David Cameron: A Progress report on your time in number 10 so far(32 Posts)
Progress report on your time in number 10 so far.
Lord Freud, DWP and Atos, work capability assessment:
10,000 deaths before, during or after testing with nearly half of all appeals being upheld for the claimants. Cost of appeals: £25 million in the first half of 2012. Verdict: not fit for purpose. Failure.
Iain Duncan Smith, DWP and back-to-work-pogroms:
Court finds the regulations of enforced labour illegal. Providers, such as A4E, REED and Ingeus, actually reduced the number of ESAclaimants finding work by 80%, and the number of 18-24 year of JSA claimants finding work by 74%. Cost: £5 billion. Verdict: Worse than useless. Failure.
Poverty in the UK:
The Trussell Trust, which now operates more than 300 food banks in the UK. In 2011/12, 128,697 emergency food parcels were handed out - up from just 26,000 in 2008/9. Verdict: Poverty and hunger are increasing. Failure.
You promised to protect the NHS. Section 75 of the Health & Social Care Act 2012 dramatically extends competition and forces compulsory competitive markets on the NHS. Verdict: You have broken every promise you made about the NHS. Nationwide the NHS is falling apart. Failure.
Fire, Police and Ambulance services are being quietly sold off. In the West Midlands alone, 1,000 staff have already been lost to the cuts, more than 2,500 jobs - a third of them police officers, two thirds essential frontline staff - could be lost as part of an exercise that has already cost the taxpayer £3million. Companies like G4S cannot offer the same skills as those losing their jobs to cuts. Verdict: Failure.
Michael Gove forced to abandon English Baccalaureate. Gove selling off school playing fields, but lies about the numbers. Leaked documents of the minutes of a meeting of top Department for Education officials reveal all academies and free schools in England, which are the Education Secretary's personal obsession, would be free to become profit-making for the first time, and be entirely decoupled from Whitehallcontrol. Verdict: Betrayal and failure.
Westminsterexpects 5,000 families to be evicted by housing benefit cuts - and it's happening almost everywhere. Councils have no choice as they frantically search for cheap housing, often hundreds of miles away. In Hullthe bedroom tax hits 4,700 families with a spare room, and only 73 small properties free. 660,000 households expected to be evicted. Verdict: Vicious attack on the poorest people in Britain. Verdict: Failure.
You are stripping away workers rights and what you call bureaucratic red tape and promoting a fire at will policy. High street companies are failing at epic proportions. Verdict: Failure.
George Osborne: With the loss of Britain's AAA status, the economy is showing no signs of recovery. Osborne is presiding over the worst recovery in history. Verdict: Epic failure.
As the worst government in British history all that remains is that you are removed from office and your government thrown out on its ear as soon as possible.
It's funny how some govt. supporters complain I have no opinions and just copy and past articles whilst others say that I'm full of opinion and no facts.
> So Ttosca. Which party do you support? Or which comes closest to your personal belief's. If you don't support Labour then it follows that both the lib dems is too right wing for you. And clearly you don't support the Tories.
I don't support any party.
> So I am curious, which party do you think "I agree with most of your views?"
Like many people, I find the lack of real choice frustrating. I believe, as people say on here constantly, that come election time they vote based on 'the least bad' party.
I don't think this is a solution to our problems, as people have been doing this for decades, and we'd have the same result; the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expecting something different to occur.
Although participation in national elections in the West has been steadily declining since the post war period, participation in politics and activism has risen. So I believe the only way to real change - as history has shown - is not through the ballot box, but by people fighting for justice and their rights through protest and dissent.
> Your opinion is that ,the govt is vicious,, and that ,the wealthy have benefitted from wealth transfer, - what facts do you have that back this up?
I'm amazed that you're asking me this. I've only been posting facts about the government record on this forum for the past year or so. Are you new to the forum, or have you just started noticing my posts?
You can also easily find news reports to back up claims of wealth transfer from the poor to the rich and attacks on the poor. Here is one which came up today:
Government 'misrepresenting' the poor, say churches
The government is deliberately misusing evidence and statistics to misrepresent the plight of the poor, a report says
As for wealth transfer, well, come April, millionaires will receive a tax cut worth tens of thousands of pounds, whilst at the same time the poorest will have their housing benefits reduced, forcing many out of their home.
Meanwhile, there have been thousands of 'surplus' (statistically unexpected deaths) from disabled and sick people who have been re-assessed by the DWP as 'fit for work':
The average death toll seems to be that the govt. are killing 73 people per week in this way.
This is so ridiculous, Ajandjjmum. There is tons of evidence out there. Why not spend your weekend reading this
The richest tenth of the population have seen much bigger proportional rises in their incomes than any other group
The poorest tenth of the population now have, between them, 1.3% of the country's total income and the second poorest tenth have 4%. In contrast, the richest tenth have 31% and the second richest tenth have 15%. The income of the richest tenth is more than the income of all those on below-average incomes (i.e. the bottom five tenths) combined.
The proportion of total income going to the richest tenth is noticeably higher than a decade ago: 31% in 2008/09 compared with 28% in 1998/99. The rest of the income distribution changed little over the last decade.
The gini coefficient measure of overall income inequality in the United Kingdom is now higher than at any previous time in the last thirty years.
the original op seems to have got it about right
Our wonderful government are shafting the vulnerable in society whist the rich gain, everyone jumping on their "scrounging,"propaganda bandwagon.
It makes me sick how the poor, ill, SAHP's etc are treated like scum but the rich tax evaders, thieving bankers, 3 house owning MPs get away with it over and over again.
It makes me sick.
No suprising Cameron and Osborne look after their own class. Was ever thus.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.