Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Watch Iain Duncan Smith SNEAK OUT of food banks debate as Tories LAUGH at stories of starving families

79 replies

ttosca · 19/12/2013 00:41

IT was the day the Nasty Party showed its true-blue colours – by sneering at the plight of hungry families forced to rely on food banks.

Tory MPs laughed and jeered as they were told how some hard-up shoppers were so desperate they fought to snap up discounted items in supermarkets.

Astonishingly, all the Government ministers from the responsible departments – including Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith – sneaked out after just an hour of the crucial Commons debate.

By then a cowardly IDS had already ducked questions, putting forward his deputy instead.

In one of the most shameful episodes ever witnessed in Parliament, Tory backbenchers sniggered and hooted as Labour MP Fiona MacTaggart told of shocking scenes at her local Tesco in Slough, Berks, as people battled over cut-price fruit and veg.

She said the store had now been forced to draft in extra security.

Almost drowned out by mocking Tory MPs, she asked: “Isn’t that a shocking sign in the 21st century?”

Senior Labour politicians later described the Tories’ callous reaction as “shameful” and “a total disgrace”.

Labour MP Jamie Reed said: “I regret to say the laughter from the Government benches says more about this issue than words ever could.”

His colleague Barry Gardiner said it was “extraordinary” to see Mr Duncan Smith smirking as it was pointed out that half a million people are now using food banks.

And The Trussell Trust, the nation’s largest provider of food banks, said it was “disappointed” by the attitude of those who jeered.

Labour had called the debate after nearly 150,000 people signed a petition backed by the Mirror, the Unite union and The Trussell Trust calling for an inquiry into the growing dependence on food aid.

But Mr Duncan Smith refused to answer for the Government, leaving it to his deputy, Esther McVey.

And in an ill-judged speech, she sparked fury by claiming it was a good thing that more people were turning to food banks.

Incredibly she insisted: “It is positive that people are reaching out to support other people.”

She went on: “In the UK it is right that more people are going to food banks because as times are tough, we are all having to pay back this
£1.5trillion debt personally. We are all trying to live within our means, change gear and make sure that we pay back all our debt.” Labour veteran Sir Gerald Kaufman described her speech as the “nastiest” he had heard in his 43 years as an MP.

Labour’s Lilian Greenwood added: “They are the nasty party through and through. She doesn’t get it and won’t take responsibility.”

Shortly after Ms Mcvey’s performance, Mr Duncan Smith scurried from the chamber, followed by an number of other senior Tories.

Speaker John Bercow said he had no power to stop them, but said the view that it was a disgrace there was no minister there “may be widely shared”. Shadow Environment Secretary Maria Eagle said the increasing need for food banks was a damning indictment of Government policy.

She added: “Since April this year more than 500,000 people have relied on assistance from the 400 food banks run by The Trussell Trust charity, double the number of food banks compared to this time last year.” She added: “It’s a scandal which is getting worse and the Government now has the humiliation of the Red Cross helping to collect and distribute food aid in Britain for the first time since the Second World War.”

Former Labour Cabinet minister Paul Murphy told the Commons he had never seen such poverty in his 40 years as a Welsh politician, apart from during the 1984 Miners’ Strike.

Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Rachel Reeves told the House: “It’s a tale of two nations – tax cuts for the rich, food banks for the poor.”

Not all Tories joined in the mocking and jeering.

Wycombe MP Steve Baker gave an emotional speech in support of food banks as he revealed how poverty had caused the break-up of his family when he was a child.

He said there was no one to help when his self-employed dad ran out of work. They had to go hungry and his parents eventually split up.

He blamed the current plight of hard-up families on politicians pretending there is a “magic wand” to solve the problem.

Mr Baker said 12,000 children in Buckinghamshire were currently living in poverty, with one in five in his constituency going to bed hungry, rising to one in three in some areas.

He added: “It is a scandalous indictment of the safety net that is the welfare state.”

