jeffs posts
The Canary‘s recent report on the number of people dying on sickness benefits reveals a scandal – not because of the high number of deaths, but because the Department for Work and Pensions has failed to reduce it in three years.
I am indebted to campaigner Gail Ward who sent in a Freedom of Information request about the number of deaths on ESA and two other benefits between 2014 and 2017 (I should have done it myself but somebody made a false and vexatious accusation of anti-Semitism against me so I’ve had to spend a lot of time fighting that instead). From it, The Canary‘s Steve Topple deduced that around 100 people a day were dying while on ESA.
That’s just one more than the 99 who I found were dying every day, after the DWP finally honoured my own FoI request about benefit-related deaths in 2015.
Mr Topple wrote that deaths in the Work-Related Activity Group were of serious concern, is this is the part of ESA for people who are expected to be able to return to work in the near future.
He was echoing my own words from 2015.
I wrote: “The work-related activity group is composed entirely of people who are expected to recover from their illnesses and be well enough to return to work within a year. In that group, there should be no deaths at all – barring accidents. Why have nearly 10,000 people lost their lives after being assigned there?”
And why are people assigned to the WRAG still losing their lives, three years after these damning figures were published on This Site?
The answer is obvious: The DWP hasn’t lifted a finger to stop them.
When I published my piece in August 2015, I made a series of points:
“The figures released today demand more considered, in-depth study.
“Age-Standardised Mortality Rates give a false picture of the number of deaths – as predicted.
“Serious questions must now be asked about the way incapacity benefits are being administered by the Department for Work and Pensions.”
It is a scandal that those points are still valid today.
And the excuse provided by the DWP is the same as three years ago, as well: “Any causal effect between benefits and mortality cannot be assumed from these statistics.”
Maybe not – but then that leads to a very obvious follow-up question:
How much research has the DWP carried out into the reasons so many people have died, in a benefit group where they were expected to get better?
The DWP has responded to a Freedom of Information request (FOI) from disability campaigner Gail Ward. She asked how many people on ESA and two other benefits had died between 2014 and 2017.
On average, this means that over 100 people a day died while on ESA for the period in question. Breaking it down, the deaths per day were:
Slightly more than 7 in the “unknown” group.
9.02 during the assessment phase.
10 in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG).
Almost 75 in the Support Group.
Deaths in the Support Group could be expected, as the claimants are often severely ill. But what’s of concern is the number of deaths in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) – the part of ESA where the DWP places people aged 16-64 who it deems can start moving towards work.
It is impossible to know why so many WRAG claimants were dying, as the DWP does not do this analysis. But nor does it calculate the number of claimants who died after being declared fit-for-work. As such, these figures raise serious questions about whether some WRAG claimants should have been in that group to start with. They also raise serious concerns about the treatment of claimants, and why so many people who the DWP deemed well enough to start moving towards work have been dying.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 27 September 2018
jeffs posts
The Canary‘s recent report on the number of people dying on sickness benefits reveals a scandal – not because of the high number of deaths, but because the Department for Work and Pensions has failed to reduce it in three years.
I am indebted to campaigner Gail Ward who sent in a Freedom of Information request about the number of deaths on ESA and two other benefits between 2014 and 2017 (I should have done it myself but somebody made a false and vexatious accusation of anti-Semitism against me so I’ve had to spend a lot of time fighting that instead). From it, The Canary‘s Steve Topple deduced that around 100 people a day were dying while on ESA.
That’s just one more than the 99 who I found were dying every day, after the DWP finally honoured my own FoI request about benefit-related deaths in 2015.
Mr Topple wrote that deaths in the Work-Related Activity Group were of serious concern, is this is the part of ESA for people who are expected to be able to return to work in the near future.
He was echoing my own words from 2015.
I wrote: “The work-related activity group is composed entirely of people who are expected to recover from their illnesses and be well enough to return to work within a year. In that group, there should be no deaths at all – barring accidents. Why have nearly 10,000 people lost their lives after being assigned there?”
And why are people assigned to the WRAG still losing their lives, three years after these damning figures were published on This Site?
The answer is obvious: The DWP hasn’t lifted a finger to stop them.
When I published my piece in August 2015, I made a series of points:
“The figures released today demand more considered, in-depth study.
“Age-Standardised Mortality Rates give a false picture of the number of deaths – as predicted.
“Serious questions must now be asked about the way incapacity benefits are being administered by the Department for Work and Pensions.”
It is a scandal that those points are still valid today.
