The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled

If the Welfare Reform Bill passes, the results will be horrific and at the Department for Work and Pensions, they are confident that it is a price worth paying.

Sue Marsh blogs at Diary of a Benefit Scrounger

Recently, it was reported that Crisis, the charity for the homeless, had warned 11,000 young disabled people were at risk of losing their homes due to the coalition’s housing benefit cap:

“Although 4,000 of the most vulnerable disabled claimants will be exempt because they need help through the day or night, most ill and disabled people will be forced to move into cheaper accommodation, often outside the area where they live.”

Those aged 25-34 will now only be able to rent shared accommodation rather than a one bed flat, on average, losing £41 per week towards their rent. The article makes the point that:

“This disturbing cut will force people suffering serious physical disabilities or mental illness to share with strangers, even if it damages their health.”

Well, yes it will and it is shocking. Not too shocking of course until we start to see things that make us feel uncomfortable. Not too shocking until we pass twisted bodies on the streets, their collecting cup lodged into their wheelchair handles, but shocking nonetheless.

Actually the really shocking thing is the accumulation of all the cuts faced by sick or disabled people and the effect it will have on their lives and almost certainly, their homes.

We already face the squeeze that able bodied people face. The VAT rise, the high inflation, the public sector cuts, the pay freezes, but overwhelmingly this group already live in poverty. On top of all of this, Scope report that sick and disabled people will lose £9.2 billion over the term of this parliament.

“The government’s proposed welfare reforms will see 3.5 million disabled people lose over £9.2 billion of critical support by 2015 pushing them further into poverty and closer to the fringes of society.”

The figure 9.2 billion is more than 10 per cent of Mr Osborne’s entire UK cuts to reduce the deficit. A full 10% taken from those with extra costs, extra needs and very, very difficult lives; it doesn’t matter how often I write it, I am shocked and terrified by its implications.

That’s 3.5 million people. Again, I write it and can hardly believe it’s true. Many don’t yet know what they face. Some will never know – their disabilities are too severe – but they will be affected just the same.

I have no idea how many of those 3.5 million will lose their homes, but the maths seems fairly clear. The entire cost (xls) to the welfare budget of sickness and disability benefits is £16 billion. 9.2 billion is over half of that.

I’m sure that unlike me, you won’t want to read this lengthy transcript of the Welfare Reform Bill committee, currently on its last stages through parliament, but I wish you would. After all these points were made and more, after a full discussion of the horrors that lie ahead for the sick and disabled, the poverty they are facing, the categorical failure of work programmes to help when their benefits are removed, Chris Grayling, Minister of State for Work and Pensions, had little to say.

To summarise, his answer was “I don’t care, we can no longer afford it…”

I don’t exaggerate – I wish I did. You can read it for yourselves. So, if I were you, I’d get used to seeing sick or disabled people on the streets. If this bill passes, the results will be horrific and at the DWP, they are confident that it is a price worth paying.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

152 Responses to “The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled”

  1. 13eastie

    It is one thing for a left-wing blog to offer a platform to causes that we must assume it feels to be well-meaning from time to time. But I might not be the only reader who is struggling to see any benefit to anyone from the brain-dead poverty of objectivity that is now prevalent.

    The OP published an article that can be encapsulated thus:

    SHRIEKING HEADLINE: “Shocking Impact”! “Heartless Cuts”!
    THE ACTUAL TRUTH: young, single, disabled people can continue to rely on tax-payers to provide housing for them if they need it, and to a standard similar to that commonly enjoyed by their able-bodied, self-sufficient peers.

    LFF would do better to humour fewer of these single interest groups whose combined presence, rather than collectively volunteering any kind of left-leaning political alternative to the Govt, serves only to send the following messages:

    1. We demand immunity to spending cuts
    2. We fundamentally oppose all cuts
    3. We are devoid of objective thought (our cause trumps all others and we just do not care about the nation’s economic problems)
    4. Nothing that serves our self-interest can be unfair on anyone else in any circumstance
    5. We are content for other people’s children to pay the price for our irresponsibility

  2. Sue Marsh

    13 Eastie – But that’s not what the article is about? It’s about the other cuts sick and disabled people face. The article I refer to at the beginning is not written by me, it is written and researched by Crisis. It claims that 7,000 out of 11,000 will not be protected from eviction. They conclude that this will lead to homelssness. I do not.

    I conclude that cuts of 9.2 billion from a 16 billion budget will almost certainly lead to more homelessness though I clearly state that I couldn’t possibly guess how much. I point out that far from the 11,000 people mentioned by crisis, the other cuts will affect round 3.5 million.

