Withered PM Can’t Function



Senior Tories are concerned that a shrivelled Theresa May is fighting to come to terms with her botched Election campaign and the increasing peril to her leadership. They fear it could make it difficult for her to carry out her promise to stay in Downing Street at least until the United Kingdom leaves the EU in 2019.

According to one senior leader close to the Prime Minister, she is really depressed at times. A leading Conservative who knows her well stated he was horrified by her health at a meeting in No 10 last week.

Evidently, she looked shrivelled and fought to engage and apparently, she seemed actually smaller than she did when she stood so tall and bold on the steps of No 10 when she became Prime Minister. It is a disaster for Theresa May and she has been poorly attended by those who were close to her.

Nevertheless, they can’t continue like this indefinitely, it could open up a Pandora’s Box, and they may have to consider having a new leader. Nevertheless, No 10 maintained that news of the Prime Minister being too depressed to perform well was entirely incorrect and it was said that she was engaged and getting stuck in.

But evidently, it’s all rubbish. She had revealed the Election went badly but was set to make the best of it and that she was staying firmly put.

In discussions to mark her first year in office, Theresa May revealed she shed a little tear on June 8 when she was devastated to discover her Election venture had blown up in her face. She was a human being, she reflected but had quickly decided to get a grasp of things and carry on in power.

She would stay as Conservative leader as long as they wanted her. But, significantly, she repeatedly declined to commit to competing in the next General Election as a leader. Instead, Theresa May stated she required a few more years to get on with the business of completing Brexit.

The discussions declined to stop raising speculation that she could be made to stand down in October at the Conservative conference in Manchester. Worried Tory managers are now taking measures to dodge a repeat of the party’s unfortunate 2003 conference which led to the downfall of Iain Duncan Smith.

Facing comparable allegations that his leadership had lost its way and his self-esteem was shot, officials established supporters in the conference hall to give his conference talk a standing applause.


Iain Duncan Smith’s weak endeavour to gather support, saying that the subdued man was turning up the volume, fell flat. The fans sprang to their feet on the signal, however, the Tories did recognise that the game was up, and their leader resigned inside days.

The Conservatives limited the damage of Iain Duncan Smith’s departure by planning the crowning of Michael Howard as his replacement, thereby bypassing a divisive leadership battle.

Tory insiders stated that would be much more challenging this time, not least because Theresa May’s likely replacements and their individual camps are now fighting like grubs in a sack behind the scenes.

Furthermore, unlike Iain Duncan Smith who was in competition, the advantage of becoming Prime Minister is much greater. One Tory MP announced the conference will be a week-long post-mortem into how Theresa May performed combined political self-destruction for all of them.


Party chairman, ex-miner Patrick McLoughlin, is under pressure to quit for failing to get the Tory vote out in huge numbers. Patrick McLoughlin is an amiable lagoon, but they can’t go on having him in the Cabinet simply because he is the only Tory to have held a coal pick and he must be put out to grass like a pit pony.


Mr McLoughlin’s forerunner as chairman, Sir Eric Pickles, and senior MP Graham Brady, chairman of the backbench 1922 Committee, has almost finished a report on how the Election went so wrong.

They are expected to be scathing about Theresa May’s failure to advise Ministers about vote-losing manifesto policies such as the so-called dementia tax concerning social care expenses for the ageing, cutting free hot lunches for schoolchildren, and stopping the triple lock which safeguards pension increases. All three proposals have been evacuated.

Pickles and Brady will not be pulling their punches.

The Tories are disintegrating before our eyes, going from one failure to the next. It won’t be long and the weary Tories will have to request a general election. Then we will have a Labour government headed by Jeremy Corbyn driving us into Brexit. The revolution is beginning.

Theresa May is defeated. She requested a silly useless election and has put the nation and the Tory party in a terrible disorder, propped up by the DUP, now we have this Tory fighting when Brexit should be their priority.

However, examine photos of any Prime Minister following a year in office, it is a staggeringly difficult task for anyone and it wanes them all.






Minister Moved To Tears

A minister in the House of Commons was driven to tears when he stood alone and expressed his heart whelming description of what transpired at the Grenfell Tower and bestowed his sorrow with the people.

On his visit to the Westway, and learning of the disturbing accounts of survivors had been the most humbling and emotional experience of his life. The families that he has engaged with have been through unbelievable torture.

This is a disaster that should never have occurred and he stated they are determined to do all that they can to make certain that something like this never arises again, and he replied to a number of statements which have been made declaring that people are being advised to move far from London.

Or that they will be considered homeless if they do not take an offer. He wanted to be utterly transparent to the House, that if this is ever suggested to a victim then it is totally unacceptable. He has already said that if anybody is knowledgeable of an individual family which is not receiving that proposition they have been promised, then they need to tell him and they will fix it.

These people have lost their home and all that was within that home as well as losing their families in the disaster and it is essential to make sure that these families are looked after and provided with another home, not outside of London, but around London, close to their families because they will require all the help that they can get.

The government can’t put them on the lost and found pile and it’s the government’s duty to make sure they are homed properly. The government can’t dismiss these people but they will not take them into consideration when housing them.

These people are not a stain on our society and the government cannot stamp on them whilst they’re down. However this is not a caring government, it’s parched and inanimate, it bears no compassion at all and they will make a trifling struggle at looking great.

The entire situation is really disheartening because, following all the media coverage regarding Grenfell Tower, it appears that the media has gone rather quiet on the matter and what was today’s news is now tomorrow’s history.

We wouldn’t forget a fallen soldier because we are reminded of it continually but a tower block sets on fire and even though the media coverage was excellent at the time, two weeks later it’s not so relevant anymore and it’s taken a bit of a nosedive.

There should be a little more consideration for the people that lost their homes and their families in the fire, with a little bit more sympathy from the government who are tactless and invariably don’t pay attention to the stuff that is especially significant.


Theresa May has given DUP £1 billion simply so she can stay in government, which was obviously more valuable than the lives lost in the Grenfell Tower incident. That £1 billion could have created new homes for those people and given them a brighter future, even though it will never bring back those that perished in the fire but for those that are still breathing £1 billion would have been more than enough to make their lives a little easier.


In fact, this pretentious DUP settlement will eventually cost Theresa May far more than £1 billion.

This arrangement rocks the columns that prop up not merely the politics of Britain but the politics of Ireland and Northern Ireland too. The price Theresa May has paid for it is hugely disruptive and probably bankrupting and will greatly overshadow the £1 billion price tag for the DUP’s proposal of support deal.

However, as the minister ended his talk about his humbling encounter, was this not simply an excellent bit of acting because if anybody believes that a Conservative housing minister is actually humbled perhaps they should reflect again or is it simply damage control, convincingly delivered by its government lackey?

It’s a tragedy, and even though they were kind words by the minister, the Conservatives are corrupt – money before human lives and heads must roll, this government must make good the commitments they made to the survivors and hopefully the people will not accept anything less.

This man is at the very top and at the very core of careful and deliberate upscaling and dispersal of working class communities happening under Tory and Labour Councils up and down the country.

People and families have been scattered to the four winds. Not only is he delivering this, he has blood on his paws over the Grenfell Tower fire. If these were real tears they were only brought on by a build-up and excess of liability.

In time, the talk he gave will quickly mutate into a scoundrels words. He is a dangerous Tory and a pretty superior rodent at that.

People have lost everything, a community has been ripped asunder, lives interrupted in the saddest way, people have lost family and people have been charred to death. Just how bad are their lives and situations, but you zoom in on a rich Tory who goes home to a no doubt beautiful house and family each day.