And the excuse provided by the DWP is the same as three years ago, as well: “Any causal effect between benefits and mortality cannot be assumed from these statistics.”
Maybe not – but then that leads to a very obvious follow-up question:
How much research has the DWP carried out into the reasons so many people have died, in a benefit group where they were expected to get better?
The DWP has responded to a Freedom of Information request (FOI) from disability campaigner Gail Ward. She asked how many people on ESA and two other benefits had died between 2014 and 2017.
On average, this means that over 100 people a day died while on ESA for the period in question. Breaking it down, the deaths per day were:
Slightly more than 7 in the “unknown” group.
9.02 during the assessment phase.
10 in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG).
Almost 75 in the Support Group.
Deaths in the Support Group could be expected, as the claimants are often severely ill. But what’s of concern is the number of deaths in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) – the part of ESA where the DWP places people aged 16-64 who it deems can start moving towards work.
It is impossible to know why so many WRAG claimants were dying, as the DWP does not do this analysis. But nor does it calculate the number of claimants who died after being declared fit-for-work. As such, these figures raise serious questions about whether some WRAG claimants should have been in that group to start with. They also raise serious concerns about the treatment of claimants, and why so many people who the DWP deemed well enough to start moving towards work have been dying.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 27 September 2018
jeffs posts
The Canary‘s recent report on the number of people dying on sickness benefits reveals a scandal – not because of the high number of deaths, but because the Department for Work and Pensions has failed to reduce it in three years.
I am indebted to campaigner Gail Ward who sent in a Freedom of Information request about the number of deaths on ESA and two other benefits between 2014 and 2017 (I should have done it myself but somebody made a false and vexatious accusation of anti-Semitism against me so I’ve had to spend a lot of time fighting that instead). From it, The Canary‘s Steve Topple deduced that around 100 people a day were dying while on ESA.
That’s just one more than the 99 who I found were dying every day, after the DWP finally honoured my own FoI request about benefit-related deaths in 2015.
Mr Topple wrote that deaths in the Work-Related Activity Group were of serious concern, is this is the part of ESA for people who are expected to be able to return to work in the near future.
He was echoing my own words from 2015.
I wrote: “The work-related activity group is composed entirely of people who are expected to recover from their illnesses and be well enough to return to work within a year. In that group, there should be no deaths at all – barring accidents. Why have nearly 10,000 people lost their lives after being assigned there?”
And why are people assigned to the WRAG still losing their lives, three years after these damning figures were published on This Site?
The answer is obvious: The DWP hasn’t lifted a finger to stop them.
When I published my piece in August 2015, I made a series of points:
“The figures released today demand more considered, in-depth study.
“Age-Standardised Mortality Rates give a false picture of the number of deaths – as predicted.
“Serious questions must now be asked about the way incapacity benefits are being administered by the Department for Work and Pensions.”
It is a scandal that those points are still valid today.
And the excuse provided by the DWP is the same as three years ago, as well: “Any causal effect between benefits and mortality cannot be assumed from these statistics.”
Maybe not – but then that leads to a very obvious follow-up question:
How much research has the DWP carried out into the reasons so many people have died, in a benefit group where they were expected to get better?
The DWP has responded to a Freedom of Information request (FOI) from disability campaigner Gail Ward. She asked how many people on ESA and two other benefits had died between 2014 and 2017.
On average, this means that over 100 people a day died while on ESA for the period in question. Breaking it down, the deaths per day were:
Slightly more than 7 in the “unknown” group.
9.02 during the assessment phase.
10 in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG).
Almost 75 in the Support Group.
Deaths in the Support Group could be expected, as the claimants are often severely ill. But what’s of concern is the number of deaths in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG) – the part of ESA where the DWP places people aged 16-64 who it deems can start moving towards work.
It is impossible to know why so many WRAG claimants were dying, as the DWP does not do this analysis. But nor does it calculate the number of claimants who died after being declared fit-for-work. As such, these figures raise serious questions about whether some WRAG claimants should have been in that group to start with. They also raise serious concerns about the treatment of claimants, and why so many people who the DWP deemed well enough to start moving towards work have been dying.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 27 September 2018
any views ?
Remember Jackie Walker, the former vice-chair of Momentum who was ousted from her position and suspended from the Labour Party on the basis of spurious claims of anti-Semitism concocted by the Jewish Labour Movement, Israel Advocacy Movement and complicit “news”papers?