But Tory and Lib Dem MPs banded together to defeat Labour’s motion, calling on the Government to reduce dependency on food banks, by 294 votes to 251, a majority of 43.

Food banks give a minimum of three days’ emergency food to people facing crisis in the UK.

People are referred by care professionals though a voucher system to ensure only genuine cases receive help.

Vouchers are also held by Jobcentre Plus for emergency distribution.

Each food bank is run in partnership with a local church or community. All food is donated by the public.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/food-banks-debate-video-iain-2941100

OP posts:
caramelwaffle · 19/12/2013 00:50

Esther McVey speech = No. Words!

edamsavestheday · 19/12/2013 12:51

tosser(s).

flatpackhamster · 19/12/2013 15:49

SHOCK as LABOUR MP's LAUGH during FOOD BANK DEBATE.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 19/12/2013 15:55

Shower of bastards the lot of them

Lottapianos · 19/12/2013 15:56

Dear god, how can they be so brazen? Everyone knows they don't give a shit but to not even be bothered to pretend to give a shit takes some serious brass neck. Sickening.

Mignonette · 19/12/2013 16:00

Jack Monroe tried and she will keep trying @msjackmonroe / agirlcalledjack.com

DoctorTwoTurtleDoves · 19/12/2013 16:05

I wouldn't give IBS a job as a paperweight, he really is that useless. As for McVile, she's been caught lying to the house again. There is no need for cuts, they're all ideological.

telsa · 19/12/2013 16:05

these people are beyond vile.

2old2beamum · 19/12/2013 16:37

I just despair at the attitude of these awful uncaring "human beings"

SouthernComforts · 19/12/2013 17:08

Disgusting behavior, like a bunch of teenagers sniggering at the back of the school assembly... except they are running our country.

HECTheHeraldAngelsSing · 19/12/2013 17:21

the way they all conduct themselves generally in the House is revolting. They treat it like a 'jolly good wheeze'. A public school debate club. When you have taken it upon yourself to offer yourself to govern, and people have chosen to trust you and elect you to serve and to run the country on our behalf and in our interests you should take it bloody well seriously. Not jeer, haw haw, waft your papers about or mock and generally treat it like a game and a big joke.

It's about who wins the argument in there. Who gets the biggest laugh. Who scores the best put down. It's not about adult, reasonable or rational debate or reaching agreement. Nobody in there is listening to anything anyone else has to say. They just want their shot at the floor.

I can imagine them all afterwards in the heavily subsidised BY US! bar, chugging down their whisky and braying "good show in the House, old chap, really gave me what for, har har har."

They have the wrong bloody attitude. It's not a damned game. It's people's lives and they have a responsibility to act like adults and not a bunch of ruddy hooray henrys.

And I mean the lot of them (well, almost all. There are a few). They're more interested in grabbing what they can than in actually representing the people.

ProfondoRosso · 19/12/2013 17:29

the way they all conduct themselves generally in the House is revolting. They treat it like a 'jolly good wheeze'. A public school debate club. When you have taken it upon yourself to offer yourself to govern, and people have chosen to trust you and elect you to serve and to run the country on our behalf and in our interests you should take it bloody well seriously. Not jeer, haw haw, waft your papers about or mock and generally treat it like a game and a big joke

Absolutely spot on, Hec. This is something that's bugged me for years. They treat the HoC like a theatre, both sides. Completely undignified. I don't see why they're still allowed to conduct this ridiculous, sniping rah-fest, just trying to draw cheers from their chums, and bawl like toddlers. It makes light of everything the people they're meant to represent care about.

And I don't give a fuck if it's a 'good old British tradition,' or whatever, if the HoC should be 'celebrated' as an institution associated with 'witty repartee.' They need to fucking behave. It's an undignified Hooray Henry fest. Winning a debate with your witty barbs might make you regard yourself as a good orator, but what difference does that make when your constituents are going to foodbanks and too scared to turn on the heating?

caramelwaffle · 19/12/2013 21:57

Spot on Hec Not all of them, but most I would say.

