Corbyn Writes To May

Jeremy Corbyn has addressed Theresa May about Londoner Albert Thompson’s £54,000 bill for cancer treatment, stating the government risks leaving a patient to die because of difficulties verifying immigration status.


Albert Thompson, 63, who has resided continuously in the United Kingdom for 44 years after coming from Jamaica as a youngster in 1973, is not getting the radiotherapy he requires for prostate cancer because the London hospital where he was scheduled to commence treatment last November told him he must produce documentation of residency or pay upfront for his care.

He was unable to provide officials with needed papers, and therefore he was informed he must find £54,000.

Albert Thompson, who has asked for his real name not to be used, is increasingly concerned about the possible repercussions on his health because of the delay of more than four months so the Labour leader called on ministers to intervene immediately in his case to ensure that this man gets access to the care that he needs.

Jeremy Corbyn stated Albert Thompson’s position was not unprecedented and he was dealing with a comparable situation in his constituency, which he had further raised with the Home Office.

He said the problems were a primary consequence of new laws introduced last October demanding hospital departments and community health services to review every patient’s paperwork, including passports and evidence of address, and charge upfront for their healthcare if they did not have documentary verification of eligibility.

The case raised the possibility that multiple undocumented British residents were being refused free NHS treatment, and that the principle of the universal NHS, free at the point of need, was being eroded.

All patients, including British subjects, can be challenged about their residency situation and made to show they are qualified to free NHS care.

He cited concerns raised by the shadow spokesperson for health and social care, Philip Hunt, who stated in the Lords last year that, as a consequence of the new laws, many people who legitimately live here and have every freedom to NHS treatment are going to be questioned by the NHS.

Albert Thompson, who worked as a mechanic before he became unwell, has never applied for a British passport because he had no need to, but the Jamaican passport he came with was lost numerous years ago and in the tightened antagonistic immigration environment, driven by Theresa May in 2013, he has struggled to establish his eligibility for housing support and free healthcare.

Clearly, when Albert Thompson came into the country, he came in with a passport and consequently there would be documents to verify this, as he would have had to come through the immigration process, and if the government want him to confirm this fact, the burden of proof should come down to the duty of the party wanting that proof.

Albert Thompson continues to be treated by his GP as directed by the cancer specialist and apparently, his radiotherapy is not urgent and the hospital has stated that they are really sorry this has created Mr Thompson anxiety and uncertainty and they are working hard to try to settle this as promptly as possible.

Albert Thompson said he had not seen a GP about his prostate cancer treatment since early last year.

Doctors have displayed dismay at the choice to classify the radiotherapy as non-urgent and they cannot envision any situations whereby a patient has been considered to require discretionary radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Either they need it by team decision when it is possibly life-saving, or they don’t and to remove it on the grounds of nationality seems immoral and inconsistent with the policies of the NHS and a Downing Street spokesperson announced the prime minister had received the letter and would answer in due course.

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson stated that the guidance makes explicit that urgent and immediately needed care should never be delayed or withheld.

Albert Thompson has no savings, has been made homeless by a similar Home Office debate over his residency situation, and has no way of paying the fee and he cannot understand why he has been ordered to pay it because he has spent his whole adult life here.

He has never had a British passport and was not aware he required one. The Jamaican passport he came to England with was lost countless years ago.

To Albert, it seems like they have done half the job and then left him to die and he would like the hospital to get in touch as he is in a bit more pain and it’s really difficult to get comfortable.

Details of his problem have generated broad outrage from politicians of all parties, NHS staff and the citizens of the United Kingdom and there is an online petition requesting for the NHS to treat him and has accumulated over 47,000 signatures.


The British Medical Association called the case morally indefensible.


A Home Office spokesperson stated that they appreciate the contribution made by Commonwealth residents who have made a life in the United Kingdom and those who have lived in the United Kingdom for a long time but believe they may not have the right documentation verifying their permission to stop here should take legal advice and present the relevant form with accurate documentation so they can progress the matter.

Mr Thompson’s legal delegates were contacted in December to explain how he can regularise his situation in the United Kingdom but have not yet received a request and apparently when the Home Office is informed of matters of this kind, they make sure the applications are dispensed with in a sympathetic way.

Jeremy Bloom, Mr Thompson’s lawyer, stated he was concerned that officials were effectively requiring him to become more critically unwell before treatment would be given and clinical decisions have been made that radiotherapy would be the best course of action for his condition.


It was simply because of the reforms to the NHS changing regulations that this treatment has been classified as not urgent or immediately necessary.