    My article is not about housing benefit, it is about cuts to vital support for the sick and disabled.

  3. Sue Marsh

    Oh, and I don’t write the headlines – we’ve had this criticism before, lol

  4. willow jacky

    well i for one am been forced out of the home i inherited due to my disability, debts, and cuts in services. I dont know where to go or to live. I have crippling problems with my spine, hands and feet, I cant even buy normanl shoes as my feet swell so much i have to buy shoes in the post from a disability shoe place, they cost a fortune i havent got to spend, but its this or walk around on crutches in the rain in slippers.
    i dont have family support or friends living near by who help me, nor neighbours who help me, im alone except for one close friend who is learning disabled who goes shopping with me. Ive been attacked in the street when having vertigo attacks, people think im drunk when im not, and ive had my enefits taken from me and left to survive on a very small inheritance that has to pay for everything, thats adaptations, prescriptions, physio, taxi fare to hospital as i live miles from it and no bus service direct, taxi fare home from the emergency doctors at night if im taken ill, as they refuse to come out to me so i have to go 14 miles to them..add aids and adaptations, help with utting light bulbs in etc, i have to pay a handyman to do these things as i loose my balance when i climb steps, and someone to cut my garden hedges back off the footpath..its not fun, Im not allowed to drive and i will eventually go deaf with my condition and probably end up in a wheel chair as my immune system is attacking my body. No way would i be able to sharea house with anyone not close to me, due to been up all night in pain, needing to sleep with the radio on to drwon out the noises in my head, changing sheets daily when i get night sweats, and having incontinance aids all over the place…

  5. 13eastie

    @59, 60

    Sue – I’m happy to let you blame someone else for the hysterical headline under which your piece was presented. Presumably, if you think LFF is unable to present your case faithfully you will be seeking another outlet in future?

    Nonetheless, I think you need to have another read of your article, Sue.

    The first few paragraphs are dominated by a bogus housing issue. You are determined to have readers believe that:

    “11,000 young disabled people were at risk of losing their homes due to the coalition’s housing benefit cap”

    “the effect it will have on their lives and almost certainly, their homes.”

    “I have no idea how many of those 3.5 million will lose their homes, but the maths seems fairly clear. ”

    ‘So, if I were you, I’d get used to seeing sick or disabled people on the streets.”

    These are your words – they are not citations and they are not evidenced. You fail to explain how anyone at all will actually lose his home.

    Moreover, you will be well aware that much of the proposed cost-saving is to be achieved by systematic case-review i.e. getting rid of bogus claimants (including many whose so-called “disability” is nothing more than a predictable and reversible consequence of irresponsible drinking / drug abuse / over-eating).

    Such cases undermine the cause of those genuinely disabled through no fault of their own (and in whom you will have to take my word that I have a keen personal interest). They grew in number under Labour and it would be to your credit to acknowledge this and to recognise that there is an issue that, irrespective of any need for austerity, and out-with any political ideology, needs to be remedied.

  6. scandalousbill


    You ask:

    “Do you think it’s fair that minimum wage workers should allow greedy landlords to take all their taxes to provide housing for others that they themselves cannot ever even hope to afford?”

    No, not at all.

    Nor do I think that it is fair that young locals from Somerset, Dorset, etc, be priced out of their local housing market because some toff city traders want a summer home. But that is not the point at hand.

    What I asked you was to back up your assertions that disabled groups outlined in the Scope document fell into your notion of rents at rates you could only dream of being subsidized by the government and also to provide some reasonable argument and evidence to back up your assertion that the draconian welfare policies of the Tory coalition will not result in disabled persons facing eviction.

    BTW 13 eastie:

    You say:

    “THE ACTUAL TRUTH: young, single, disabled people can continue to rely on tax-payers to provide housing for them if they need it, and to a standard similar to that commonly enjoyed by their able-bodied, self-sufficient peers.”

    With regard to this point, you might recall that Sue in the OP cited the Scope report that notes
    “The £9 billion of cuts will affect every aspect of the day-to-day support disabled people rely on to live – including housing, living costs and social care support. Examples of this are, by 2015:
    • 170,830 families where both parents care for a disabled child will lose £520 million
    • 516,450 disabled adults whose partner is a full time carer will lose £1.258 billion
    • 98,170 single disabled people will lose £127 million
    • 114,066 disabled people moved from incapacity benefit (and ESA) to Job Seekers allowance will lose £994 million

    Given your statement cited above, could you provide some evidence or references to support your contention as opposed to the right wing drivel in your post. Or do you maintain that Scope was merely referring to seniors?

