To never want anyone to champion Jack Monroe again?

[SuperScrimper]

After what she has tweeted about David Cameron. here

Like him or loathe him to describe the way he talks about his deceased son as 'misty eyed' and used for political gain is disgusting.

The greatest loss any of us can imagine is the loss of a child. Shock horror, even politician have real feeling. It's just awful that she would say that about another parent.

I don't care what she can do with a bloody lentil. Something's are just too low.

I've been thinking about this very carefully

I've not quite got straight my position on the tweet but what I do feel is that use of "misty eyed" was not appropriate.

Re: the NHS. I agree that there are examples where DC shuts down debates. Whether that is knowingly or not.

What I do think is that it is an area of his life that understandably causes him enormous grief and may make it hard for him to think and respond rationally - particularly in the rough and tumble of political debate.

That being the case, I wonder if the best thing wouldn't be for NHS policy issues and questions to be dealt with by the minister for health or another government minister. This would save undue upset for DC and mean that is he not accused of acting cynically. In addition, it would mean that there could be truly transparent debate.

but surely as PM he has to put personal stuff to one side and do his job.

That's not a bad idea at all, Gobbolino. Although, presumably he as PM would still have to 'sign off' any actual decisions? And anyone given the job of dealing with NHS stuff would probably still face accusations of being DC's 'puppet', or not dare to venture their own opinions for fear of falling out with him.

Plus (the more I think about it), it IS part of his job and maybe he ought to be able to deal with it as a professional, personal experiences notwithstanding? Plenty of people have to face things in the line of work that might be difficult for them personally.

*I'm still wondering what responses people would propose should be used when they say it is possible to continue a debate or discussion after someone has invoked the memory of their dead child.

Just one or two suggestions would do, because I'm damned if I can think of anything anyone could come back with*

David C: I know all about disability, so we'll have no more of that.

Ed: I am afraid you only know part of what thousands people in this country are facing. Too many are dealing with hardships on top of the horror of a disabled child or relative. Your experience should mean you champion these people, instead you are looking to systematically destroy the support systems around them. The bedroom tax is putting more disabled people and carers into poverty so we'll have no more of THAT.

I don't know enough about this to put a decent argument together, I expect Ed does. And if he can't face Cameron, or is uncomfortable when Cameron trumps him with mentioning Ivan he NEEDS to get some strategies in place to deal with it.

gobbolino

I think we can safely say that anyone who says "I don't want to hear any more of that." is shutting down debate knowingly.

In his 2014 conference speech, when he came to the NHS, he said "for me this is personal" before he went in to describe going to hospital night after night with a sick child in his arms. Then he said the NHS was safe in his hands. I would hazard a guess this is what Jack was referring to.

No-one can deny this. It's all written down and documented on the internet.

The thing is, Nancy, whatever Ed said (and I like your script), no matter how fair and professional and true, he would be flayed alive by the right and the associated media. And he knows that.

That's a good response, Nancy, but that's assuming EM or whoever made the response would be permitted to speak uninterrupted without the baying crowd in the house shouting "For shame!" while they tried to do so.

aermingers
I haven't read the whole thread but re Jack Monroe using her own experience politically and DC using his. Excuse me but the two things are not equivalent.
Monroe was struggling to feed her child on her income. She tried to find ways to overcome the limitations of resources and she has done brilliantly. I think Margaret Thatcher and Tony Benn would be happy with her addressing her situation.
There is no solid comparison with her level of political action and the political action of the elected leader of the Conservative party.

That is too simplistic. It is not comparing like with like.

I mean JK Rowling, similarly, had a resources problem and sought to solve it through her own labours.

DC, bless him, has never, for one moment of his fortunate life, known a limitation in his own resources, unless, perhaps his champagne allowance ran out at university. Lord help us, you can't compare them. She has the right to a view and DC has to be a big boy, he's ELECTED, he is paid for BY US, politicians almost always use their families because that is what they are. It doesn't mean he didn't adore his son, but he inevitably uses everything to some extent, look at how he uses his pretty and employed wife, another one who has never looked at £15 as a weekly food budget, rather as a tip for the hansom cab driver or maybe the maid when she stays at Sandringham!

I agree TBH onlylovers - the recent furore has given the right wing press a fabulous "we have been wronged" out - so distasteful on so many levels.

I agree with jack.

And even if he is not doing it on purpose and is genuinely shutting down debate on disability and the nhs because he cannot stand it, because of his loss, then he is not capable of doing the job he is doing.
Because those debates are an essential part of that job.

That DM article is one of the most patronising and homophobic things I've had the misfortune to read in a while. They should be ashamed to have printed such a disgusting load of tripe, but given the paper in question, of course they won't be.

The problem is DC has been talking about his son for years in a specific way - by saying he understands because he had a disabled son.

In the election before his son died he gave a speech and I remember thinking at least if the Tory's get in, DC wouldn't slash services for people with disabilities as he understood.

How naive was I?

Instead they've become the group most impacted by cuts, a group that has had a media smear-campaign via the DWP (scroungers, anyone?), that new benefits have come in that get harder and harder to claim, forced medical assessments filled with lies and misinformation, cuts to social services and care services, sanctions to people found not fit for work, and a new programme that's just started aimed at people on Support Group (the most severely disabled) and so much more.

Then feels very personal, much more personal than if he hadn't made it apparant he'd protect this group, then did the exact opposite.

So it is a total slap in the face when he shuts down much-needed debate, when many of those issues hadn't impacted him at all.

I agree with Jack.

I'd be interested to know when her substantial display of tats were done and if she had to pay for them.

I think it is a simple issue of taste here. JM's tweet was distasteful and comes across as a cheap shot. JM is smarter than this and we all know it.

She will lose the gig with Sainsbury's even if she hasn't yet.

she has lost the Sainsburys gig. Never mind, she still has the Grunaird to spout her rubbish in.

Wet August, her tattoos were mainly done when she was 18, before she was a mother, whilst she was in a series of minimum wage jobs. They were done by friends at a reduced rate, and have nothing whatsoever to do with why she was struggling after her relationship broke down and she became a jobless single mother. She had no tattoos drawn during that time.

Anyone with half a brain and no agenda could have discovered that themselves with a simple Google search - or did you just read the Richard Littlejohn piece in which he gets 15 'facts' about JM completely wrong and not bother to read her rebuttal?

...and she hasnt lost her Sainsburys gig, all they have said on the matter is "Jack Monroe blogs independently. Sainsbury’s is not a political organisation and we certainly don’t share her views"

She's also had over 1000 tweets of support and agreement with her.

Seriously, Google is your friend.

If Sainsbury's certainly don't share her views then they presumably don't think Cameron should go and are fine with him using the death of his son as a cynical debate blocking tactic. I won't be shopping there any more then.

Can't stand her ever since I tried one of her recipes. It was absolutely disgusting.

What a delightful post.