Does the NHS intend to wait until he gets weaker and weaker, and then reclassify the treatment as immediately necessary?

Laura Stahnke from Praxis, the charity that has been helping him, stated that they hope that the hospital and that the Home Office will move swiftly to make sure Albert gets the treatments he urgently requires and obtains his status.

It is revolting that someone who has lived in the United Kingdom and paid taxes for decades has been refused urgent cancer treatment due to his failure to meet a huge bill for his radiotherapy and this goes against the ideals of the NHS.


Both Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May paid tributes to Stephen Hawking who has now departed from this world and the Labour leader remarked that the scientist was also a strong campaigner for the National Health Service, yet Theresa May insists on making a joke of it.


If we believe in universal healthcare, how can it be conceivable that someone lives and works in this country, pay’s their taxes, but is then refused access to the NHS for life-saving cancer treatment? Can the prime minister explain?

However, Theresa May stated that she wasn’t knowledgeable of the particular case that the right honourable gentleman has raised, well she damn well knows about it now…

I speculate that Albert Thompson is not unique in this and that there are countless more people out there quite like him and consequently Theresa May should be addressing this matter with the Home Office and others.

Albert Thompson stated he was pleased his case had been raised in parliament and he hoped it would urge officials to review the request for payment of £54,000 before his radiotherapy treatment was given.

The rest of Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn’s dialogue was taken up with the NHS, with Jeremy Corbyn rebuking the government over matters including A&E targets, maintaining that Theresa May must get a grip on the situation.















Egyptian Teen’s Nottingham Death

Police are keeping an open mind about whether an assault on an Egyptian pupil that sparked outrage in her home country was racially motivated.

Mariam Moustafa, 18, died following being beaten by a gathering in Nottingham three weeks beforehand and the hashtag “Mariam’s rights will not be lost” has been trending in Egypt.

Furthermore, Egypt’s prosecutor-general has asked for information about the examination into her death by British officials.

The Egyptian Embassy announced it had been closely following the details of the vicious attack and had expressed the need for those responsible to be brought to justice swiftly by UK officials.

The extensive attention of the Egyptian people is apparent and the embassy continues to be centred in its attempts to help and support Mariam’s grieving family whose life has been destroyed by their disturbing loss.


Nottingham Police at this time, from their inquiries, has no knowledge to propose that the attack was prompted by malice but they are proceeding with an open mind.

However, a 17-year-old girl was detained on suspicion of assault causing grievous bodily harm and was freed on conditional bail.

Mariam Moustafa’s uncle reported to the BBC that he thought an assortment of approximately 10 girls had begun hitting his niece before she ran to get on a bus, he stated, the girls kept pounding her until she passed out and a man intervened to help.


Her younger sister, Mallak Moustafa, stated that her sister told her how the crime unfolded before she went into a coma.

Mariam Moustafa could not see as she’d been punched in the head but then as soon as she noticed their bus coming, she ran to it, attempting to get on it.

She got on to the bus, but she didn’t think they’d all pay £1 to get on the bus. They went up to her when she’d sat down and said they weren’t finished with her. Then the girls kept saying punch her more, punch her more. Then she couldn’t see what was going on.

Some of the people involved laughed about her being in a coma on Instagram and they should be ashamed of themselves.

The family believed England would be their future, and to be an engineer one day, or anything they wanted to be, that’s why her dad brought them to England but it appears that it has truly destroyed them and they didn’t think England was like that.

When Miriam was born, her father did the best he could for her. He came to England for her future and education, to be an engineer but now it’s not fair.

Mariam Moustafa was punched several times outside the Victoria Centre in Parliament Street at approximately 20:00 GMT on 20 February. She next got on a bus but was followed by the same group of women who were threatening and abusive towards her before they got off.


Also in a statement, bus company Nottingham City Transport (NCT) stated one of its operators helped Miss Moustafa and they would like to openly acknowledge the driver, who went upstairs to mediate and served as a barrier between the criminals and the young woman after he urged them to leave the bus.

CCTV from the bus has been given to Nottinghamshire Police as part of their inquiry into this shocking assault as they continue to support their attempts to name the offenders.

The hospital sent her home initially, where she fell unwell and was taken back to the hospital where she entered into a coma and Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust announced an initial investigation did not show any notable adverse occurrence on the trust’s part, however, they will thoroughly review the family’s concerns.

Mariam Moustafa was an engineering student at Nottingham College and Mariam was well-liked and able and had strong aspirations for her future studies and eventual career.

