Edwina Currie is good at making people cry


 

Edwina Currie has returned, triumphantly, to what she does best: attacking people living in poverty for having the temerity to do things like watch TV, smoke cigarettes, or own pets.

In an phone-in show on Radio 5, Currie spoke with Hayley, a mother from Derbyshire, who’d been explaining that her and her husband sometimes have to skip meals to feed their children.

The first thing Currie said in the discussion was to quiz Hayley on her lifestyle, asking:

Have you by any chance got any animals? Dogs or anything like that? … Do you feed the dog everyday? … How many animals and pets have you got in the house? … Have you got Satellite TV? … Have you got clubs, are you paying through catalogues for clothes? … So where’s all the money going, Hayley?”

Currie’s implication is that answering yes to any of these questions – having a pet, buying clothes through mail order, paying the equivalent of two cinema tickets a month for TV – renders one ineligible for sympathy. And her incredulity at the difficulty of Hayley’s life despite not committing these ‘sins’ belies her ignorance at life below the poverty line in the UK.

When Currie hears something she thinks she can blame Hayley for, she jumps to conclusions almost instantly.

One of the expenditures mentioned is paying off bills. Currie hears this, and goes for the throat, declaring:

“What’s happened here… is that when the money was coming in – this sounds like there were two salaries coming in and no savings – life was being lived to the full and a very good life indeed.

“But when that’s no longer the case, when there’s no longer money coming in, then  you have to evaluate whether you’re going to be able to get back to the good life quickly or not in which case you’re going to have to think about maybe declaring yourselves bankrupt.”

Which causes Hayley to tearfully respond:

Can I just say to Edwina that I’ve never lived life to the full, I don’t go out every weekend, and I don’t— cause you’ve really upset me to be honest. We don’t buy clothes on a weekly basis or anything like that, we’ve never lived life to the full… When have I borrowed money? I’ve never said I’ve borrowed money from anywhere

[Paying off bills] isn’t borrowing money, I’m paying council tax, I’m paying my debt.

You can listen to the discussion, and Edwina’s shocking heartlessness, below:


Edwina Currie making people cry (mp3)

Currie simply can’t believe that people who have hard lives aren’t personally to blame. It’s the point she made in November, when she said:

I don’t think people in this country go hungry. But are these people at the same time maybe buying the odd lottery ticket? Do they just occasionally have the odd cigarette? Somewhere along the line does food come as the first priority?”

And it’s the point she’s making now. She is a walking embodiment of the just-world fallacy, she appears to be impervious to reason or evidence, and she makes people cry on the radio.

See also:

The right’s attack on child poverty targets shows their ignoranceTim Nichols, December 15th 2011

How can we fight child poverty without hitting people’s pockets?Matthew Butcher, December 8th 2011

Does the child poverty agenda now belong to the Conservatives?Declan Gaffney, December 7th 2011

Look Left – Tories past and present battle to out-nasty each otherShamik Das, November 20th 2011

Currie v Jones: Do people go hungry in Britain?Alex Hern, November 14th 2011

This entry was posted in Social Justice and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Anonymous

    Currie simply can’t believe that people who have hard lives aren’t personally to blame. It’s the point she made in November, when she said:

    =========

    Some aren’t to blame. That’s clear.

    However what about the rest?

    Your argument that because some are innocent, all must be innocent.

    It’s the Yorkshire ripper defence. You didn’t catch and convict Jack the Ripper, so you can’t prosecute me.

    ==========

    “Have you by any chance got any animals? Dogs or anything like that? … Do you feed the dog everyday? … How many animals and pets have you got in the house? … Have you got Satellite TV? … Have you got clubs, are you paying through catalogues for clothes? … So where’s all the money going, Hayley?”

    =========

    Nothing wrong in asking what they are spending the money that other people give them, is it? After all if you force people to give you money, we have every right to know how it is spent.