He is in command of billions of public funds and resources and can offer possibly even announce an order incorporating all housing in the United Kingdom, yet there he is having chatted to a few victims who tore him to shreds, shedding a tear, but presenting no actual course of action.


He cried when he saw Grenfell on television but he is feeble and does not retain his position and presently he’s on the news lamenting and gets a hint of compassion, why doesn’t he leave his home and let some of the victims from Grenfell stay there, even then he would probably be able to trot off to a second home someplace.

The housing system that is running is all about social cleansing, not simply in Westminster but it’s occurring all over London and it’s been occurring for a very long time now. However, the Grenfell fire has made it much simpler for the government to purge.

Large social cleansing forces tens of thousands of families out of London and data reveals that the numbers claiming free school meals have fallen by about a third in some areas, suggesting regions are becoming stores for the wealthy.

Tens of thousands of impoverished families have moved out of inner London in the preceding five years, generating social cleansing on a large scale, leaving vast parts of the city as the store for the rich, figures imply.

The size of the problem is exposed in data that shows a number of children qualified to free school meals, and a broadly used indicator of deprivation has fallen by nearly a third in some London areas following 2010.

The figures depict a mass displacement of impoverished families from inside London just when the government has launched a boat of changes to the welfare policy. Even though there is no obvious connection between welfare changes and the decrease in free school meal applicants. Sadiq Khan, who obtained the figures, announced that government policies were generating a separated capital.

This evidence confirms that the government’s strategies on welfare and housing have created social cleansing in London on a huge scale. Families have been forced out of large portions of the city and this is not the sort of London we want our children to grow up in.


Boris Johnson announced that Tory welfare reforms would not lead to Kosovo-style social cleansing, promising that we would not see thousands of families ousted from the home where they have been living.

However, the latest numbers reveal that this is what has occurred after the government cut housing benefit, introduced the benefit cap and exposed proposals to sell off social housing.

Runaway rents and a deficiency of social housing are eradicating families from inner London and preventing others from having children in the first place. The housing pressure is not simply upsetting education for children who are forced to move away from their schools, it drives workers farther from their workplaces and that puts stress on companies and public services.

The creation of districts that help particularly the wealthy is damaging neighbourhoods, ruining the marketplace and damaging social versatility.

The numbers note that whilst there has been a 3 percent reduction in those qualified for free school meals across England, four inner London districts have noticed a deterioration of 25 percent or more. Across inner London as a mass, there was a mediocre decline of 16 percent.

Some of those families seem to have relocated to outer districts where even though there was an overall reduction in the numbers qualified to free school meals, some regions observed an abundant appreciation.

In Merton, there was a 19 percent growth, Bexley 15 percent, and Croydon 11 percent and other families have moved out of the capital completely. Innumerable families have been ripped away from their family and friends, with children required to travel an hour and a half just to get to school.

They’re separating London into more rich and poor sections that will generate tremendous destruction to London’s well-being and hasten the burgeoning bias in the city. We’re being socially purged.

The rent goes up, and the benefit cap doesn’t satisfy the rent. That indicates that people are either required to go hungry or move away from their families and the lives they’ve developed.

The flight of disadvantaged families from the capital is, in part, a result of government administration. Government schemes like the bedroom tax and the benefits cap appear to have had a displacement impact and that is what we seem to be witnessing.

These policies have established an open-ended trend that, following the 1990s, has observed inner London growing more prosperous and more costly and if inner London is being emptied out it would have consequential implications and would be something to take action on.

The findings match other matters about the social cleansing of London and found that in 2012 more than 11,000 Londoners were located in housing outside their district, with more than 2,000 being moved outside London completely and leaked government data revealed that 50,000 London families have been located outside their area since 2011.

When questioned regarding the declining amount of children that qualified for free school meals in inner London and claims that this indicated block social cleansing, the Department for Work and Pensions stated, that their welfare changes guaranteed the long-term sustainability of the welfare policy whilst further providing a £80 billion safety net for those who require it.

They also said that families in work make choices on where to live based on what they can afford every day, and they thought it was only right that households on benefits face those same decisions.
Khan, who was shadow minister for London, announced if he was selected as mayor he would create more affordable homes and launch a living London wage, combining rent levels to income.

He stated that he would do all he could do to hinder the government’s proposals to diminish the welfare cap and sell off more affordable family homes and that we need to make sure that the city continues to be affordable to all those who want to live there.

What a poisonous capital city it has become. But never mind the capital, what a wicked country we’ve become, it has become tainted to the core.

Let’s not overlook the part local governments are participating in allowing the process of social cleansing and upscaling. Quite good council estates being destroyed and the land auctioned off to individual housing developers.

The social cleansing of the Woodberry Down Estate in Hackney and the Aylesbury Estate in Southwark two instances in point. Interestingly enough, both were done under the auspices of the new Labour-run councils.

The Oxbridge Three have nothing to say about this matter.

We have become an embarrassment and should be humiliated and it brings a whole distinct spin to the phrase rotten boroughs. Different tactic, the same offensive consequence of manipulating the boundaries.

And we should all accept that there was a limited separation between New Labour and old Tories. This is presently the principal edge of the extreme far right neo-lib Tories and their followers in all parties.


You only have to look at the death casualties of welfare reforms, NHS cuts, et cetera, our amazing austerity to understand that the poor are getting killed and elbowed out the way for the rich, particularly in hyperinflated London.

But the truth is that disabled people require help more than the rest. Help that’s being ideologically rejected by a system that handles highly complex specific people as nothing more than statistics, quota’s and headline fodder and that is the dilemma. Meanwhile, sick and disabled people get treated worse than dogs, until abuse is normalised.


Only the DWP are continuing to obscure at each conceivable turn the publicity of data that would settle things one way or the other. This enables them to maintain the published data that doesn’t support this or that conclusion, but without willingly presenting data of their own.

However, the DWP was ultimately compelled to show that there were raised death rates amongst those elected to carry the brunt of the bank bail-out, and other justifications for the stamping down of the disadvantaged and defenceless.

One figure alone recorded 4,000 dead who was pronounced healthy to work and that was simply the tip of the iceberg.

If the people that had their benefits cut because they were deemed to not have a disability or illness and then they die, clearly that would show that assessor who considered them not sick or disabled wrong in the first place.

There have been a number of claimants who have been before an assessor who has examined them, one man was told that he should get to his doctor quickly because there was something dangerously wrong with his heart.

The claimant was considered to be eligible for employment and died some weeks later!

The death percentage of those refused ESA was 48 times greater than for the average working population in the two weeks post assessment. Refuse ESA and death happens inside two weeks.
Sadly this is most positively conceivable in the event of some poor people.

These people had permanent health conditions but were considered eligible to work by an assessment which isn’t fit for purpose. A portion of them died inside two weeks of that judgment. In some instances, they killed themselves, in more their sickness killed them, with death pretty likely to have been accelerated by the pressure of a long drawn out assessment process and then being refused money at the end of it.

The report didn’t need to prove causation, that would have been to illustrate a really malevolent intention on the part of the DWP. What we have is proof of a hackneyed callousness that rules the sick fit to work, a truly fatally flawed social policy.

The work-related activity group is comprised solely of people who are presumed to recover from their sicknesses and be well enough to return to work inside a year. In that group, there should be no mortality at all, barring accidents, so why have approximately 10,000 people lost their lives after being assigned there?