Her best friend, Mariam Jankeh John, stated she was loving, cheerful, fashionable and intelligent.

“I can’t imagine someone as friendly, calm and cheerful as Mariam can be a victim,” she stated.

The consul general of Egypt and the medical counsellor, as well as a spokesperson from the embassy, was promptly dispatched to extend assistance and support to the family at this overwhelming time and they were briefed by the family’s lawyer on the latest medical and legal developments.

The post-mortem investigation into the death of the 18-year-old girl who died three weeks following her attack by a gathering of women was uncertain and more tests will now take place to verify if there was a link between the attack and her death.

The 17-year-old girl, who was detained on suspicion of the crime causing grievous bodily harm, continues to be on bail.

Whether this was a racial assault or not, this crime should not have taken place and we can admonish those people who are guilty, however it will continue to repeat itself over and over again and it doesn’t matter how harsh the reprimand is, it appears to be that we, not merely as a nation, but globally, we appear to be producing children that are transforming into monsters.

It doesn’t matter that some people are from another homeland, it doesn’t give another person the right to take a life because it’s improper conduct from another human being. It’s vulgar and immature and makes us nothing more than freaks.

If people think it’s acceptable to take a life just because they’re from another country, a different religion, they look different, or they speak differently, then that is wrong.

How can a person truly think that it’s appropriate to do stuff like this? And what goes through their thoughts when they’re doing it? Nonetheless, it’s intended, malice aforethought and should be judged in court for no less than a life penalty.

To take a life, for whatever cause is not acceptable and is an extremely heinous crime and if a person causes harm or death with a plan or predetermination, with malice, then there is a sole ingredient for first-degree or exacerbated murder.

It’s a predetermination to perform an action without lawful reason or explanation. A wicked intention to harm with intent, at the time of punching somebody or killing them. With an intention willfully to behave in a cruel and malicious disregard of the outcomes to human life but of course, malice aforethought does not fundamentally mean any ill will, hatred or malice towards the person killed.

In the United Kingdom all brutality upon a person, whether sexual or violent are crimes that are deemed heinous crimes. There was intention because what right-minded human being would laugh at something on Instagram when they found out this poor young girl that had her entire life in front her was in a coma?

What intent there was is for the police to find out, we can’t assume anything at the moment, but what we do know is that Mariam had her entire life in front of her with gleaming possibilities. She will no longer experience the cruelness from the people that robbed her of her life but for her family that will grieve for the rest of their lives, simply give them a thought.















Free School Meals Debate

It’s a move which antagonists have labelled as pulling the rug from under hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged families and under changes, critics maintain more than one million children who had previously been entitled to free school meals could have to go without.

However, the Government maintains the questionable strategy will, in fact, mean an additional 50,000 children will be eligible as battle lines were drawn in the Commons when MPs were asked to decide on the changes.

The Labour competition had requested for the vote but the party was defeated by 312 votes, including those cast by south Essex MPs and amongst those was John Baron, Conservative MP for Basildon and Billericay, who has strongly supported the Government.

He said: “The proposed changes to the eligibility criteria have been designed to ensure that support is targeted where it is needed most, meaning that those on the lowest incomes remain the focus of free school meals.

“The opposition is saying that we are taking away free school meals from children. This is incorrect. No child will lose their meals during the rollout of Universal Credit as a result of these changes.

Evidently, Government policies mean an additional 50,000 children will be eligible for a nutritious meal at school by 2022 and the opposition’s claim that the reforms could leave over a million children without this is misleading.

Under the changes, the Government wants to propose a means test for those on Universal Credit which would mean claimants with net earnings up to £7,400 will be entitled to free school meals.

Families are currently able to claim free school meals if they are on Universal Credit, as a component of a set of steps to ease the change to the brand-new benefits policy and when Universal Credit was introduced, the Government was clear they would set new guidelines for free school meals.

Furthermore, to ensure that no one was negatively affected throughout its roll-out, the Government tentatively made Universal Credit a qualifying perk for free school meals, regardless of income and this was evidently made apparent at the time, this was supposedly always an interim measure.

The Government’s strategy will mean that if you get a free school meal now you will continue to do so until the end of the rollout of Universal Credit, planned for 2022, and then to the end of either primary or secondary school, whichever you are in at that point.

Rebecca Harris pic

Conservative Castle Point MP Rebecca Harris further attacked the Labour Party of incorrectly maintaining the Government voted to take away free school meals from one million children.

