Webbo Posted 25 August 2015 Posted 25 August 2015 It was exposed and before it all received the objections it is doing now, the excuse was that the leaflets were just an example on how the policies were working. If the leaflets and falke stories had not come to light would IDS had ordered the scrapping of them if one should have happened to fall on his desk? The DWP would have a procedure of getting material approved from higher departments one which most likely be close to IDS. Regardless of the intentions the question remains what other policies have been supported by actions that are economical with the truth? Were these carried out before the GE resulting in people voting Tory? If this was a Labour Government Tory supporters would be calling for heads. I would agree. Politicians are working for the public. Well in theory anyway. I wouldn't.
Buce Posted 28 August 2015 Author Posted 28 August 2015 I always thought Cameron was full of shit.. Apparently, it's the other way round: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/david-cameron-and-samantha-went-bodyboarding-in-sea-polluted-with-diluted-sewage-10476651.html
Guest MattP Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Good man, we should all admire a man (and woman) prepared to get hands dirty.
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 If he wasn't PM, you'd definitely say that Dave was punching above his weight.
Guest MattP Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Bigtime, she's not bad. Hague was the king of that though, how did that baldy bastard pull Fijon?
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 The problem with the argument that IDS has taken a lot of people off the dole is that many were not 'fit for work,' as yesterday's release of figures showing the number of deaths of people with said status proved. Moreover, there have been too many who have been given insecure, low paid and low skilled jobs that actually save the government little - owing to the fact that they have to be topped up with tax credits, housing and other benefits still needing to be paid to the claimant due to insufficient wages, so this is actually underemployment. We therefore still have the issue that employment is not doing what it should for the poor, that is to enable social mobility and take them out of poverty and indeed the benefits system.It might make the employment figures look good, but it actually isn't a great way of lifting people out of the poverty trap.
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Bigtime, she's not bad. Hague was the king of that though, how did that baldy bastard pull Fijon? Mrs Clegg was quite the looker as well. Even George Galloway has an attractive wife. Another couple of years of teaching, then I'm trying for Parliament!
Buce Posted 28 August 2015 Author Posted 28 August 2015 If he wasn't PM, you'd definitely say that Dave was punching above his weight. Is that the second, or third time, Bilo? I think you need to get laid, and soon!
Guest MattP Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 The Tories know exactly what they are doing mate, cut cut and cut welfare, Labour forced into a position to fight anti welfare. Labour seen more and more as party of welfare, Tories seen more and more party of working. No lose situation for the current government. Corbyn falls into this trap more than anyone.
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Is that the second, or third time, Bilo? I think you need to get laid, and soon! It's not even been that long, either!
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 The Tories know exactly what they are doing mate, cut cut and cut welfare, Labour forced into a position to fight anti welfare. Labour seen more and more as party of welfare, Tories seen more and more party of working. No lose situation for the current government. Corbyn falls into this trap more than anyone. I agree, it puts us in a position where we can't be seen to oppose it too strongly if we want to be seen as the party of work, yet can't be seen to support the policies lest we're seen as complicit. It's a very difficult balancing act for Labour, and is among the reasons why I completely understand the motives for abstaining on the welfare bill.
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 I think Bilo had it right in an earlier post (#83) This Government has gone at it like a bull in a china shop. In some areas it is costing more but it makes the figures. In those stats released some of thosr died within a year despite being deemed fit for work being told get a job or placed on a programme with reduced income. They still needed care which they had to pay for. There must be a fairer way of doing it. Many of those doing the accessing have little medical knowledge regarding the conditions of the people that they see. This has been shown by the number of appeals won. Certain illnesses are not 24/7. A person may be fine one day buta danger to themselves and others without warning. Before all the counter arguments are heard some questions for employers. Would you be willing to convert your work place for anyone with a disability or long term illness. Does your place have a lift? Are you willing to pay extra insurance to employ someone that has been deemed fit for work after 20 years on DLA? Would you be willing to allow time off for hospital visits therapy and bad days? It would be great if employer would say yes to all those but the truth is before it happens the infrastructure has to be there which it is not People are expected to turn up for meetings and work programmes with no though of their conditions or abilities.or lack of them. I have said all this before though and got nowhere so why do I bother?All I am saying that the present method has not worked and needs a revirw to find a fairer way. I would have more respect for this government if they admiyyed they got some things wrong. Don't know how true or the details of this. Not seen it anywhere else but the WCA may be scrapped. I will await for the official announcement. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/ids-announces-fitness-for-work-u-turn-that-was-five-years-in-the- making/ I have been say this for a couple of years now either review and change it or scrap it
Wymsey Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Starting to can't stand Duncan-Smith, at the moment. Seems a bit of a bully with his recent explanations.