The Department for Work and Pensions acknowledged failure in its effort to suppress a number of people who have died whilst claiming incapacity benefits following November 2011 and has declared that the number who died from January that year and February 2014 is a surprising 91,740.

This represents an increase in a percentage of 99 deaths per day or 692 per week, amid the start of December 2011 and the end of February 2014 compared with 32 deaths per day/222 per week between January and November 2011.

The DWP has laboriously stated that any causal effect within benefits and death cannot be calculated from these statistics.

The DWP has further alleged that these isolated figures present insufficient scope for examination and nothing can be obtained from this publication that would enable the reader to reach any conclusion as to the outcomes or impacts of the Work Capability Assessment.

Mortality in the support group and the assessment stage are more problematical since they involve people who do have severe disabilities, many of who may be expected to die whilst claiming. But are these deaths being stimulated artificially by the DWP’s handling of them?

A statistical announcement issued (August 27) in answer to a Freedom of Information inquiry dating back to May 28, 2014, asserts that the cumulative number of deaths involving claimants of Incapacity Benefit, Employment and Support Allowance and Severe Disablement Allowance between the start of December 2011 and the end of February 2014 is 81,140, including 50,580 ESA claimants and 30,560 IB/SDA claimants. All figures are rounded up to the nearest 10.

Join this to the 10,600 deaths that were previously known between January and November 2011 and you have 91,740.

Information for ESA claimants shows:

7,540 deaths whilst claims were being evaluated, bringing the perceived sum to 9,740.
7,200 deaths in the work-related activity group, bringing the identified whole to 8,500.
32,530 deaths in the support group, bringing the perceived sum to 39,630.
Also, 3,320 deaths in which the claimant was not in receipt of any benefit payment and is consequently listed as unknown.
The total number of claimants who flowed off ESA, IB or SDA whose date of death was at the corresponding time and of those the number with a WCA decision of fit for work, mid-December 2011 to February 2014 was 2,650 2,380 ESA, 270 IB/SDA.

Furthermore, the entire number of people who ran off ESA, IB or SDA whose date of death was at the corresponding time with a completed appeal following a WCA decision of fit for work, Great Britain: December 2011 to February 2014 was 1,360 1,340 ESA, 20 IB/SDA.

The latest figures infer the average amount of mortality per day mid-January 2011 and February 2014 was about 79.5 – 556 per week.

This compares with a percentage mid-January and November 2011 of about 32 per day – 222 per week.

This Writer has not yet checked the DWP’s accompanying statistical release, presenting the candied Age-Standardised Mortality Rates mid-2003 and 2014. The data in this one asserts that fatality decreased from 1,111 deaths per 100,000 across all three benefits to 1,032.

However, claims for Incapacity Benefit, ESA didn’t exist at the time were at an all-time high in 2003, of almost three million throughout the year. The numbers claiming this sort of benefit have both declined and increased since then.

So what are we to presume?

Firstly, the numbers released need to be more examined, in-depth research that can be accomplished by This Writer inside an hour or so of its announcement. Second, that the DWP should withdraw its appeal against publishing them, for obvious reasons. Third, that the Age-Standardised Mortality Rates give a misleading understanding of the amount of mortality.

Finally, that pressing questions must now be questioned about the way incapacity benefits are being delivered by the Department for Work and Pensions and we should feel physically sick, the number of people dying is expediting under our government, so what do we do to prevent this?

The Tories intend to abandon the Human Rights Law so I doubt they care about what the overall citizens consider, they only want views from the wealthy who have a large dwelling and loads of cash, because they can afford to support themselves with high-priced advocates from the Tories if they say anything adverse.

There are a 100,000 disadvantaged people, reduced to existing on the state, and the state simply cuts that inadequate lifeline and they die!

The foul piece of work accountable for this had a great education, then espoused wealth, so he’s not even a self-made man. He led his Political Party until they realised what he was, and got rid of him.

He has now been perceived to be a trickster and a piece of dirty excrement and he has been regurgitated out of our system.

We did once have a pretty good country but it’s now sick and lame and it brings a tear to my eye that our government have a policy that kills and the one thing that Tories are good at is manipulating data and numbers, but this is contemptible even for them.

Any other company or person would have judicial measures taken if they were responsible for this sort of crime, sadly, this government are above the law, and I hope the minority of people who voted them in are happy, I believe forced euthanasia will be next.

Sadly, that would be too dignified, the government would want us to suffer right till the very death and generate as much pain and distress as possible.

No one should be beyond the Law, Government included. Pursuing this train of thinking, and I could just be inventing out of my backside on this, but since we are in a style, subjects of a selected Government, we are all citizens to the Crown.


Now I am convinced that the Queen would not want to get entangled in any way publicly with this, but the Crown, in this Kingdom, has an old-fashioned commitment towards the Crown’s subjects. I am sure you understand my gist, but I’m uncertain as to how this could work because the Monarchy is now completely Constitutional.

Nevertheless, any public interference by the Monarch would constitute legal mayhem. It appears the Royals only mediate behind the scenes, and in their own interests – even though I stand willing to be admonished.

There appears to be a modern-day Nazi Party manipulating the Press and our TV programme executives promoting their sickening misuse of the impoverished regime. The Tories are continuing where the Coalition left off.

How many times have you noticed programmes aired on channel 4 and 5 regarding so-called benefit rogues or spongers? You have Undercover Benefits Cheat, The Great Big Benefits Wedding, 12-years-old and on Benefits, Britain’s Benefit Tenants, Benefits Street, Benefits Britain et cetera.

They are all intended to make the benefits claimants seem like spongers-of-the-state to anyone viewing those programmes. They want to make them appear blameworthy for being in a position where they require assistance.

The press too, and of course, they are continually pumping up on anything out of the norm to help sell their newspaper. But when they report on a claimant that has had something they shouldn’t have they intensify it and make even the tiniest fiddle into such an enormous deal that the readers are ready to go and stone the person to death.

Melodrama, it is all invented to help turn the nation’s community upon the disadvantaged and defenceless in the community who need to rely on donations. But really, there is much more depravity going on than that inside the ramparts of Parliament by the highly regarded people who are driving those attacks upon Britain’s vulnerable.

Many of our ministerial leaders and MP’s are using redirected funds accumulated by not paying out benefits to claimants who innocently find themselves put on sanctions, and those denied ESA or JSA, to line their own carnivorous pockets.

We have discovered them with their hands in the public till decreasing their own tax duty whilst rising hard-working Briton’s tax, defrauding thousands of pounds in expenses demands from the tax man, and putting up their own salaries above inflation, et cetera.

But this is okay, nothing bad is said about them on TV or in the Press, they are exempt from any penalty. Why are there no shows on TV about Minister Cheats, MP Swindlers, Parliament Spongers, et cetera?

There is no equality. Merely extremely evil people who would like to see the poor launched into the workhouse like back in the dark ages of antiquity, and we know what happened to most of them, don’t we!

Human Rights are being stamped on for the poor, disabled and vulnerable here in Britain in this, the 21st century by our own Government, but it is alright as they have further manipulated the rules of the country so they can stay in government for at least another two years.


Corporate manslaughter might be a valuable position to begin. The DWP put out figures in 2012 showing the amount of mortality among ESA claimants mid-January and November 2011, a tally of 32 per day.

Now it has published numbers confirming the amount of mortality among ESA claimants mid-December 2011 and February 2014, an average of 62 per day, approximately double the former average.
Ministers at the DWP would have been conscious that the amount of mortality was growing but they did nothing about it.

