, business is war' will carry on as men, women and children are killed at a wedding.
Government says 'heart goes out' to wedding guests killed by Saudi bombs - but it won't stop selling them arms
Government says 'heart goes out' to wedding guests killed by Saudi bombs - but it won't stop selling them arms
- Status