Lee Anderson, Ashfield MP insists Jack Monroe has made a fortune on the backs of the poor.

[newnamethanks]

AIBU to hope for a libel trial as entertaining as Vardy v Rooney and an outcome that rivals the Katy Hopkins debacle?

I don't know that 'made a fortune' was the wisest term for him to use. He'd have been better off saying made a decent living or something like that, because talking about other people being well paid inevitably opens any MP up to complaints about salary and expenses. Anderson is going to be on a salary that's multiples of the median in his constituency, so it's a particularly bad idea for him in a way that it isn't for a stockbroker belt Tory MP.

Even with a pro bono lawyer she would need funds as a shield against the risk of a costs order.

Why does she crowd fund to her PayPal for legal fees then?

Where did you donate the Sainsburys money before they sacked you for that horrible tweet regarding David Cameron’s dead son?

This is so lazy. As has been pointed out, she didn't tweet about Cameron's dead son, she tweeted about Cameron's exploitation of him.

Why is there so much hate on here for her?

Anderson says that his Welbeck deputies lamp takes pride of place on his desk at Westminster

brief explanation of the role of a Deputy below ground in a coal mine. He can be compared to a supervisor, he was responsible for an area of the pit underground. He would walk the roadways (tunnels to non mining folk) and crawl along the coal face where men were working. He would be supervising all aspects of health and safety...
...he would almost certainly have started work down the pit as a miner and worked his way up to being a Deputy.

The deputy was also responsible for testing for poisonous and explosive gases. He would carry a "deputies lamp" (a davy lamp) to assist him in this.

Have you read the thread?
It might give you a clue.

Some people see through the shite and put 2&2 together to get 4. Others put 2&2 together and get 4 but they break it into portions so it looks like it's 2..

I disagree. I think It was an awful thing to say. She said he was using his “dead son” as a ruse to “privatise the NHS”. It was complete nonsense to suggest anyone (including the tories) had any plans to “privatise the NHS”. I’m no Tory but abusing a bereaved parent in such a vile way based on conspiracy theories is utterly wrong imo.

I think we need to get back to a place where we have some standards in public life and discourse (this absolutely should apply to everyone including bojo too of course). That doesn’t involve using the death of a child for political ends.

she also refers to her own child all the time in her work, claiming she was so poor she couldn’t feed him (despite as pp pointed out apparently having a wealthy family and not exclusive custody). If it’s really true he was going hungry in those circumstances, social services should have been involved.

I don’t think it’s hate. I think that for many posters she seems like a self important middle class person who makes money out of pretending to be poor. Lots of people find that objectionable. That’s how I understand it anyway.

I hope she does sue Lee Anderson soo the truth of her claims can be explored.

I think what makes me think it could have been a choice is that she has a wealthy family and her ex was allegedly paying maintenance. So her claims that she was switching off the fridge and her son was constantly in danger of going hungry don’t ring true.

I am a single mum and there is no one I wouldn’t ask for help if my dcs were in any danger of going hungry. I would ask my family, my ex, anyone. I have no pride whatsoever that would stand in the way of feeding my child.

I disagree. I think It was an awful thing to say. She said he was using his “dead son” as a ruse to “privatise the NHS”. It was complete nonsense to suggest anyone (including the tories) had any plans to “privatise the NHS”. I’m no Tory but abusing a bereaved parent in such a vile way based on conspiracy theories is utterly wrong imo

Cameron repeatedly referred to his own experience during the election campaign and after. He repeatedly cited this as evidence that the new improved fluffy Tories understood disability and health care, especially in the soft focus interviews in his Oxfordshire kitchen being parent of the year.

It was very effectively deployed against any interviewer challenging their record on health and disability.

Nobody made him do that, it was a strategy.

Is the backlash against JM because she's not in poverty anymore? I think she highlights, intentionally and unintentionally how complex poverty is and the issues around it, such as mental health, shame, stigma etc. I don't think she is poor anymore but she seems to be able to create nice recipes for very low cost. They've been useful for me when I've had very little money to spend on groceries.

She still regularly gives the impression she is living in poverty. Which is blatantly not true. That’s the issue here.