This is totally a bogus claim and the downright spreading of ominous reports from the Labour Party which is a troubling development which will frighten claimants and in some instances may even prevent them coming forward for money they are eligible for to help their families.

For the competition to be deceiving the people in such a calculated way is shocking and it will create a precarious position in Universal Credit, where families would be better off earning less in order to qualify for free school meals.

Many people, including MPs, wrongly assume that all children in hardship already get free school meals.

That is not at present the situation, but under the interim protections under Universal Credit, there would be, and those million kids would qualify for that benefit but it’s through this additional enactment that they’re yanking the rug from underneath those families.

The current policy would serve over a million more kids than under the policies that were voted. However, The Department of Education maintains it predicts that by 2022, about 50,000 more children will benefit from a free school meal opposed to the previous benefits policy.

The move is one of four Government policies that Labour has asked for a vote on in the Commons and there are plans to stop childcare vouchers and alternatively use the tax system, as well as moves to free childcare for two-year-olds and additional changes to Universal Credit.







Websites Are Shutting Down Their Comments Sections

As the media are seeking to develop their commitment to their readers, an obscure trend has been developing in the last three years, and various news websites are shutting their below-the-line comments sections.

NPR is the latest to declare the closing of its own story-page section. Following eight years spent experimenting with comments on its features, the American public media concluded it was not providing a user experience for the broad preponderance of its users.


NPR follows a direction started in 2013 by Popular Science, an American magazine. Three years following, the publication still thinks it made the correct choice and Carl Franzen, online director at Popular Science, recognised a distinct division between the website and its social media pages.

The website is the place to learn and participate and the discussions that happen on the social media channels.


It’s not the primary result of the media and Facebook, being first and foremost a social network, has the structure and policies in position to encourage better communications where the Popular Science account, as well as writers, communicate with their fans.


Social media such as Facebook or Twitter make for greater quality discussions than story-page remarks because of the barrier  and browsers have to make an additional effort to go to another website. Although it introduces friction to the process, it’s helpful friction because it gives an understanding that is sometimes misplaced with the immediacy of social media.


Nevertheless, Arlene Burgos, head of social media at the integrated news division at ABS-CBN, a principal Philippine media, is not so enthused about the kind of discussions on Facebook. ABS-CBN’s account numbers 11.7 million participants, one-tenth of the Philippines’ population.


According to her, Facebook gives a large area but is not always a community for creative conversation. She doesn’t think it is a spot where people can come to talk societal concerns to direct political activity like Jurgen Habermas’ public sphere.

Recently, she’s also observed a significant portion of people acting irresponsibly and writing without considering the outcomes their words have and these people could capture the public discourse and could start establishing the tone of the discussion and it could be risky if it goes that way.


Megan Whelan, the community engagement editor at Radio New Zealand (RNZ), which closed its comment sections, also believes it makes sense to shift the conversation to social media because it’s where readers are.


In the case of RNZ, they are capable of reaching various readers such as native New Zealand people, younger people and women.


John Arne Markussen, editor in chief at Dagbladet, a Norwegian newspaper, has noticed comparable trends when his paper chose to centre on their social media community.

You have to give preference to something and they have chosen to move the discussion to the social media.


In Popular Science, NPR, Radio New Zealand and Dagbladet’s cases, only a minority of their actual readers were engaging in their below-the-line comments section. Only 1,400 users signed up and they were hardly commenting more than once a week on RNZ’s website.

Following talks with the digital leadership team, Megan Whelan believed the only way to make story-page comments work was to apply her whole time turning it into a community, communicating and moderating.

Staff and financial resource restrictions were frequently part of the reason why publications decided to stop their own comments sections particularly considering it’s a hard time in the media industry.

Dagbladet decided to build an online presence as early as 1995 and at first, there was no moderation for their comments.

In 2012, they outsourced the moderation to a Swedish company and a year following that they decided to experiment with internal moderators, whom he saw as debate leaders.

Some senior reporters as well as three younger journalists watched the comments and communicated with readers and it went moderately well but it was an expensive process.


ABS-CBN closed its story-page comments segment for comparable reasons and there were numerous comments and so few staff to moderate and fully engage with the readers.


News24, a major South African media, further recognised to engage comprehensively with its readers on its website would need a significant financial and staff investment but, at the time, it had now chosen to invest in a newsroom of digital-first journalists.

The experience with page-story comment moderation at News24 was especially hard and the size of the comments was tremendous and hate discourse, in particular, was widespread but to make moderation simpler and more effective for journalists, the media had an automatic filter in place.