  7. Elaine

    Sue I’m too tired and unwell to add anything useful here. I would go into details about how being declared fit for work, the breakdown and waiting 10 months for tribunal and 8 weeks for reinstatement and now waiting for the next medical forms to fill in and the next test where I get lied about unless anything has changed and how stressed the thought of it being the same assessor again and it being worse than if it were the man who raped me, who at least wasn’t being paid for out of tax payers money to degrade me. Oh the taxpayers money wasted on bad assessments and tribunals, the extra money cost to the nhs. The horrific human price of further debility due to the process of begging for a pittance. Being turned down for help through the cuts, which the man from social services told me would have been there if they had assessed me when they were supposed to 4 years ago…I may be well enough to pay tax now had I been properly supported years ago. The support has been too hard to access for many years, they are making it more difficult. You see people who are genuine are the ones not well enough to jump through the hoops, the minority who are pulling a fast one have the mental capacity to know what to say and how to say it. If you are genuine and doing your best to get better so you can work, rest and play on a regular basis then you are declared fit for work even when you can’t bathe as much as you would like or sleep upstairs in a clean bed due to your health….sorry I am emotional, this is affecting me and many more and Sue knowing you are fighting for all of us when it costs you so dear in energy is inspiring and you know many of us appreciate it.

  8. jenna

    To Anon E Mouse

    You claim over and over again that you are a minimum wage tax payer. What job exactly is it that you do that ennables you to post on here ALL DAY and other days when you keep attacking Sue??? Does your boss know how much time you spend on here? Or perhaps this is your job.

    I am disabled. I can assure you that what Sue says is very real. The disabled are constantly attacked in the media and it is always as a result of regular press releases from the DWP with deliberately innacurate information. Both the Mail and Telegraph have recently had to print retractions and been admonished by the Press Complaints Commission. Regurgitating press releases without checking the facts is not journalism it is propaganda – aimed at people like you – who swallow every word of it.

    This has nothing to do with wanting to elect a Labour government. The disabled will never forget that it was they who first started the legislation for the Work Capability Assessment, now in full flow. I have never voted Labour in my life. I now many disabled people who have always been Conservative voters but they swear never again. We have a dilemma , shared by the country as a whole, in that people have been disenfranchised. There is no party fit to vote for. If you think performing fake medicals on truly sick and disabled people is a good way to save money, then just be prepared that tomorrow or next year, it could be your turn. Being a tax payer does not exempt you from sudden illness or accident that will change your life forever, just as it did mine. That is something that most people in favour of all these cuts to the disabled never like to think of. Sickness and disability like earthquakes, is always something that happens to someone else.

    No one is defending the few cases where people are getting huge sums in housing benefit to live in large houses. But this number is extremely small and over exaggerated in the press for effect. The “mansion” case was in fact a large family of asylum seekers and the local authority had a duty to house them under the law. No one with common sense sees that as a fair way to deal with the over immigration to this country. But what you must realise is that the vast majority of the Housing Benefit bill is actually made up from people in low paid work, such as you claim to be, who need help to make up their rent.

    Why do you not campaign for more social housing to be built?Capitalism is supply and demand. Rents will fall when the supply is adequate. The doubling or even tripling in some areas of house prices in just over 12 years is the real cause of the high cost of housing benefit. Every Tom, Dick and Harry was encouraged to become a Buy to Let landlord – artificially inflating the housing market again – in the hope of a rent to pay the mortgage while reaping in the reward of thousands in property price increases. Rents become proportionate to the value of the house price.Greed as always is at the centre of everything.

    Of course nothing will be done to increase the supply because this would lead to a fall in house prices which those who have them want to see increase still further. It is insanity. The young can no longer get on the housing ladder. Penalising the disabled will not help this situation one bit.

    Do you not find it odd that with nearly a million 16-24 year olds without employment, the government is only investing £60 million in apprenticeships. yet the cost of assessing the disabled as fit for work is £500 million per year to a foreign owned computer company? Plus all the cost of tribunals to correct their decisions, where 40-70% of appeals are succesful. Then there is the contracts with the mostly private work provider companies who will be paid £14,000 for every disabled person they place in a job. All this to get a million disabled into “work” they cannot do and are becoming even sicker under the sheer terror of knowing their means to live is being taken away. If a million healthy young people cannot find employment, why do you think billions are being spent trying to force the disabled into work? It is simply government policy to start the privatisation of the welfare state. As a low paid worker, you should be worried. The next step is to make everyone take out private income protection insurance – companies like UNUM are already in place to do so. national Insurance will no longer cover you should misfortune befall you, no matter how many contributions you have paid. If you paid attention you would know that in the last 2 years many workers like yourself have become ill and then found they were refused any help and signed as fit for work even if terminally ill or awaiting operations.