It seems Ms Walker turned her experience of being smeared as an anti-Semite into a stage play, The Lynching – and now film-maker Jon Pullman has created a full-length movie about it, entitled The Political Lynching of Jackie Walker.
Shot in the UK and Europe, with commentary from friends and foes, the movie follows Ms Walker’s activities for more than a year, filming her at work, in performance, and across the kitchen table to interrogate the issues that lay behind the headlines, and the woman behind the activist. The film was due to have its premiere screening at the Labour Party Conference on the evening of September 25.
But the screening had to be cancelled – and the auditorium evacuated – after organisers received a bomb threat.
Obviously, at the time of writing it is far too early to make any suggestions about who may be responsible – but we may definitely suggest that whoever it was disapproves of free speech, especially if it presents a coherent, logical and possibly persuasive narrative that is different from their own personal bias.
And what encouraged them to commit this prank (I would be very surprised if there really was a bomb at the Liverpool auditorium in which the film was due to be screened)? Well…
May I draw your attention to this article, which I regret to inform you was published by a periodical known as The Sun which describes itself as a newspaper (although opinion on this is divided).
Headlined Fury as far-left activist who said Jews were behind the slave trade tells Labour members she’s been ‘lynched’, the piece states: “A far-left activist who was kicked out of Labour for making anti-Semitic slurs is putting events at the party conference – in which she claims she was “lynched”.
“Jackie Walker has sparked fury by hosting a film and a play at the annual get-together aimed at clearing her name.
“Ms Walker was formerly vice-chair of Momentum but was fired after she claimed Jews were responsible for the slave trade.
“Labour MP Louise Ellman blasted the attempts to promote her worldview, saying it was “disgraceful” for banned activists to be tolerated by other party members.”
This smear piece was accompanied by an image of a flier advertising the film screening, which clearly showed its date and location: Blackburne House, Georgian Quarter, Falkner Street, Liverpool at 7pm on September 25.
I call it a smear piece because it presents a lie as truth – that Ms Walker “claimed Jews were responsible for the slave trade”.
This is based on a fragment of a conversation between Ms Walker and a friend on Facebook’s private Messenger service, that was hacked by members of the Israel Advocacy Movement and given to the Jewish Chronicle as proof of anti-Semitism.
But Ms Walker, speaking afterwards, explained that she was referring to the Caribbean slave trade, of which her own ancestors had unique experience. This is from an article written nearly two years ago: “Yes, I wrote “many Jews (my ancestors too) were the chief financiers of the sugar and slave trade”. These words, taken out of context in the way the media did, of course do not reflect my position. I was writing to someone who knew the context of my comments. Had he felt the need to pick me up on what I had written I would have rephrased – perhaps to “Jews (my ancestors too) were among those who financed the sugar and slave trade and at the particular time/in the particular area I’m talking about they played an important part.”
“For the record, my claim, as opposed to those made for me by the Jewish Chronicle, has never been that Jews played a disproportionate role in the Atlantic Slave Trade, merely that, as historians such as Arnold Wiznitzer noted, at a certain economic point, in specific regions where my ancestors lived, Jews played a dominant role “as financiers of the sugar industry, as brokers and exporters of sugar, and as suppliers of Negro slaves on credit, accepting payment of capital and interest in sugar.””
It’s a bit different when you see the full picture rather than just a fragment, isn’t it?
Hugo Gye, who wrote the Sun piece, would have had no excuse for ignorance of the facts of the matter – including the fact that Ms Walker has not been found guilty of any anti-Semitism at all by the Labour Party’s own disciplinary mechanism, so what motivated him – and the newspaper – to promote the lie?
Was it mischief?
Remember, Ms Walker is a former vice-chair of Momentum, and Momentum has banned The Sun from its fringe events at this year’s Labour conference.
By publishing its story about Ms Walker, along with details of the film screening, this publication might as well have been giving instructions to anyone with an agenda to push the false accusations of anti-Semitism and suppress the facts.
The bomb threat could easily have been triggered by this bitchy story.
We may never know for sure.
But, like so many of the accusers’ recent efforts, it seems likely that this attempt at repression will backfire.
People are going to ask why.
Why seek to silence an accused person who was only trying to put forward her side of this case?
What does this film show, that the accusers have to fear?
The threat – to kill by explosion people attending the premiere – is so extreme that people will want to know the answers to these questions. Is the accusers’ case really so fragile that they have to resort to such extremes in a bid to maintain the illusion of Ms Walker’s guilt?
Well? Is it?