That may be deemed to be out-and-out neglect by the people controlling policy at the DWP, leading to the deaths of other people.

It’s frightful, inevitably there must be some way the government can be held responsible over this? Although, we could go with impeachment.

Impeachment is when a peer or citizen is accused of high offences and misconducts, exceeding the scope of the law or which no other authority in the land will prosecute. It is a procedure that is aimed in particular upon Ministers of the Crown.

The first reported impeachment was in 1376 and the last in 1806.

It is the most tragic thing for all of these unfortunate people and there should be an extended drive in all of this terrible nightmare which just goes on and on and gets worse and worse.

The follow-up should be a demand for those people who believe these sanctions on poor people are acceptable and they should stand trial for the excess mortality caused, which appears to be about 55,000 up until February 2014 but is rising at about a hundred a day.


While David Cameron was alongside it all supporting and encouraging it, this level of death from the government’s abuse is lewd, and heads of government need to roll.

This should be headline news. It just goes to prove that governments are still picking days to hide bad headlines. I mean, look who owns Sky and of course they won’t mention it, the Tories have the media bought or is it Murdock that has the Tories bought?

Myself, I speculate it’s more an alliance of preference, both worship money and control and when they operate collectively that is what they get.

The government is unfit for purpose and should be dismissed and taken to court to acknowledge their cruel disregard for the lives of those who have died and those who have lost relatives or friends because of these actions. The government have supported this all the way.

Nazi genocide in which Hitler killed many Jews, the sick and the disabled, and this is no different because the government are suppressing a race of people, but this time it’s the poor that are suffering and being killed.

The government tell us rubbish and hogwash, they cut benefits by these sanctions and they write letters to claimants in an endeavor to stress them out and then you go round in a never ending loop of telephone calls, posting letters to them and evidence that you’re in need of benefit or disability, but you simply end up going round and round in an never ending circle, and for those that get engulfed into the insanity, it invariably causes the demise of many.

There are people out there suffering from cancer, that are having to wait an entire 6 months to get their money, money that they’re entitled to. In the meantime, they are suffering because they can’t afford heating, fresh food and laundry.


Isn’t it astonishing though that ATOS are still doing the assessment for the DWP even though everybody was told they had lost the contract?

Disabled Britons are being put through terrifying examinations and tribunals simply to obtain essential benefits who may have been brutally denied funds after assessors have been accused as policing claimants out the window in entirely unethical assessments devised by the Government.

After the Conservative Government shifted from Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) in 2013 thousands of people have been re-assessed and denied much-needed benefits. However, these examinations, outlined by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and carried out by private firms are now being brought into question over the walking component.

Assessors for French data firm ATOS and British company Capita needs to ascertain whether the claimant can walk 20 meters unaided, amongst additional everyday tasks, according to DWP rules.

But, experts have stated they think assessors are policing disabled people from the window of assessment centres and cynically ticking off the mobility criteria without the person even knowing, or having the opportunity to be challenged on it.

If such methods are being carried out, the assessors are neglecting to present the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) with the proper information to evaluate a case. Nevertheless, both have demonstrated they are carrying out examinations and following practices set by the DWP.


Under the reliability criteria, assessors must verify whether or not the 20 metres can be initiated every day and under changing circumstances. Alternately, at assessment centres, informal observations are being carried out which campaigners state cannot possibly match what is set out in law.

Important information which is frequently obscure, the claimant must be questioned if they can always walk the distance required. If they can’t walk it in all situations, satisfying all the criteria, it must be acknowledged they can never achieve the task.

Notable disability campaigner Baroness Thomas of Winchester faced her own struggle with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and won.

Fighting for the rights of disabled people, the peer in the House of Lords stated the four essential reliability criteria she had included, along with Lib Dem MP Steve Webb, are being overlooked at assessment centres operated by Atos and Capita.

What Baroness Thomas got entered into legislation was that the four reliability criteria had to be more than mere guidance.

The four were, in the case of the Moving Around distance, that the claimant had to be able to walk the distance, even 20 metres, safely,
and to a satisfactory standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period.

The Government made those rules compulsory. Yet, the DWP maintains their examinations led by contractors ask specific questions which can verify someone’s abilities every other day.

A spokeswoman announced that they do not look at a snapshot of someone’s life, despite the fact that the assessments barely last forty minutes which is mind-blowing and would not give them a decent chronicle of somebody’s health requirements.

You can’t form a view of somebody’s ailing health, which leaves me utterly mute and in scepticism on how well these evaluations are being dispensed with. This is not a game, these claimants have a debilitating ailment, which several experience excessive tiredness, weakness and pain, which leave many in isolation.

Giving them money does not relieve their discomfort, but it does make their lives a little better. Most live in agony and that tiny fraction of funds that they do get is a blessing, after all, they don’t aspire to be impaired or disabled.

And they require all their energy to get through each day but then they come across these silly guidelines that are established by boundaries and are a genuine pain in the posterior and cost many their lives. Most of these people have integrity and it’s a disgrace that they are being managed this way, like complete and utter animals, in fact, most animals get handled better.

The Government have stated that if a person can walk that distance on some days but not other days, then they must be considered not to be able to do the distance according to the guidelines.

In a PIP assessment, a person is only required to be able to walk 20 metres unaided, just two bus lengths. This was formerly fixed at 50 but shifted abruptly in what was deemed to be a silly money-saving tactic.

This was clearly going to save the DWP a bunch of money and mean that a number of higher rate DLA claimants would lose the higher rate PIP and therefore not be eligible for the Motability car.

Those that were entitled will not be any longer as the government sink their fangs into the jugular and it’s an outright insult as they treat all claimants with rebuke, almost like a blow to the mouth with a fist.

When the Government announced the PIP regulations, they abruptly altered the initial 50-metre guideline.

The point is that the walking evaluation must be an outside test, and needs to take into account of weather situations, the state of the pavement, crowds, dropped kerbs, even if we’re simply talking about walking 20 metres.

Firms like ATOS and Capita have deposited more than £500 million in taxpayer money through the DWP contracts.


However, after taking the DWP contract for PIP assessment in 2013 aged, weak and disabled people have been forced into evasive re-assessments which leave them afraid and sometimes poverty-stricken.


Wheelchair using UKIP councillor and disability spokeswoman Star Anderton, 45, was also forced to go back for assessment. She maintains it is common that, people are viewed as perfectly capable of satisfying the guidelines if they can walk the requisite distance only once.

So many people say that’s what occurs. They go for assessment and it is essentially considered if they can do that distance once, they can do it all the time.

That’s the contradiction of the Government guidance and they might be able to do it every now and again. The reliability criteria is specified in forms by ATOS and Capita and the reliability criteria were promptly included after the boundary shifts from 50m to 20m.

Even though it’s in all the forms they don’t take any notice at the assessment centre and the rules aren’t being adhered to. It is as if all they want is to put everybody on standard rate and seek to get the figures down.

ATOS has frequently rejected such allegations but campaigners have blamed them of satisfying workers who bring down the number of claimants on the DWP. Supposedly, they carry out examination as proposed by the DWP and do not stray from the set test which they carry out and transfer back to the DWP for a settlement.

Capita echoed this comment.

However, people who had been for a DWP evaluation with ATOS and Capita stated they were not questioned whether they could walk the requisite distance reliably, and to a satisfactory standard, repeatedly and in a generous time period.