Moderators would pick the words for the filter to watch out for and forbid. Nevertheless, it did not always work.

They were smart and pretty careful. As one offensive word was banned, the next day it would be a version of a different word and it was difficult to keep up with it.

There were numerous journalists in the management of moderation but the funds were still poor and even though users had to comment through their Facebook profiles, it did not hinder them from posting offensive remarks and some would slide through the rigorous monitoring of journalists.

News24 management was disputing their comments system as it was and they were concerned about legal accountability and reputational concerns if they continued with our current comments system, so the news publication ultimately chose to close down its comments section.

Now, News24’s engagement policy focuses on helping people to write theory pieces and opening comments only on the opinion pieces and some topical stories and it was found to be so much more useful.

If there were 100 comments when the story-page comments were open, perhaps 25 percent of them would be published. Presently, as much as 80 to 85 percent get published and News24 even saw an increase in the audience.

Plus many people who were shocked by the nature of the comments generally now felt it was a place they could return to.

Closing the below-the-line comment sections is not a light-hearted and straightforward choice to make. Most often, there’s a feeling of abandoning the concept of a community communicating on the website.

There’s an advantage in having comments below a story and developing a community and conversation is something that can add an excellent quality and build an understanding of society and while established media brands are conflicted whether to close their comments section, newer media ventures such as Vox have chosen not to have a comments section.

Other news websites have opted for different comment designs like Quartz, which enables users to comment on particular sections.

The concept came from speculating about how papers in the 17th and 18th century used to leave margins for their readers to communicate their views and this approach is to encourage friendly commentary and substantive participation.

Social media is increasingly becoming the favoured place to promote discussions for various media. For a number of purposes including economic, personnel and time limitations, public programs like Facebook are being chosen for their efficiency of fairness and chance to spread to extensive and more distinct viewers.

Nevertheless, these programs do not emerge as the final answer for producing a vibrant, courteous and productive place where fans and journalists can relate and interact and while some media still believe in the necessity for below-the-line comments, numerous newsrooms are becoming displeased with the resource-intensive work it needs to get only mediocre action.

Newsrooms are therefore praying that productive energies such as The Coral Project will bring more proofs as to how to encourage greater and more comprehensive commitment.

People like to make comments and they do like to have a comments box to remark on what they think and that is the difference between a physical newspaper and a virtual one.

If newspapers and journals of any kind take away their comment space, people will be less inclined to read what the media have to say because it’s then taking away our freedom of speech, but hello people, isn’t that the plan?

If they want to filter out profanity, then why don’t they simply bar those that dish it out but really I find it more stimulating when there is a hint of controversy, blasphemy included.

Of course, people don’t have to cuss when commenting but in the passion of the moment, people do get frustrated but that’s why it’s called a debate. At least it’s all online discourse and nobody is out there parading their sabres.

Myself, if I don’t see a comments box I will go less and less to their site as there are so many semi-automated ways to filter out profanity or abuse laced comments but I say, bring it on!

It’s a foolish way to engage with the readers by taking away the only free speech they have and by removing that freedom, the media are going to suffer.

If the media don’t want to listen, observe or perceive the revolution and the anger they have stimulated, then simply don’t invite the people in the first place but the media can’t just give them freedom of speech and then take it away that will simply cause an even greater revolution.

So, essentially, if the people do not agree with what has been written, the answer is to get rid of them and their offensive beliefs. Picture us all having an opinion, what a shocking thing for the mainstream media, which means we must all be deplorable out there in the physical universe.

Cutting off all comments, both good or bad, is not ideal. It simply boils down to suppression and control although sometimes the internet brings out the worst in people, of course, we are nothing more than human beings and some of us might be a tad more uncultured than others but does that actually matter?

Poor communication, poor writing, and bad vibes are the role of public discussion and it’s sad more people don’t have the literary talents to write expert judgments, but justice is slovenly. Even people who failed their English class should and must have a voice, or we will certainly sink into anarchy in time.

Quelling people by putting up barriers, or generating one-way top-down communications is like a pressure cooker. When people lose the capacity to answer, attack and state their case, however awkwardly, the demand of cultural outbreak escalates to alarming levels, until one day it erupts into violence.








Quietly Shelving A Plan

Ministers have been attacked for breaching a promise to introduce a change to cut the enormous number of benefit sanctions, plunging people into the suffering of starvation and removal from their homes in some circumstances.