Posted by jeffrey davies on 26 September 2018
jeffs posts
still austerity goes on while the workers pay feel this price of Austerity and welfare reforms fueling excess mortality, report says
Landmark report warns that austerity and benefit changes have contributed to "a substantial excess mortality after 2010".
A damning report from NHS Health Scotland, which has been largely ignored by the mainstream media, warns that austerity and welfare changes are worsening the nations health and causing excess mortality.
The report, titled ‘Working and hurting? Monitoring the health and health inequalities impacts of the economic downturn and changes to the social security system’, highlights positive impacts on the nation’s health such as rising employment and fewer benefit sanctions.
However, the report also warns that these positive indicators have been undermined by damaging Government austerity measures introduced since 2010, including cruel cuts to social security benefits.
These have caused “rises in child poverty, stagnation or even reversal in previously declining mortality from some causes of death and lack of improvement in adult mental health”, says NHS Health Scotland.
The investigation into mortality trends and causes of deaths found that the economic downturn, followed by harsh austerity measures and benefit changes/cuts have contributed to “a substantial excess mortality after 2010 in Scotland among some groups of the population, especially men, and people in the 50-74 and 85–89 age group”.
Benefit sanctions have been blamed for pushing the poor to food banks.
Commenting on the report’s findings, lead author Martin Taulbut said: “Since 2010, we have seen falls in the number of children and adults living in workless households, and rising employment rates among groups specifically targeted by UK welfare reform.
“However, the anticipated wider gains have either failed to materialise (working-age poverty, positive mental wellbeing) or are moving in the wrong direction (e.g. child poverty, mental health problems for young adults).”
“From the current data, we are unable to reject austerity and welfare reform as contributing to the change in mortality.
“Governments and public agencies have a shared responsibility to better understand the reasons for the worrying trends we are seeing, and NHS Health Scotland and partner organisations will continue to review this in 2018/19.”
Posted by jeffrey davies [82.9.81.48] on 24 September 2018
reply | edit & publish | delete
jeffs posts
please read there are very many who are disabled who don't show they are yet society through government help are now ridiculing them pointing out that theres nothing wrong with them hmmm read this Dear fellow parent,
I understand.
I understand what it’s like to be in the park and others wonder why you are sticking so close to your child, perhaps guiding them or supporting them to do what other children much younger are doing easily.
I know what it’s like to see parents and children stare at your child, laugh at them or worse...walk away from them.
People would understand if your child looked different, if you were pushing them in a wheelchair or if they had a walking frame.
I see your child’s disability even when they don’t look disabled.
I understand.
I have a child just like that too.
It’s the expectations, isn’t it?
They look fine so why are they not talking like others expect, acting age appropriate or joining in with others?
The assumption that, ‘looking fine’, means they are, ‘fine’, and that we are the issue not the child.
Oh, do I understand that!
Our parenting is questioned just because our child doesn’t, ‘look disabled’, whatever, ‘looking disabled’, is even meant to mean?
People think we are over protective, over bearing and causing the problem.
Yet they don’t know what we know.
They don’t see what we see.
They can’t see autism so they don’t know it’s there.
They can’t see global delay or learning difficulties so they must not exist.
They were not there when you received the genetic diagnosis so they don’t know.
They haven’t experienced the epileptic seizures so therefore you must have made them up.
They don’t know anything about the myriad of specialists you have visited or the volume of appointments your diary is full of.
They see your child and make assumptions based on the fact they look ‘normal.’
I understand.
You dare not mention that your child receives disability money. You know from experience that you will be accused of using your child to get money.
Why? Just because your child doesn’t ‘look disabled’ so therefore according to society they can’t be disabled.
I understand.
You see I have a child like that too.
I get the sideways looks when I hold my almost ten-year-old tight as we walk.
I hear the sniggers as he flaps and makes baby noises as we walk down the supermarket aisle.
I know the judgement at the school gate when my child is the different one yet he looks just like any other child.
For some reason disability is meant to be noticeable or else it must not exist.
People have this strange notion that if something can’t be seen then it must not be believed.
I know how that makes you feel because I feel it too.
We should not need to justify our child disability just because they don’t look disabled as people expect.
It shouldn’t matter what someone looks like and people are so quick to judge.
So, know you are not alone.
Know that I understand.
I am right there with you.
You do what you need to do for your child and know I support you.
Together we can raise our beautiful disabled children who don’t look disabled and hopefully one day others will understand too.
Yours lovingly,
A mum of a stunning but disabled little boy.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 24 September 2018