And I am a floating voter.

lottieandmia · 19/12/2013 22:07

Arseholes. If they get in next time...........revolting people.

TheGreatHunt · 19/12/2013 22:09

flatpack it doesn't matter what party they came from, laughing is unacceptable.

These people are on different planets.

claig · 19/12/2013 22:11

Very good post, HEC. But I think it is just theatre what goes on in there and it has all already been decided outside the House, so that is why it is an adversarial debating society.

Without the adversarial aspect it would be boring to watch for the public, not that that is the reason why they do it, since TV cameras have only been in there for a few decades or so and it was adversarial before TV cameras were introduced.

Lottapianos · 19/12/2013 22:22

Great posts HEC and Profondo. You're right - I've seen better listening, turn taking and general respect at a chimps tea party. Disgraceful behaviour. Most of them just don't give a fig.

Mignonette · 19/12/2013 22:23

It doesn't matter if it is boring to watch. It is not a show. This is for real and these people make me want to vomit.

God help them when I next bump into any of them. They'll need to drag me away.

claig · 19/12/2013 22:32

I think it is a show, but an important show. Because in the heat of the jibes and insults and laughter, the mask of professionalism is removed from them all and we find out which ones are lying and which ones can't stand the heat of the debate. It is a testing ground for them all and the public can see which ones are not up to the job and cannot take the mockery or the jibes and which ones get rattled when they are caught out.

The post title says watch Duncan Smith "sneak out".
I don't know why he left, but it may be that the laughter and heat got too much.

I prefer to see a contest of laughter and jibes and attacks rather than a polite, businesslike debate which paints them all as competent professionals.

ProfondoRosso · 19/12/2013 22:33

Absolutely, Mignonette - whether or not it's boring is irrelevant. It's not about who 'wins' the debate, it should be about the tangible effects of those debates on us.

It reminds me of the misogynist douchebags who defended their right to make sexist heckles in debates at Glasgow Uni (where I work) in one of the unions this summer. It was all in the spirit of 'debate.' Hmm I can't imagine what's going through your mind if you value that more than respecting your fellow human beings.

Mignonette · 19/12/2013 22:38

I don't judge their ability to be a good MP by whether they can cope with a howling mob of alcohol fuelled bellicosity. Yes, if they resorted to foul mouthed abuse that'd be worthy of negative judgement but not being able to shout the loudest or take the piss most effectively? In what way does that improve their effectiveness? They are there to represent their constituents and shouting down opponents via childish one liners does not do that.

The real deals are done out of the house.

claig · 19/12/2013 22:43

'The real deals are done out of the house.'

Exactly, that is where they are supposed to be professional and serving the people.

But eventually they have to turn up and answer in the House and there Labour have to give them a hard time and that involves rattling them by jibes and mockery in order to peel away their facade and reveal what is underneath. That is when we find out what they are really like, when they are held to account in the heated hothouse of noise, jeers and laughter.

futuredad · 19/12/2013 22:44

There's plenty of pictures of Labour MPs & shadow cabinet "laughing" during this debate too.

What "stories" like this in the left-wing press shows is that Labour is (thankfully IMO) struggling despite the inevitable infighting that comes from a coalition government.

lottieandmia · 19/12/2013 22:48

How thick do you have to be to realise that it is totally indefensible to laugh about the fact that some people are so poor they cannot even buy food now (I refer to the twats in government)? Whatever the context - this is a shit way to behave, whatever party you're from. But since the tory bastards are running the country it's even worse from them.

claig · 19/12/2013 22:50

'How thick do you have to be to realise that it is totally indefensible to laugh about the fact that some people are so poor they cannot even buy food now'

Have you got a video link of any of them laughing about a person who cannot afford food?