A yellow card scheme, giving claimants 14 days to question a judgment to dock their benefits on the grounds it was inflicted unfairly, was promised more than two years ago in October 2015. However, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has now speechlessly acknowledged that the move has been suspended indefinitely because an evaluation has proved complex.

The position has been rebuked by Frank Field, the chairman of the Commons Work and Pensions Committee, who highlighted the horrifying suffering that bans are still creating and it comes as the number of penalties begins to grow again, driven by an eruption in the number of penalties inflicted on claimants of universal credit.

One constituent of Mr Field, the MP for Birkenhead, was recently docked benefits for missing an appointment to get universal credit because he was in an operating theatre at the time but the DWP later admitted it was a legitimate reason and issued a back payment but the damage had now been done. The loss of money resulted in the constituent being evicted.

If people are in support of the current benefits policy then they have to be one of three things. Severely misinformed, a total nincompoop or totally uncaring about whether disadvantaged, unemployed and disabled people live or die.

Sadistic arsehole comes to mind as well as sociopathic sadists who actively take delight in other people’s suffering and the British people repeatedly vote them back in because they’re told by the newspapers that they read that the alternative is an evil, bloodsucking animated Stalin.

There’s a level of supporting a system that comes with the high focus on an individual person and we live in a time where there is a dominant political ideology that is of individuality.

Nevertheless, collectively we want to see people fail and there’s an element of well they probably failed at something anyhow and for the same reason we worry more about homeless dogs because we can’t imagine they would ever deserve that.

However, for some strange reason, we are more than content to think his owner has some shortcoming that suggests it’s relatively alright that he’s homeless and it’s not even a moral failing, simply a financial one.

We all know the market is not currently dishing out money through any ethical system at all and there are people all over the globe doing thousands of things more harmful than any homeless person on the street.

We support a system that penalises people for not having enough money, then work backwards to implicate them morally.

There are different rules for anyone middle class and up of course and spends more on attacking, evaluating and sanctioning people than any of it saves the taxpayer and I’m not sure what’s sadder, the DWP who gleefully target sanctions or the utter arseholes who seek to rationalise their behaviour and human suffering is a cause for celebration for some people.

Perhaps the spiritualists and the religious nutcases are correct. Perhaps good and evil are things and not simply ideas. Perhaps there does exist possessed beings who frolic and dance in the high winds, the human spirits of annihilation.

Perhaps some people aren’t actually people at all, like the bots and sockpuppets on certain websites and perhaps beasts actually do walk amongst us. After all, why would someone put a meaningful amount of effort into taking someone’s disability payments away, or destroy whole communities on the coasts of the Mediterranean after making yet another hundred million, as if the first few hundred million weren’t enough and perhaps the demons are some sort of an explanation?

If we could detect brainwaves, we’d see how bad attitudes can develop. They’re the true demons and if you’re a Jobcentre advisor with a bad attitude, you can spread it around by sanctioning people for crap reasons.

The government may have a coherent voice, but they clearly don’t have a coherent brain to go with that voice and the government have openly and brazenly shown that they don’t care if the poor live or die.

They care more about wasting taxpayer money by channelling it into private deals and ripping away money from the most defenceless to satisfy the most extreme and brutal far-righters and far-right rags that scream their propaganda about scroungers.

The government doesn’t care in the slightest about you or if you’re out of work, regardless of the reason. They want you off benefits and are quite content for you to suffer and even possibly die as a consequence.

They are arseholes who care only for themselves with an illogical resentment of the poor and what we should remember is this, they’ve repeatedly been told sanctions don’t work and are more costly to the taxpayer than not using them, and yet they’ve chosen to move on with a dangerous and harmful system.

Next time they profess to be fiscally responsible and are helping people back into work, making work pay and all their other nonsense, we must have a listing of the dozens of ways their words and performances fail to match up.

But realistically, it further comes down to how indifferent people are and people in general simply don’t care anymore and there were numerous people who voted to abandon the EU because they simply didn’t want weirdly shaped vegetables in Aldi, people who voted Conservative just because they were already in power and they hadn’t tried to google the options.

The level of madness is unbelievable and this is why elections shouldn’t be held because people overall, are too misinformed and slothful to make an informed judgment.
















Breaking Point

Patient safety is being jeopardised as a hospital is at breaking point, according to a staff whistleblower.

Basildon Hospital, Essex has been slammed by a worker who has fostered concerns there are not enough workers and additional beds are being put in already crowded bays. However, the hospital maintains there are no risks to patients using the service but the worker, who wanted to remain unidentified, stated she was really concerned.