In fact, when their assessment data was recovered from the DWP it stated they were informally observed. It’s reported as many as 800 people per week are being dismantled of their benefits, or the higher rate, leaving them too sick to work and too nervous to challenge the judgment in court.

One woman who found out about the reliability criteria and wrote about it in her appeal following her losing all her disability benefits.

Despite having kidney failure and being hospitalised three times per week for treatment, the retired grandmother who worked for more than three decades had benefits withdrawn following her PIP assessment.

After pointing out, under the reliability criteria, she could not carry out the necessary distance safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period, her benefits were reinstated.

There have never been points for mobility before and now there is.
It’s nothing but a trick. People were never asked the questions they’re asked now, aside from how far you could walk and the person would tell them that on a normal day I can walk this far and on a bad day I can’t walk that far.

The DWP doesn’t care who you are or what your difficulties are, you are a number and they want a smaller number. ATOS has distributed data about the rules online and campaigners state examiners do not adhere to the guidelines.

It says, the reliability criteria must be considered for every activity and will be viewed as an essential part of the information-gathering method whether at a face-to-face interview or throughout a paper-based evaluation.

An ATOS Healthcare spokesperson stated that as one of the suppliers to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), they engage each evaluation in stringent accordance with the Department for Work and Pensions PIP assessment guide.

And the reliability criteria is fundamental and that means and all their Health Professionals are thoroughly taught in their performance and application. This covers evaluation for mobility for which an evaluation of an individual’s capacity to walk takes adequate account of the guidelines without limitation.

Apparently, they guarantee the criteria of their reports and that they’re kept in line with all guidelines established by the DWP and the process is further reinforced by an objective review process which reports to the DWP.

The DWP, not Capita, makes the determinations on whether to grant a benefit or not and the level and time of those awards.

Assessments are taken into consideration by the DWP adjacent to all other proof offered by a claimant and assessors are qualified to recognise when and where everyday observations may be used in line with DWP guidance.

A Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) spokesperson justified the use of informal observations, alleging they were relevant to the assessment process. Evidently, they are practised adjacent to the healthcare professional’s own evaluation, the claimant questionnaire and any other proof.

The spokeswoman stated that they demand the highest standards from the contractors who conduct the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) evaluations and work closely with them to guarantee PIP is operating in the best way imaginable.

Decisions for PIP are made after viewing all the data given by the claimant, including any supporting proof from their GP or medical professional, and anyone who opposes the ruling can appeal.

For those people that are refused PIP but are nevertheless obviously sick, they are then put onto Universal Credit. An employer will pick someone who, amongst many other things, will turn up regularly, not go sick or let them down.

Somebody who does not need the work place to be altered so that they can work and above all, be reliable. Therefore, they will not waste their time on the person who has cancer, multiple sclerosis, or epilepsy amongst all the other illnesses that could cause one to be late for work, or not be able to get into work at all.

These people might not have qualified for PIP, but that does not mean they’re not ill and it’s far more awkward for them to get a job that people without disabilities don’t have. Nevertheless, if they do have a disability, how long will their boss continue to hire them when they’re not able to turn up for work?


Mental Health problems will no longer be a component of PIP, this was unobtrusively put through throughout the by election and will see countless people losing payments.

There are of course people out there that will maintain that all those who want to cheat PIP will declare that they can’t walk 20 meters.

And it may be that some people will choose to deceive the benefits policy, but choosing to put disabled people through incorrect or skewed assessments is not fair to those people who require the benefit.

Maybe if MPs didn’t give themselves a pay increase all the time and stopped giving out so much overseas relief and gave it to their own people and they quit funding immigrants benefits and grants to furnish their homes, then perhaps some of those disabled claimants would not lose their dignity.

This government is attempting to destroy the benefits system for disabled people, having previously closed the workshops that those people obtained self-esteem, even though they were paid a paltry wage, these workshops were killed off on the terrains of cost.

The MPs must look at their personal self on a number of tax-free benefits they get. They chose to cut the benefits by £30 of those on disabilities, but receive a wage increase for themselves whilst claiming expenses for small things like paper clips.

When there are hundreds of thousands of immigrants with outstretched hands expecting to be supplied with easy money it is the most defenseless in our society that repeatedly takes the punch to guarantee that the non-contributors continue to get their free donations, and the governments of the past and present should dangle their heads in embarrassment as should the voters who keep voting in these dirtbags.

They gather money by cruelly penny-pinching from those least able to stand up for themselves, where they will, no doubt prize themselves a nice profitable gratuity and pay increase.

Recommendation for PIP or previously Living Disability Allowance should never have been outsourced outside of the NHS, it should have been the local GP of the person who was making a request for that benefit to carry out the evaluations and present the report to the DWP.

It creates too much stress for the claimant and their doctor is more insightful of their disability and requirements, particularly if they have a succession of ailments, then they can give an imagery of their health.

After all, the patient’s doctor knows them better than anybody else and they would presumably have been their patient for an extended time and they would be capable of presenting the DWP with all of their conditions and how it changes from day to day, how far they can walk and what they can and can’t do for themselves.

Assessors should not be evaluating medical matters with benefits of recipients where they do not have the medical training or the ability to deliver a good bed side manner that a GP would and why should a sub-contractor who is not medically able be permitted to direct probing interrogations for information which is protected under patient confidentiality with the NHS?

There are some shysters out there who fraudulently claim benefits but then there are also people genuinely in need that are not being handled with the dignity and respect by a nation that puts Great in front of its name.

Nobody less than a medical doctor practising in disability appraisal should be permitted to evaluate or make any judgments correlating to what a disabled person can or cannot do. There are some people who seem fine one day and then completely crippled up and powerless to do anything the next day, that is, sadly, the nature of some disabilities.

The reliability criteria state that if you can’t do something repeatedly then it is to be interpreted as if you can’t do it at all. Those are the DWP’s own rules set in deliberation with well educated and qualified medics who know the science behind the symptoms.

Some people are judged by fantasy stereotypes, propelling an extrapolation of their own ability. It stands to reason that you can’t implement your expertise to evaluate other peoples ability if they are sick and you are not.

For some people, it would take three or more days to recuperate from a brief trip to the store, but they will still try to do that trip because if they don’t they would be stuck indoors all the time. However, with healthy people, it wouldn’t take that much time to recover from such a light activity and they could do it three times a day in lunch breaks whilst maintaining a job.


Yet Tony Blair’s government attempted to spin comparable populist attitudes that all disabled people are closet criminals. They abused this manner of bias and cumbersome reasoning to sidetrack awareness from their own misdeeds like the dodgy dossier and expenses disgrace.

It was a persuasive weapon and redirected a lot of anger, disability hostility crime rose a lot. The Tories maintained the wrong this allowed without reinstating an air of fair play because it assisted their plan of austerity to refuse people benefits. That is what PIP is all about.

The disabled have been utilised like a political kitty plaything to divert the eye of the media and the people, and as a whipping boy to disgrace everyone into accepting their own portion of the spending cuts.

While cuts may be inevitable for all quarters following the consequences of irresponsibility manifested in the banking disaster, this sort of deceitful gyration and wrongful execution of defenseless human beings by government has lead immediately to the grass root rebellions we are dispensing with now in the United Kingdom with Brexit and a transition of control to the Labour movement.

Judges have been granted an 11 percent wage rise. The MP’s have now been granted an inflation busting pay rise and the House of Lords get £300 a day simply for signing in. It’s a society for bottom burpers to interpret the news in leather bound seats while consuming food and of course drinking, smoking, and nodding off all the while they are paid £300 a day five days a week for this.

