I'm disgusted by Osbourne jumping on the Phillpott bandwagon created by the DM(374 Posts)
So, yesterday there was outrage after the pictures of dead children were used in the most cynical way by the Daily Mail to sell the idea that welfare "scroungers" are evil, with Phillpott branded a "vile product" of the benefit system by the DM.
What's our government's response today?
George Osborne, when asked about the claims, said a debate was needed about whether the state should "subsidise lifestyles like that". link
To add insult to injury, he was visiting Derby when he said this (which is where the children lived and died).
How fucking insensitive can you get?
aufanie totally agree with every think you've said on this post and a lot of others IMO you would be brilliant in politics.
Sorry, aufaniae, for rambling. To reply to your OP: I think you are not at all unreasonable. I think you are very reasonable, calm and rational.
He was asked a question and answered. He didnt jump on any badwagon.
Reading the article he quite clearly seperates the awful events from the comments made re benefits.
Whether people like it or not, there are people who agree with the cuts and dislike the subsidising of peoples lifestyles. That doesnt make either side right hence it being a debate.
He could have said "Although I would like further debate about welfare changes, I do not think this tragic event had anything to do with the benefits system".
It should be noted that Phillpott wasn't really entitled to benefits anyway. His children and working partners were. (His partners were also entitled to wages, which he took).
Mr Osborne said a debate was needed about whether the state should "subsidise lifestyles like that".
Didn't see anyone questioning Public Service Workers when Nilsen was caught, or Medical Staff when Shipman was caught, oh, and nobody said anything about the Wests and benefits.
What Osborne said was wrong, and just because it doesn't fit your usual political agenda HappyMummy you should have the grace to admit that he was wrong. But you won't, along with all the other benefit bashers the imprisonment of a psychopath gives you free rein, doesn't it.
This isn't really an AIBU so we've moved it to In The News
In fact I think thats the route of the problem.
Single, able bodied unemployed people are actually entitled to very little.
However, if only people would come out and say "I don't think children, the disabled or the working poor should be entitled to government support through benefits and either a) they should be responsible for themselves and live in shanty towns or b) they should be in work houses or c) They should be supported through charity, and I personally will volunteer once a week at a hostel for abused women and give away 10% of my income." then there really could be debate.
All this pussy footing around "I don't want to give benefits to Phillpott" doesn't get anybody anywhere. Nobody wants to support his 'lifestyle'.
However, if you don't want to give benefits to children, you have to explain how you will deal with the consequences.
Merrymouse-yes! Exactly, precisely what he should have said. So true. In fact, that's a bit like Anne widdecombe said I think. It's possible to be pro benefits changes and anti benefit dependency (misguidedly albeit IMO) without losing all human decency.
Misguidedly I mean because the scale of this is massively over played.
Dawndonna, i just dont get what he said was wrong. He didnt connect the two events or blame benefits in the sligtest. I am allowed to disagree without being ungraceful as you put it.
As for commenting that a debate was needed re funding lifestyles - given the amount of benefits is claimed to be as high as £68k then lots of people would want to parliament to debate over such a generous system.
But that's the whole point, he did connect them.
The point is he was abusing the system. He was only able to benefit from having a large family because he took the cash from the intended recipients.
However, my impression is that Osborne is more concerned about the quantity of benefits children receive, not whether they receive them. If this is his main concern, he has been quite reticent about expressing it.
Dawndonna I agree with you totally.... Osborne's comments were meant to add to the already misguided opinions of some against people who have to live of benefits.
And this is what i heard today.
DarkesteyesThu 04-Apr-13 22:44:19 I experienced first hand today the kind of attitudes that are being enforced.
A few years back we had a domestic abuse murder in the town where i live. A woman and her young child.
Today i overheard two people discussing the Philpot case and the conversation then focused on a local case.
the words were "they are just council house scum"
yes those were the words spoken about a dead woman and her dead child. Just because they were claiming benefits.
And these words were spoken by a woman who also has had problems with a controlling ex.
But the woman who spoke these words isnt a claimant so her logic is that she herself is an abuse victim but the woman who was murdered isnt. No she is just council scum just because she claimed benefits.
As i left the coffee shop i felt like screaming. its fucking despairing
The existence of a welfare state isn't the reason why sociopaths exist.
George Osborne is a despicable man.
That's appalling darkesteyes , utterly vile.
Scum is a foul word. And yet on here I see it used fairly frequently about the Tories, " tory scum" is apparently a perfectly acceptable term according to MN.
But those of us who are tories feel exactly as you did when we see it written about us on here .
Tories are shameless cunts for doing this. My DH used to work in political PR.... straight away he said this is typical Tory stuff. Just remember this anyone who votes for these utter bastards. This is how confident they are in their way that they can do something as blatant as going to the very place on the very day this trial concluded and made a speech about 'hardworking people'. They are jumping on the graves of those children. Please never ever votes for these fucking assholes, they have no humanity and their arrogance is breathtaking.
This is what he actually said :
*Philpott is responsible for these absolutely horrendous crimes, that have shocked the nation.
'The courts are responsible for sentencing.
But I think there is a question for government and for society about the welfare state, and the taxpayers who pay for the welfare state, subsidising lifestyles like that.
'And I think that debate needs to be had.*
I'm struggling to get the outrage. He was put on the spot, he made it clear Philpott alone was responsible but added that a discussion needs to be had. Which it does and which is happening, hence caps , UC etc etc. It's hardy a secret that the tories want to tighten up the system!
Tories are shameless cunts for doing this.
Please never ever votes for these fucking assholes, they have no humanity and their arrogance is breathtaking.
Do you have anything intelligent to say?
You do realise it's a coalition, don't you?
This is a Tory Government in ethos. The libdems have been lost whilst busy selling their souls and have had no influence in the benefits debate whatsoever. Osborne is a Tory. Cameron is a Tory. The Deputy PM does nothing but deliver difficult stuff news when Cam is away. That is how it works
The outrage is about Osborne deliberately allying the concept of benefits debate/change with this case - do you really believe this is a coincidence? the debate on the day in the place? Trust me when I tell you it is all very carefully planned PR wise and if any of you believe anything else you are daft.
I'm happy to debate with anyone but calling people cunts and fucking asses diminshes your argument and suggests you don't have the intelligence to engage.
I loathe the labour party and all it stands for as much as you appear to loathe the tories but I would never, EVER suggest someone is a cunt or a fucking ass or stupid in any way for supporting them.
It is your absolute right to hold your opinions but to abuse people who hold different ones is a thoroughly unpleasant trait and diminshes you, not them.
It probably is all planned but that's not relevant to me. Most political expediency is. And of course the tories want to tighten up the welfare state, I'm continually surprised that people are shocked by that.
I am at liberty to express myself as I wish. It is not directed at you personally so do not trouble yourself. These are bad people exploiting strong feelings about a dreadful situation. It is manipulation at the most sinister level.
I have not suggested that voting for Tories makes someone a cunt(This would suggest to me that you have misconstrued what I have said: possibly deliberately) but I think ethically Tories are cunts to people and time and time again their dreadful 'good poor bad poor' debate is trying to turn people against one another and use this horrible event to bolster their position. Disgusting.
It probably is all planned but that's not relevant to me. - It should be because they are exploiting a terrible situation - the morals of that need a looksee.
its pointless typing 'the tories are cunts' x 100%.
its not argument or debate.
its not offering solutions.
half the time posters aren't even commenting on the basic facts. in this case what Osborne said, after being asked a specific question by a journalist.
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.