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Starting to can't stand Duncan-Smith, at the moment. Seems a bit of a bully with his recent explanations. He is, but nobody is going to bring him in line because he's doing the dirty work that's been asked of him. Obviously 90 people a month dying after being declared fit for work should lead to resignation in disgrace, but this bulllying methodology is what was promised and is now being delivered.
Benji Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Maybe Gove has politely asked IDS if he can give him a couple of weeks rest to harden his stiff upper lip. Either that or there's a bet on who can be the most unpopular. Winner gets a peerage.
Guest Bilo Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Maybe Gove has politely asked IDS if he can give him a couple of weeks rest to harden his stiff upper lip. Either that or there's a bet on who can be the most unpopular. Winner gets a peerage. Do you reckon Theresa May will want to get in on that action? It's an actual mystery how Gove keeps getting top jobs, I can honestly see that being on Politics exam papers in 20 years time as a 40 mark question.
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Someone on Facebook had a good reason why IDS is still around. They reckon he has some nasty info on Cameron. Silly I know but funny.
enmac Posted 28 August 2015 Posted 28 August 2015 Someone on Facebook had a good reason why IDS is still around. They reckon he has some nasty info on Cameron. Silly I know but funny.Why silly? IDS has got some power. I'm sure Cameron tried to move him to another department during a cabinet re-shuffle. He refused and he's still in the same place. I think IDS has powerful allies. Beware of psychopaths.
Rincewind Posted 29 August 2015 Posted 29 August 2015 Why silly? IDS has got some power. I'm sure Cameron tried to move him to another department during a cabinet re-shuffle. He refused and he's still in the same place. I think IDS has powerful allies. Beware of psychopaths. I said silly before anyone else did. It certainly would fit in with him refusing to move in the reshuffle. Maybe cynical would have been a better word. I think he turned down defense. Maybe a good thing because we would be nuked by now.
Guest Bilo Posted 29 August 2015 Posted 29 August 2015 Why silly? IDS has got some power. I'm sure Cameron tried to move him to another department during a cabinet re-shuffle. He refused and he's still in the same place. I think IDS has powerful allies. Beware of psychopaths. I wouldn't be surprised if Gove had dirt as well. Never piss off a journalist.
Webbo Posted 29 August 2015 Posted 29 August 2015 Why silly? IDS has got some power. I'm sure Cameron tried to move him to another department during a cabinet re-shuffle. He refused and he's still in the same place. I think IDS has powerful allies. Beware of psychopaths. Psychopath?
Buce Posted 29 August 2015 Author Posted 29 August 2015 Psychopath? Professor Robert Hare, Criminal Psychologist: " The list in full is: glibness and superficial charm, grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, cunning/manipulative, lack of remorse, emotional shallowness, callousness and lack of empathy, unwillingness to accept responsibility for actions," How does that not decribe IDS?
Rincewind Posted 29 August 2015 Posted 29 August 2015 Professor Robert Hare, Criminal Psychologist: " The list in full is: glibness and superficial charm, grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, cunning/manipulative, lack of remorse, emotional shallowness, callousness and lack of empathy, unwillingness to accept responsibility for actions," How does that not decribe IDS? Yes and he says it himself.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.