£1500 a week for doing nada and they’re clamping down on the sick and disabled.

The government wants to save money and entered into an arrangement with a private company which wants to make money, a union made in heaven but sadly the loser is the claimant.

Evidently, the assessors have always appraised people out of windows and they further plant people in the nearest car parks to the assessment centre. Other methods that are used are toilets that they put out of order signs on and lifts that are not permitted to be used by wheelchair users, stating it is because of health and safety issues.

Apparently, the receptionist scrutinises people in the waiting room, as do others who purport to be people waiting to be assessed. Then there is the use of uncomfortable seats to see how long people can remain in the chairs, usually without arms to assist people getting out of them is a typical deceitful trick.

There are are a number of people out there that are not falsifying it but the papers disregard this reality. Some of the might not look sick, but then you have others that might have terminal cancer, which after several yards becomes obvious if people stopped to observe, but they don’t, they simply assume and walk off all self-righteous.

Disability cars, well most cost, except the basic ones, and there is a price limit of 30K on them, therefore loads of people pay £500-3,000 deposit if they, for example, have a big family or require wheelchair access, plus the expense of the conversion et cetera.

Then they lose their higher rate of payment for the three years, plus if they come out of the scheme after say two years, plus insurance companies then view you as a new driver, as 96 percent of insurance companies don’t take on people from the mobility scheme and the ones that do are the more costly companies, so it’s not as black and white as people imagine.

Breaking The Law



First, there was election spending, now an investigation has uncovered that there is evidence the Conservations may have breached election and privacy laws in this year’s election.

The Conservatives used an undercover call centre, employing a 100 people a day to make repeated cold calls to voters in marginal seats. The callers were besieged with Tory messages on Brexit and immigration and on polling day made solicitations promoting specific candidates.

Paying people to canvas for particular political candidates is prohibited and the Information Complaints Commissioner will be investigating, and if anybody has not obeyed the law, they will act.


Theresa May was touring target seats, adhering to the dialogue, telling everyone it was about strong and stable leadership. However there was a tip-off about a hidden Tory campaign, the people were never supposed to see.

From an unlikely place, concerns that laws protecting our privacy and our democracy were being broken.

Whilst there was Theresa May and her travelling road show, in Neath in South Wales there was an undercover operation, apparently set up to help sway the election in the Conservatives favour.

Welcome to the call centre being utilised by the Tory campaign. From a facility on the high street in the valleys of South West Wales where jobs are limited, salaries are low and the Labour party dominant.

A company of young people are on the telephones. Zero hours operators doing the Conservative parties bidding. It was less than a month before polling day and an undercover reporter has a job at Blue Telecoms.

A whistleblower stated that Blue Telecoms had been making potentially illegal telephone calls to voters. Blue Telecoms has an unusual management culture and some slightly dissatisfied workers had just googled the human rights act on the computer.


And then there’s this man Sascha Lopez failed Conservative Council candidate and winner of profitable contracts from the Conservatives during election campaigns.

He’s holding up a 50-pound note, he stated later on this was a trick forcing his young recruits to snitch on one another. He stated they would get the 50 quid if they reported somebody and they will listen into their calls, and if they’re correct that person will get the 50 quid and it will come out of the other person’s earnings they have snitched on.

It appears the first practice of Blue Telecoms is you do not talk about Bluetelecoms, which is strange because anchors were in Neath and knew precisely where it was. With the election approaching, the call centre was dialling innumerable UK voters claiming their something called Axe Research, stating they are independent market researchers, as they accumulated information from voters in dozens of marginal seats.

It’s a legal requirement for call centres to be upfront about who they are. The undercover reporter wanted to know why they call themselves Axe Research and was informed that was simply the name that they go under to do these surveys.

The woman stated that she did a google search and nothing came up for Axe Research but as far as anyone’s concerned they are a legit independent market research company.

Nothing comes up because Axe Research has no website, no telephone number, and does not exist. Therefore one of the top Queens Council’s was asked what the law states. The law states that if a company is going to process a person’s data, that person should know who that company are and what they’re going to do with their data and they are the basic principles of this enactment.

And clearly, what that indicates is if you have got a situation where the company that’s calling you is hiding their actual identity or is deceiving the person that’s taking the call, then that’s clearly a problem under the privacy legislation.

A political party can’t justify getting the law wrong on this issue and Sacha Lopez stated that Axe Research is a trading technique of a group of his companies and referred the anchors to Conservative party headquarters.

The Conservatives wouldn’t respond to inquiries regarding Axe Research however they did admit that Blue Telecoms were operating for them. But there are more questions and a possible illegality.

You might remember as the election approached, Theresa May announced this: “If we lose just six seats, then the government loses its majority and that means Jeremy Corbyn in number 10”.


Inside hours in Neath the call centre began saying it to, immediately calling overtly in support of the Tories. What you’re about to discover could have grim results for the Conservative party. Twenty UK landline numbers are listed with the Telephone Preference Service.

These households have opted out of nuisance calls, it’s forbidden to call them to promote anything, including political parties.

Now that enormous ribbon of households is the prohibited berry of election phone campaigns, an untapped pond of voters that by law are tantalisingly out of range. With one exception, you can call them for legitimate market research.


The Tory call centre was cold calling voters from amongst the millions of landlines which have expressly objected to nuisance calls.

But first of all we have to study what these calls proposed to accomplish and the day before the election, there’s a caller, it’s Richard Minshull, director of the Welsh Conservatives. His presence coincides with the call centre saying very different things to different types of voters.

On the line, there’s a voter who’s opted out of nuisance calls and when he says he’s torn on the eve of the election, there’s a specific message for undetermined voters:


“It was reported in the Daily Mirror of September last year that Jeremy Corbyn said that he’s not concerned about people coming to live in the UK and that there’s been reports on Sky news on the 20th April, this year that Theresa May restated her pledge to reduce net migration. So thinking about these reports in the media and reports that you live in a marginal constituency.”

The man was then questioned if he was more inclined to vote for Theresa May or if he was more disposed to vote for Jeremy Corbyn and by the completion of the call, just listen who he chooses – Theresa May.

The Conservatives did state they did constitute legitimate marketing calls. Blue Telecom insists they did not.

This exchange was presented to an expert in political campaigning. He was questioned, having examined the footage, where he believed it fell, did he believe it was an election poll or was it promoting the Conservative party?

He stated it was canvassing, that it’s not researching, all the questions are primed, a number of them are actually rhetorical in that mind of overseeing them to one answer. It’s canvassing, and it replicates all kinds of dialogues you witness on doorsteps by political parties for countless years.

They’re methods here seeking to influence people.

Blue Telecoms stated all the dialogues were presented directly by the Conservative party. How many voters would have been persuaded with an election that was in the balance, is presently a key issue.


June 8th and its Polling day. With the Welsh Conservatives director still at his side, Sascha Lopez is certain of triumph and the Tory call centre appears to have assumed a high-risk approach. Making solicitations for particular Conservative candidates for places around Wales.

It’s unlawful to pay somebody to boost people to vote for a singular candidate. The purpose is to enshrine in our legislation the belief that votes can’t be bought.

Conservative voters alone were prompted to vote but what are they attempting to accomplish here? They’re attempting to get people out there to vote, that’s the normal function of the canvasser, but this time, it’s a call centre and people are being paid.

There are legal constraints in the Representation of the Peoples Act, about paying people to canvas effective to a campaign. It’s something that is forbidden by legislation and it amounts to a criminal offence.