It’s formulating pressure and stress on people which is very disagreeable and it truly is offensive and hospital administrators have given instructions for patients to be housed as extras in full bays. Therefore a bay created for four will have an additional patient in the centre of it because A&E is so full.

It endangers patient safety, infection control, dignity and health and safety. It further increases the workload of already stretched nurses.

Some wards are operating on two nurses for 29 patients on some nights and it’s risky but the frontline workers are being forced to jeopardise reasonable and safe practice, and concerns are not being heard.

The concerns first began two weeks ago, according to the staff member, and have continued throughout, and the hospital has been on the internal critical incident for over a week.

There are not sufficient beds in the critical care unit for the deteriorating patients and these patients are being managed in general wards, adding to the pressure.


The hospital is at breaking point. If the Care Quality Commission marched in unannounced, they would be appalled at some of the executive choices being made and the exhausting provisions doctors, nurses and non-clinical workers are being forced to work with.

A spokesperson for the hospital stated it was facing an exceptionally high demand for services, but it had tried and tested strategies to sustain services and he continued that lately, in order to generate additional space throughout an unusually hectic 24 hour period, they put one extra bed on two wards.

The patients put in these beds were evaluated by doctors, nurses and therapists to ensure they were safe and screens are accessible on wards to protect privacy and dignity and oxygen would have been instantly accessible had it been needed in a crisis.

Furthermore, evidently, in this way, they’re able to make two additional patients rested in a bed, on a ward and he added that nursing personnel levels were assessed five times a day to ensure they met the requirement.

However, people should examine really precisely at the absurd life-ending procedure to transfer hundreds of patients on the appalling roads to a hospital which is not going to have expanded space or parking and is currently striving to cope with Basildon’s demand.


This is an insult to the people of Basildon and a risky move on the part of Mid and South Essex STP.

Of course, you can’t simply turn patients away from the hospital, that would be thick-witted, on the other hand, you can’t simply conjure up beds or staff and whilst the situation may not be perfect, at least their making some sort of attempt to provide some care, sooner than sending people away.

Furthermore, if a person is so concerned, why doesn’t that person use the proper channels and the CQC to do an instant investigation rather than rushing off to the press who have absolutely no influence to do anything.

Hospitals can’t create beds and they can’t breed staff overnight and we should be thankful that they’re making an effort. However, the whistleblower was not thick-witted, they were simply doing what they believed was right at the time.

In fact, they were rather brave to have done what they did and to remain nameless was only because they would have worried that they might or seemingly would have lost their job and we don’t want to be losing staff right now, we demand more.

It is the negligence of this government which has closed 15,000 beds everywhere over the years to attempt and force the NHS into decay in the eyes of the public and some hospitals have significant staffing difficulties, also generated by the Department of Health and Jeremy Hunt for the purpose of making Insurance owned Private Healthcare to look like an attractive alternative.

Plus anyone with half a brain cell should recognise this and not buy into it but they should further have a say about what they think about the ugly, ludicrous, life-threatening hospital plans they are making in Basildon, Southend, Chelmsford and the neighbouring regions.

Hopefully, people will let the powers-that-be know what they think of their cost-cutting methods and it’s such an affront that they seek to dress it all up as being good for us.


Lovely Valentine’s Day Message For People

Of course, Valentine’s day is a day of joyful sentiments and appreciation. A day that you can consume with your loved one, with all the compassion and niceties, so what better way to observe it, than with a message from the DWP, intimidating you and telling you that they will take away your privileges.

Soon, you’re beginning to feel like a teenager that’s been told off and made to sit on the naughty step.

Awwwww, how sweet.


The charmers down at the Department of Work and Pensions have got everyone feeling all emotional and misty-eyed with a veiled warning to people who’re living together as spouses but not reporting it to the DWP.

Actually, it’s not even that veiled, is it? Furthermore, it’s safe to say it hasn’t gone down well.

It’s like a nuclear war and naturally, several gammon-faced Brexiters have gathered in too, to maintain that it’s a great thing to take away people’s welfare money, making the entire situation even nastier and shameful.

In case you’re unfamiliar with Britain’s bountiful benefits system, the DWP can decrease individual benefits if you’re living with someone as a couple and in some instances, this means inspectors attending people’s homes to investigate whether they’re romantically involved so the DWP can decrease their benefits.

Therefore this Valentine’s Day message about this was especially charming and nothing declares love like continuing the damaging societal story of benefit scroungers via a cutesy gif.