@C8H10N4O2 - David Cameron did not use his deceased son as a “ruse to privatise the NHS”. That is entirely false. I do not think there is anything more to be discussed there. What happened to his son was a tragedy. Also given he was the parent of a disabled child, I think it’s fair enough for him to say he had an understanding of that (if he did).

plenty of legitimate things you could use to criticise David Cameron. Making cruel comments about his son to back up a conspiracy theory is not on though.

I've bought Jack's books and followed her recipes.
When reading the books I was always struck and awed by how a working class person could claw herself up from poverty, and how she had the confidence to articulate herself so well.
Sadly I then learned she was appropriating the experiences of the poor. I grew up working class, where lack of money caused huge distress and anxiety as my Mum struggled in two jobs to keep a roof over our head and food on the table. Jack's experiences as she describes them are not authentic.
She is the living embodiment of the Pulp lyric " if you call your Dad he could stop it all".
That's the main reason I've stopped giving her any attention. She's a dishonest attention seeker.

There's 2 things I can think here.

1: she's actually in poverty as she claims. In which case the monthly patreon cash, PayPal donations, tip jars, book income, media appearance fees etc have all been wasted.
This proves she's bad with money and is in no position to advise anyone on how to spend theirs.

2: she's not actually so deep in the poverty that she claims. In which cases she's lying about the claims of poverty and in no position to advise anyone on money matters.

Which one is the truth? I don't know.
Logically, pretending to be broke would illicit sympathy from her many 1000s of followers. This could lead to a tiny percentage donating to her out of that sympathy.

Pretend to be poor and broke to a few thousand followers, get sympathy and support from those unwilling or unable to research her, get a small percentage of followers to donate.
Even 1% her followers donating £5 to her PayPal is a shit ton of cash the likes of which most UC and poor people could only dream.

340k followers. 1% of those 3400.
3400 donate £5 in a year.
£17000.

Also given he was the parent of a disabled child, I think it’s fair enough for him to say he had an understanding of that (if he did)

It is sad that despite having an understanding of the challenges of disability, his government and succesive governments still had a policy of making life as difficult as possible for disabled people.

As for Jack, she is no different to Oliver and of lots of others in the cookery world. I like Oliver, but he likes to jump on a bandwagon too and has also made some serious mistakes. His mistakes cost people their jobs. I don't see the same unrelenting hate directed at him.

Jack's life story aside, and back to the case in hand:

She went swinging for Anderson all week and said a lot *about him. He had a pop back. She can't resist the drama, and encouraged by her very enthusiastic Twitter fan-base, whipped up a lot of excitement and views of the video which would have otherwise remained in it's pitiful right-wing obscurity. She spent a lot of the day excitedly discussing how they'd be buying her a house and/or making her a millionaire.

In the cold light of day, she appears to have regrets.

Bring it on, I say, they're all as bad as each other.

Have you never seen a Jamie Oliver thread on here 🤣

I must have missed them!

Just noticed I made the same reference several pages later-oops! Great minds @Clymene 😀

Is the backlash against JM because she's not in poverty anymore?

See my post upthread for a list of what gets the most criticism, it's more about a perception of regular deceit and a feeling that everything she does has shilling for money and attention somewhere in it

On the 'not in poverty anymore': she was voluntarily unemployed for several months after returning from maternity. Her baby's father paid maintenance and her wealthy parents were supportive. Some people feel that doesn't match her claims of extreme poverty.

There is also her online behaviour.

Wether you agree or disagree with her tweet.

Her tweet was about David Cameron. You may feel it was awful towards him.

but the phrase ‘awful tweet about David Cameron’s son’ is incorrect. It’s used to make it sound like she said something really terrible about a deceased child with disabilities.

I am not that keen on her but I think the difference between the 2 is important.

I'm happy to accept your figures and spy she probably only made 3k from the food bank donations.

You are right, that makes it OK :-)

My local foodbank gives out recipes and tips from her materials which are made free of charge to anyone using them for foodbank/educational use. They are popular because they focus on a make do and mend approach to what you have and what is low cost - people can actually use the information in them.

I don't really care how many times Lee Anderson claims to have been down a pit or not. The simple fact that he thinks women are responsible for family poverty because they are incompetent and that you can feed a family for 30p per head per day shows he knows sod all about the reality of poverty or perhaps he doesn't care and just wants the publicity.

It does however fit a common pattern of WC men made good men who burnish their own image by blaming those who don't "make good" for being failures, unlike their important and successful selves.