Those candidates were ultimately unsuccessful, but who knows what the effect the overall campaign had, and The Information Commissioner is asking Conservative party for answers.

Sascha Lopez and the Conservative party are at odds. He stated that Blue Telecoms did polling and research but not canvassing and not marketing. The Conservatives stated there were marketing solicitations, they can’t both be right, but their claims they obeyed the law will now face rigorous investigation.





Sentenced To Life In Prison



Whilst several of you wouldn’t have heard of Ross Ulbricht, it’s safe to say that several of you out there would have done. Ross Ulbricht is the person behind the illegal online drug emporium Silk Road and was condemned to life in prison.

Before the sentencing, the parents of the victims of drug overdoses addressed the court and Ross Ulbricht burst into tears. He never wanted that to happen and he wishes he could go back and convince himself to take another path.

The 31-year-old physics grad and former boy scout was given five sentences, one for 20 years, one for 15 years, one for five and two for life, all are to be followed concurrently with no prospect of discharge.

The judge gave out the cruellest punishment possible to the man US officials identified as Dread Pirate Roberts, pseudonymous founder of an Amazon-like online market for illicit gains. The said purpose of Silk Road was to be beyond the law, in a world he formed over time. He was commander of the vessel, the Dread Pirate Roberts and he made his own laws.

Ross Ulbricht urged the judge to leave a light at the end of the tunnel ahead of his sentence. He acknowledged that his middle years would be taken away from him, however, he asked the judge to at least leave him his old age.


He was a converted man, not like the one when he founded Silk Road, he was a little smarter, a little more experienced and much more humble.

Even though the judge rebuffed arguments that Silk Road had diminished harm amongst drug users by taking unauthorised ventures off the street, no drug seller has ever made this argument in court, it’s a vested argument and it’s an argument made by one of the privileged.

Silk Road was formerly the biggest dark web marketplace for unauthorised narcotics and other services. In March 2013 the secret site listed 10,000 items for purchase, 7,000 of which were narcotics including cannabis, MDMA and heroin.

Silk Road had generated approximately $213.9 million (£140million) in sales and $13.2 million in commissions before police closed it down.

Ross Ulbricht was sentenced in February following a four-week trial on all seven counts, from peddling drugs and money laundering to maintaining an ongoing criminal enterprise, a charge normally reserved for mob kingpins.

He had gone so far as to solicit six murders for hire, even though no charges were ever brought.

During the hearing, the defence proposed that Ross Ulbricht was the victim of an elaborate hacking attack that left him seeming like the fall guy. Given the testimony presented against Ross Ulbricht, the delivery proved a tough sell to the jury.

Ross Ulbricht was apprehended in the science fiction segment of his public library, literally discovered with his fingers at the keyboard, operating Silk Road. He was logged into the Silk Roadmaster account, according to the agents who arrested him, and investigators discovered chat accounts and other proof on the hard drive that implicated him.

The judge took particular interest to study the reams of documents given to her in Ross Ulbricht’s support, and that whilst it was strange to do so, she needed to direct them in the sentencing, especially those who’d stated that an online drug marketplace subdued the intensity of the drug enterprise.

Following his sentence, Ross Ulbricht’s defence contended that the Silk Road was, in fact, a blessing to the well-being of its clients, particularly those who habitually used drugs. However, the judge determined none of the evidence reliable.

Silk Road created users who hadn’t sought narcotics before. Silk Road increased the market and places necessitated on drug-producing and violent regions in Afghanistan and Mexico that produce the poppies used for heroin.

The belief that it is harm-reducing is so precarious and is intended for a vested assembly of people who are using drugs in the solitude of their own homes utilising their personal internet intermediaries.

Two parents of children known only by their first names and last initials who had died whilst using narcotics purchased on Silk Road addressed the court. Richard B, whose 25-year-old son died of a heroin overdose, revealed his fury at the people who have supported Ross Ulbricht candidly.

Following Mr Ulbricht’s detention, they have endured the steadfast drumbeat of his followers and their persistence that Silk Road was victimless, and he firmly maintains that his son would be here today if Silk Road had never existed.

Vicky B, whose 16-year-old son died after taking a potent manufactured drug at a party and jumping from a second-story rooftop, the time since her son’s passing has been intolerable. She presented a photo of the last kiss from her offspring, holding up a photo of herself with her son Preston before the school ball where he died.

She keeps Preston’s ashes at home, her voice breaking. Sometimes she simply embraces them. Sometimes she gets under a blanket with them and tries to get warm.


But after all of this, the War on Drugs still continues.


Admittedly there are people out there that still obtain narcotics and will continue to do so, however, this guy made it something a tad more unconventional than that. He built a place where anybody could purchase and market narcotics and implement all kinds of unlawful activities and he did so with the obvious intention of being hidden and he should suffer the consequences.

At the end of the day people died because of this and we could debate that they didn’t have to take any kind of narcotic, he didn’t put a gun to their head and they had a mind of their own, it’s called free will, but then it could be contended that if temptation wasn’t there is the first place and all that, I guess it’s a matter of opinion.

There are all sorts of drugs out there, all of them prohibited, even though some might dispute that some drugs are more dangerous than others and that marijuana should be made legal and I would agree if it is solely for medicinal purposes and no other reason.

But there will always be another Ross Ulbricht or somebody putting some narcotic out there for somebody to obtain and not all of those will end up with such a severe punishment as Ross, but there is a narrow line and how do we decide who gets what sentence and who we should make an example of?

They might well have needed to make Ross Ulbricht an example for others trafficking narcotics, but Ross will inescapably remember this for the rest of his life, whether he rots in jail or not. This will be on his conscience for the rest of his life and the people that died because of it, that is his sentence.

He might have moved on with his life if he had not been given a prison sentence, he might have got married and had a family, but the reality that his actions put short somebody’s life will never leave his memory.

Some might consider that his punishment was too severe and perhaps he should have been given the possibility of parole but those families whose children died because of his actions will never be pardoned, they will have to live with this to the end of their days, no child should die before a parent.



Jeremy Corbyn Grills Theresa May


It’s not an issue of what regulations you have, it’s how those are being implemented and that is the problem. They have building regulations about compliant materials, the mystery is, why is it, despite that, we have seen in local authority regions, materials being put up that seem not to comply with those building regulations, and that is what the government must get to the bottom of.

Why is it that fire inspections and local authority inspections seem to have bungled this crucial matter?

But when you cut local authority expense by 40 percent you end up with less building control inspectors and when you cut local authority budgets everyone pays a price.

Those cuts to the fire service have meant there are 11 thousand fewer firefighters. The public sector pay cap is punishing recruitment and retention right across the public sector.


What the disaster of Grenfell Tower has presented is a disastrous outcome of austerity. This is a disregard for working class neighbourhoods and the disastrous consequences of deregulation and cutting corners, and Jeremy Corbyn is advising the Prime Minister to come up with the resources required to examine and remove cladding, to suitably finance the fire service and the police, so that all our communities can actually feel protected in their own homes.

This tragedy must be a wake-up call.


There was total mayhem in the House of Commons as all rivals yelled in objection of Jeremy Corbyn, and it’s rather sad when people are roaring right by the speaker’s chair and yelling exhibits a loss of stability. Everyone is listened to in the House of Commons, however long the session has to run.

Although, I’m not sure how they work in these situations with everyone continually yelling at one another, and it’s especially irritating the way parliament appear to discuss everything as a joke, particularly Theresa May, and all you hear is ridiculing as if there are some kind of zero points to be made.