    =========

    “What’s happened here… is that when the money was coming in – this sounds like there were two salaries coming in and no savings – life was being lived to the full and a very good life indeed.
    “But when that’s no longer the case, when there’s no longer money coming in, then you have to evaluate whether you’re going to be able to get back to the good life quickly or not in which case you’re going to have to think about maybe declaring yourselves bankrupt.”

    ==========

    Basic statement of the facts. The sad bit is the bit about no savings. Given that so much of their money was going to the state, and now the state is on the point of bankruptcy, its the state that has shafted them.

  • Paulrathbone

    shameful disgusting tory bitch – she should be shot – what right has she to lecture people – she should apologise -

  • http://twitter.com/Zerocredit_UK Zero-credit

    An interesting diagnosis for bankruptcy from Edwina. Is that what anyone struggling with the £1.5 trillion of personal borrowing should do? She might not be quite so comfortable with the prospect, if she actually cared to take the time to think about her sound bites.

  • Pingback: TreeOfMan

  • Anonymous

    What money that other people give them? Did she say she was receiving benefits? Her husband is working, you ignorant fuckwit. Listen to it fist before jumping to your arsehole conclusions.

  • Anonymous

    And what’s more, even if they were on benefits, since she had been working before, she will have paid into national insurance, thereby meaning any payments she might receive is simply what is owing to her. It is not your money as you didn’t make the contributions; it is hers and nobody has a right to enquire what it is spent on.

  • Anonymous

    It is my money.

    1. The money they paid in were given to other people, not into any fund.

    2. The money taxpayers currently going in, would come from other people if she were on benefits.

    As for your fuckwit comment, “What money that other people give them?” Apart from the errors in grammar, she is in debt. Other people have given/lent her money. Do you think people should borrow money and not repay it or is that just the preserve of government?

  • Pingback: BootMeNow

  • Pingback: Maggie Greene

  • Pingback: Jaye Fonda

  • Pingback: Elliot Hollingsworth

  • Pingback: Hanna Rodgers

  • Pingback: Kris Thomas

  • Pingback: VeeBee

  • Mr. Sensible

    Currie is at it again… She doesn’t know the first thing about this woman’s situation, and should appologize at once.

  • Pingback: Kevin Richards

  • BenM_Kent

    Which state is on the point of bankruptcy? Are you in Greece?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/AGQNGBOJVZDVKBKY7AFVIFDCYA Michael

    @barsacq – exactly

    @LordBlagger – all money is debt -‘I promise to bear the bearer of this blah blah’. Do you think the 99% should continue supporting/bailing out the obscene wealthy 1%?

    I’m surprised Edwina didn’t suggest they apply for that ‘job’ in Tesco.

    Another example of divide and rule tactics by a representative of the 1% against us the 99%. Trying to put the blame on an individual rather than looking at the systemic issues in society/the economy.

    I really felt for the poor lady. I know a lot of people who have worked all of their lives – ‘PAYE people’ paying their tax and national insurance – who have over the last 12-18 months have been made unemployed. Now unemployed they’ve still got to pay their mortgages, council tax, bills, and yeah feed their (existing) pets – what does Edwina suggest put them down??

    They don’t have the luxury of having funds from post MP directorships, pensions etc. They never had banker’s bonuses.

    What they did think was that by paying their bit into society for the last 20+ years the same society would see them through these ‘bad times’ which can effect anyone.

    I wonder would Edwina have been so harsh on her phone-in to directors of investment banks about their debts? They owe us – the 99% of this country – 100’s of billions – but the bonus carnival still goes on for them. In the mean time the rest of us have been made or live in fear of being made unemployed.

    Socialism for the 1% capitalism for the 99%.

  • Anonymous

    I totally agree the fact is the Min wage was set so bloody low by labour that you can really seriously have problems living on it.