    You really do need to wake up to the fact that the government is using you to pit the working poor and middle classes against the sick and disabled and each other. No one is attacking the bankers anymore are they? Or blaming the world recession which began in the subprime mortgate market of the USA. No, like you, attention has neatly been diverted into attacking the sick and vulnerable. Shame you have fallen for it. You don’t honestly think your taxes are going to go down do you?

    How about you blog on a site calling for corporate tax evaders to pay their tax, instead of just the minions who do the actual work for them, like you? That would solve the national debt and plenty to spare. You are attacking the wrong people, just like you have been brainwashed to.

  9. 13eastie

    @62 Bill

    It was the OP who decided to obsess over a spurious “homelessness” issue regarding young, disabled, adults (my military record would confirm that I used to be one of them, though I’d be the first to concede I’ve been fortunate to have been able to move on without issues). I’m not sure why it would offend people so much that I point this out.

    I dealt specifically with this gross misrepresentation. I did not suggest that the cuts would be without ill effects.

    With regards cuts to the other benefits that it is obvious will be to the detriment of those who receive them, the simple fact is that virtually no-one in the country is better off after Brown’s maleficence as never-elected Prime Minister. Unless you have a vaccine with which to inoculate every single interest whiner against Labour’s maladroit carnage, the economic reality is that they will, like the rest of us who have had tax increases and seen real incomes diminish, tighten their belts.

    I say this with the proviso that (and especially since this will be done on medical advice) migration of those able to work, from a category that encourages them not to to one which compels them to attempt to do so, is a good thing for all genuinely disabled people.

  10. Gary Hills

    2.Anon E Mouse what a horrible way to think. It is not those that are sick and disabled who caused the greed and incompetence of the bankers. Yet if this useless government wanted to cut Housing Benefit bills it would not target those who need to claim.

    It would make the limit of what is paid binding on the landlords so they cannot set rents above the means of the average amounts. No person should be forced to lose their home for the sake of ideology. For that is what this is really about. Forget the billions and billions swindled from the British people by rich tax dodgers. No instead focus on those who already live hand to mouth who struggle to get by. Demonise them and treat the like dirt just so Cameron and Osborne can deflect from their rich tax dodging chums.

    £9.2 billion is what those with the least are going to lose. Yet Vodafone alone was left of in paying £6 billion in unpaid tax by George Osborne. So no it’s not those who are sick and disabled who should pay the price but the criminals who have money but think they are too important to pay any tax.

  11. molly

    Well done Sue another brilliant piece sadly ruined by small minded people who are not interested in what you have to say but just want to have an arguement to satisfy their small minds. How can anyone not see how the governments cuts are affecting everyone? Except the richest people in the country who have made record profits on their millions!! My next door neighbour is a lovely disabled lady who has had her council property modified and adapted for her needs. She has been left in tears since the letter from the council arrived telling her the increase in rent and the stopping of her daily carer who helps her manage to live on her own. She was a nurse for 46 years and paid her taxes for what? The local meals on wheels service has had to close and the day centre she looked forward to attending twice a week has shut due to council cuts. The prognosis of her situation is bleak. She has been happy living in her home for 36 years and with the meals on wheels and her carer she has been able to manage to keep living in her property. She is now having to face the prospect of selling her possessions and moving into a council run home. The cost of this compared with the carer and meals on wheels is completely outrageous. How can the government not see that they may be making savings one way but in the long run the costs will escalate the other way. In addition, surely she has paid enough taxes to secure her the right to live the end of her days in the way she wanted, in the home she has lived in for so long.

    I feel extremely disgusted at the way this country is treating the old, infirm, disabled, students and any other category that is feeling the attack by the government and the people who feel they have more right to services than others. The media propaganda has worked brilliantly for the government by turning people againgst each other and as the above negative posts have shown there is a lot of people who are not prepared to listen to the real truth about how the cuts are affecting everyday people. I totally agree with Douglas above who says would they be happy if we all were shot? Who would they pick on then? probably each other!!

    Please dont get disheartened Sue by such ignorant people who are not prepared to take the time to read up on facts and fiqures but read the daily mail and believe the government induced lies. You are a voice for hundreds of pople that live in this country without a voice and I look forward to reading your next report with interest.