They are so rude to ridicule and yell. These are your political MP’s doing this, people that we elected to serve our towns and cities. How bad that they won’t and don’t hear each other and they get rewarded a lot of money to ridicule, shout and essentially do nothing.



Numerous people lost their homes due to Family tax credit and credit blacklisting – the computer said no, and many are then driven to live in an ignitable high-rise home with vanity cladding. It’s called soundless methodical disenfranchisement and extermination.

Wake up people, the business magnate and political honcho has an agenda, it’s called exploitation, simply to finance thrill seeking activity like sex, drugs and extravagant homes, yachts and terrorism.

Children are disciplined to not interrupt when a grown-up is talking, but here you have assumed heads of our nation yelling whilst somebody else is talking and most of them lack basic kindness.

Men, women and children are dead, families destroyed and people are traumatised. The community is devastated because of the government’s cost-cutting, it’s negligent and because of that cost cutting the government is not beyond blame and if seen as blameworthy, arrests should be made.




Children That Fancy The Position of Prime Minister


Would you aspire to become a political leader? Or to be a delegate of the United Kingdom, or any nation come to that. Well, numerous kids were taken out of classrooms and this is what they had to say about it, as they assembled in a library with such frankness, though their purity gave loads of insight.

They were questioned what they would do if they were Prime Minister…

One girl stated she would probably help more with the environment, pollution and assist the homeless. Another said he would probably end people fighting, like conflicts and get families together.

Another boy stated he needed to get the best out of Britain because he announced we are a great nation and that we justify having great laws. Another boy said he would improve the environment and make dwellings more affordable for poor people.

A young girl stated she would desire to make the world kinder so there’s like no fighting and that we are all one huge happy family. They further stated that they would make certain that everyone had their rights in the country.

One young boy announced he would seek to sort out the economic pressure and eliminate any difficulties that are around the community, like all the homelessness, which is a severe dilemma.

The children were highly interested and were really excited, they appeared to like being able to do something innovative and they further liked the new experience, however, they were just drawn in by some of the concerns at the moment and they liked to understand how it influences them and their parents and families in their geographical area, that was of vast importance to them.


But out the mouth of babes comes honesty, not the distortions that we get from our government, and we all know that children, in particular, are great at make-believe, but it appears even less so than the lying that the government are apparently doing now.

Even though children aren’t able to vote, the decisions made at the election will have a significant bearing on the lives of all kids across the country.

Private academies get much better results than state institutions, therefore wouldn’t it be appropriate for the various types of academies to interchange educators every now and then, so that all pupils have the same opportunities to achieve.

There could be a web page set up where kids can have their say in the country. The government should listen to the children since they have some good ideas.

If cuts have to be made, they shouldn’t be in education. Young people in this country are the future and the government must keep up a world-class education. If we are to compete, especially in science and technology, we must fund in these fields correctly.


The government are not directly involved with young people and Theresa May should take the opportunity to see young people doing positive things, rather than simply hearing negative stuff about them from the media. Young people would like their viewpoints to be heard more and further would like more help for the hard working single mothers out there.

The financial recovery should be the government’s priority, however, they should further spare consideration for the education system since cuts in education will never permit society to progress. Smaller classroom sizes, equalisation of opportunity and a curriculum shouldn’t extinguish a student’s creativity.

We want our children to grow up in a society where the balance of their parents bank account does not determine their experience at school and electoral competitors touring schools throughout election season is not sufficient to prove that they care, these children demand to know that they’re prepared to listen and do something about what they have learned.

There should be more funding for youth clubs which need to be more locally accessible. Youth clubs keep young people off the streets and out of trouble. Youth clubs are great because they can promote skills there that they can practice later in life.

As humans, we work better collectively, and if schools worked collaboratively, rather than in opposition to each other, they function better. It is about the quality of teaching rather than statistics.



British armed forces should be yanked out of Afghanistan, and the UK government should support the Afghan people politically. Using the military only makes the situation worse.

Education requires more student management. We further require women’s education to encourage young women to cultivate their ambitions and to be furnished for the trials of difference that lie ahead. You only have to look at how many women MPs there are to understand that the path into the future will not be simple.

We should have more police to patrol a wider array of areas and more community centres with more facilities so that there is more for youngsters to do, perhaps then there would be fewer crimes and kids should have more liberty to say how they feel.

Teaching and teachers should be fun, in our school’s children are taught how to learn, not what to learn.

There are not enough playgrounds or areas to play sport, and it’s frustrating for children and teenagers to find areas to hang out. This drives teenagers to do bad things, and the government should pay more consideration to children and teenagers and spend money on them because they are the future.

It’s refreshing to know that there are a number of people out there that have the same anxieties about this country, and politicians should address children and teenagers with more interest, and it’s excellent to see a group of young people making, for the most part, more insight on education than any of the three principal parties.

It’s especially delightful to see young people being involved and interested in their future and the community around them. Children are, believe it or not, quite able to talk about a designated issue when asked. This notion that numerous people appear to have of young people being incapable of concentrating on anything past youth culture is, quite frankly, untrue.

There is commitment and dedication from educators, possibly not at all schools, but there is from many, and these comments came from the children and young people themselves. Children and young people take an interest in their community, country and their own futures if they are given the abilities, means and further the possibilities at home and further at school to do so.

When children have situations taught to them, why can’t they come to a perfectly rational and reasonable determination about change? They need to grow, be involved and practice skills they require to put into actuality once they are old enough to vote, campaign and take charge for their futures.

Numerous schools do this and do it competently, regardless of national newspapers, general elections and go-getter media moments.













I don’t usually cite people’s work, however, I was listening to some material from George Carlin, who’s work I utterly admire, because it’s all about telling the truth, but not only telling the truth, but making comedy out of it and making it into parody and basically making people laugh.

I like to ridicule, it’s one of my better qualities, plausibly more so than writing and I do it with a passion, so when I was listening to some of George Carlin’s material, I couldn’t help but chuckle and thought that I would bestow some of it with the public.

We watch tv and we watch the advertisements or the shopping channel which attempt to market their commodities, they tell us that their merchandises have quality, value and style. That if you buy on tv it’s convenient and purports to be moderately affordable.

They tell us that we will be saving money and that they’re a friendly service with named brands, with easy terms and affordable prices, and not only that, you’ll get a money back guarantee. Perhaps even free shipment, or a free home trial – No money, that’s also not a problem, order now, pay later, but you have to order whilst the stocks last.

Then they inform you that all purchases are final, and you’ll have to give it approximately 6 weeks before they ship out your goods, though some items won’t get to you, and some items will require assembling. Buy by mail or purchase by phone, try it in your home, try it in your vehicle.

So, come on in for a free presentation and a free consultation with their affable proficient team. They’re friendly and expert sales agents will encourage you to make a selection that’s exactly right for you and just fitting for your means.

However don’t forget to pick up your free bonus, a traditional and expensive custom created high-quality premium selected pocket torch. Additionally, if you act quickly they will include an added complimentary gift, a vintage and fancy custom produced high-quality selected leather style wallet with detachable key chain and pencil holder.

It’s their way of saying thank you, and if you’re not entirely satisfied, you pay nothing. You can simply return the unused portion for a full refund, no questions asked, it’s their way of saying thank you, keep our free gift. Really, it’s their way of saying, lean over, just a little further and let us stab this huge jackhammer into your anus a little bit farther.