    But of all people to speak about life style you ask a women who shagged Major, talk about about failures

  • Pingback: Brnch Sec Ruth H

  • http://twitter.com/Newsbot9 Newsbot9

    This country is SCREWED. Thanks to Blagger and his pals.

  • http://twitter.com/Newsbot9 Newsbot9

    Oh yes, “so much”. Oh wait, perhaps people should have jobs. But no,. you have to destroy them so you can enjoy a 0.1% greater profit this quarter. Then you spit in peoples faces and tell them that they should have their wages cut (as they would be), seeing the same take-home pay but losing healthcare, childcare and other little “non-essentials” they’d need to pay out of pocket for…as they do in America.

    Even if they had saved cash, one medical emergency would wipe them out. Again, like America.

    And I don’t see why you shouldn’t be prosecuted, myself.

  • Pingback: Larry Mullet

  • Pingback: Laura

  • Anonymous

    When asked about giving her a platform, Nicky Campbell (on Twitter) responded to the effect that she holds a point of view that some share, presumably justifying such an appearance. I’m curious how repellent a viewpoint would have to be for the BBC not to give it airtime. I suppose we’ll see, if Currie makes a return to 5Live.

    In addition, my curiosity extends to the question of fee payment. Does the BBC pay a fee to Currie to cause emotional distress to license-payers?

  • Patrick

    I think it’s a fair point. If someone phones into a radio station to make an extreme statement that they have to skip meals to feed their children then it’s only fair that they should be prepared to defend that statement against robust questioning. What would you expect Currie to do? Say, “Oh do you? How awful.” Of course she’s going to question the caller.

    And by the way, Currie was not saying that having a pet invalidates someone for sympathy. She was making the perfectly reasonable point, that if you are complaining that you can’t feed yourself, but you do feed your pet or go to the cinema, then that is a significant piece of information that the listeners would want to know.

    I was once unemployed for two years. At the end of benefit fortnight, I’d often be left with an onion sandwich for dinner. Did I like that? Of course not. But I also smoked. My choice to allocate my money like that. Life is not always roses. Deal with it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jim-Moore/100002860584188 Jim Moore

    Perhaps the young lady should have used Currie as a role model. Get into politics, make an ass over yourself and have egg on your face (excuse the pun), and then screw the PM at no 10 in spite of him being a married man and then ultimately squeal about it and write a book.

    Its not only presumptuous to assume things about people but it also is double standards. To that I presume she would answer “Give them cake!”

  • Franco

    You can stop smoking. You cant take a dog out the back slit its throat. Well maybe you can…

  • Pingback: Keltis

  • Pingback: Matt Carr

  • mediantoo

    Edwina Curry is the embodiment of self-serving Conservatism. That nice Mr Cameron seems so caring and never puts a foot wrong, but Currie has revealed the true consequences of this government’s vicious, socioupathic, survival-of-the- richest policies. In any other walk of life Currie would be considered a danger to society.

  • Pingback: Kevin Richards

  • Pingback: David Griffiths

  • Pingback: David Griffiths

  • Susan Pass

    I heard this on the day, just proves tory’s have no idea what it is to go without, classing everyone as reckless losers, currie assumed the worst of Hayley. Currie is a heartless bitch but then we knew that from when she was an MP sleeping with a married man, she should never be allowed to be on live radio/tv again.

  • End Workfare

    What a nasty harridan. One thing that seemed to go unsaid about this woman’s struggle, is that at such a young age, there’s just no way she’s had the years behind her to accumulate anything that would help her in hard times such as home equity and savings. I know from experience how it is to be a young family, when your child care fees cost more than your mortgage payment. And that she skips meals and is a little overweight is not surprising. She’s probably filling up on cheap carbs, stressed out, and not getting enough sleep, all which cause weight gain.

  • Pingback: Britain 2012: Some families have only £2 per person per day for food | Left Foot Forward

  • YouGov Tracker

  • Touchstone Economic Tracker

  • Best of the web

  • Archive

7ads6x98y