Those Casanovas over at the Department of Work & Pensions decided to get all heated and cloudy on the topic of welfare fraud in observance of Valentine’s Day this year and pretending to be living alone is one of the most popular examples of benefit fraud.

Don’t ruin Valentines Day by failing to disclose your true circumstances, it said in a rudely dictatorial post on Twitter and to combine the honey to the vinegar, a delightful pink graphic.

Declaring your true love tomorrow? It asked, floating over a sketched hot-air balloon in the appearance of a heart.

Don’t neglect to reveal you’re true living arrangements too. Don’t get separated from your Valentine. Tell us about a change now and, the perfect tease, it attaches a link to an Express editorial about benefit cheats.

The DWP is pure trash.

Anyhow, once the enchantment wore off, here’s the context of this claim.

The government predicts 1.1 percent of benefits paid out were fraudulently claimed in 2015-16. However, even this minute symmetry comes under the section of overpayment accounting for 1.9 percent of benefit expenditure in 2015-16, which further includes honest blunders on both sides.

So only a small minority of people are fraudulently claiming.

There is further underpayment in the system, which is roughly the same symmetry. The amount underpaid to benefit claimants in the same period as above was 1 percent of total expenditure.

The government states undeclared cohabiting is a general kind of benefit fraud. However, this is considered to be because of fast-changing living situations and the complex nature of cohabitation as a relationship and living together can mean many different relationships, and the government requires you to report the income of your married partner, your civil partner, or if you are living together as a married couple if you’re claiming benefits or tax credits, which is a confused description.

Cohabiting claims have most infamously been messed up on the government’s side and the private company Concentrix that handled tax credit claims for HMRC removed money from people who they accused of cohabiting with RS McColl, a Scottish corner shop chain that would appear on some people’s statements because you can get benefits from there, the 19th century philanthropist Joseph Rowntree a claimant lived in a house furnished by the Foundation under his name, and their own children.

However, it’s roused up a hornet’s nest on social-media ire and national media outlets including the New Statesman reacted furiously to the social comms and a section on the magazine’s website was especially annoyed about a link included in the tweet to a Daily Express feature about benefit fraudsters, whilst the paper quoted figures that suggest the number of benefits paid out to scammers is minimal and offset by underpayments.

The DWP announced to PR Week that earlier comparable campaigns tied in with calendar dates and had not created such a powerful response and a spokesperson replied that they frequently use important dates in the calendar to better articulate their methods and did so for a number of matters on Valentine’s Day and that they didn’t plan on offending anybody… Yeah, right!

However, displeasure was apparently taken by the likes of gammon-faced Brexiters, which called the tweet unpleasant and exceptionally misjudged.

However, the most blatant acknowledgements to the DWP’s impact were offended tweeters, who have characterised the campaign as a strong entry from the DWP for the most ill-judged Valentine-related social media campaign award and a nadir in DWP comms.

Another was cruder: “Happy Valentine’s Day you lonely, lawbreaking shits,” it stated, while other tweets riffed on the romantic verse ‘Roses are red, violets are blue’, adding their own couplets.

The Express article gave instances of fraudsters, including a Leicester woman who wrongfully collected £83,370 in benefits by erroneously declaring she was single.

The piece also cited James Blake from the DWP’s counter-fraud and compliance directorate as stating that relationships have their ups and downs but not telling the DWP when your circumstances change is a crime and the shameless few involved are deliberating diverting money away from those who really need it.

He also said that true love may be hard to come by but benefits cheats aren’t difficult to track down.

Love was in the air, but what you could sniff was the Department for Work and Pensions stinking out the room. At least that was the collective opinion on social media after the Whitehall department in charge of benefits elected to mark Valentine’s Day with a welfare crackdown.

This is very disturbing and this is the agency that brought us “When did you catch Down’s Syndrome and 40 years of Toryism has promptly slaughtered the UK’s humanity and we are ironically living under a sick government which treats the needy and disabled with complete disdain.

The City of London Thieving banker department steals more money in a single day from the taxpayer than the Poor fiddle over the course of a year in unwarranted benefit claims and it’s about time they began taking a leaf out of their own book.

You have to establish an example for society. There’s too much Tory teapot calling kettle black, and they wouldn’t know what the word Love means and while multi-millionaires rake in tax-free avoidance in offshore tax havens what are the Tories doing? Clamping down and intimidating with prison sentences to the poorest.

Furthermore, they have spent £100 million in under two years fighting and frequently losing appeals from people who have been refused disability benefits.