  12. Anon E Mouse

    scandalousbill – Despite Sue Marsh’s attempt to work the statistics to allow her hand wringing, wailing and negative ‘opinion’ to be taken as fact (and in my assessment to try to differentiate between people with disabilities and those able bodied instead of being inclusive) tell me how many people you think will be “thrown on the street” by actions of this coalition government.

    Give me a number scandalousbill – we both know this is nothing more than this author trying to forward her Labour agenda. Again. As for the research what do you expect from a report from Demos?

    As for the young person in Dorset priced out by the rich would those toffs include Harriet Harman, Polly Toynbee, Luciana Berger, David Garrard or Gulam Noon?

  13. Anon E Mouse

    DavidG – You asked me about socialism and got your answer.

    At no point have I passed any comment on the disabled – just the fact this author is using disability as a means of promoting her Labour Party views and then refusing to answer any question put before her and finally doing the ignoring trick – “I disagree with you so I’m refusing to respond”. Throw in a bit of smearing and the suggestion that I have something against the disabled, which is far from the truth and Sue Marsh seems to have all the qualifications to be a Labour MP in a Brown style government. A government she voted for.

    You yourself DavidG are trying to say that you and I are different and I just don’t see that. Some people are able bodied and some less so. You live with your victim mentality if you wish but do not accuse me of something I haven’t said – it is dishonest.

    Regarding your offensive “Ethnic Cleansing” remark try this:

    That’s why I find your comment truly disgusting to compare some government cuts to those poor human beings. Shame on you sir.

    You have a weird sense of right and wrong DavidG. But I bet you ignore the point anyway. Again…

  14. scandalousbill


    You say:

    “Give me a number scandalousbill – we both know this is nothing more than this author trying to forward her Labour agenda. Again. As for the research what do you expect from a report from Demos?”

    Do you read the Ops before commenting?

    Sue cites the estimate given by Crisis that has predicted 11,000 disabled persons face homelessness.

    Crisis cite Government statistic, among other sources, as the basis for their calculations and projection:

    “These figures come from an Equality Impact Assessment of the measure published by the Department for Work and Pensions this month:

    Do I feel that the impacts Crisis describe will occur once the legislation takes effect? Absolutely. In fact I fear these figures may well be conservative. I think that the unit cost basis indicated by Grayling in the exchange between him and Timms on Welfare Reform, that I previously referenced, implies that greater the disability of the individual the more that person will suffer. For me, this is a most pathetic way to obtain “savings”.

    BTW, 13 eastie, this is far from your notion of belt tightening. Reduction of care to the most vulnerable differs strongly from going out to dinner less often for “savings”; it translates directly into the enforced suffering of those less able. I am not sure if your comments on this topic reflect your demonstrated insensitivity or simply an underlying bigotry.

  15. Anon E Mouse

    scandalousbill – I don’t believe it. Never believed there would be a double dip recession either – it’s just negative Labour supporting scaremongering. Nothing more.

    The clue is in the headline “could lose their homes”. ‘Could’ is the operative word here. Not ‘will’. No one is going to lose their home. Forget “Jennifer’s Ear”, the Tories won’t do it.

    To forward her agenda, Sue Marsh is citing these reports as gospel and they simply cannot be taken as such.

    No one can make the statement that Crisis did that: “Applying this lower rate to single people under 35 will mean average losses of £41 per week for those affected, with the vast majority losing their homes”.

    To make that statement as definitively as that person does, ignoring the “Well they would say that wouldn’t they”, is tantamount to idiocy. How can Crisis possibly know the outcomes of 11000 individual people?

    They can’t. It can only be an opinion, not a fact. And I reiterate the stance I have taken throughout regarding Sue Marsh and her sycophantic love of the Labour Party and her wish to forward her agenda of getting that throughly discredited party back into power. Because that’s what she’d like.

    That’s all this is and I concur with Robert I’m afraid…

  16. paulstpancras

    The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled

  17. reefa green

    The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled

  18. Chris Paul

    The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled

  19. 13eastie

    @72 Bill

    However inconvenient it might be to admit, living in a shared home is not the same as being homeless.

    And it is quite disingenuous to suggest that ALL those receiving benefits will be affected similarly by ALL changes in the way that you and Sue have attempted to do.

    You know full well that, as with changes to other benefits, much of the “cutting” is to be achieved by getting people off benefits who should not be receiving them in the first place i.e. targeting the LEAST vulnerable.

    P.S. I hope you don’t think that calling people names adds any kind of weight to your other comments…

  20. scandalousbill

    13 eastie,

    You say:

    2You know full well that, as with changes to other benefits, much of the “cutting” is to be achieved by getting people off benefits who should not be receiving them in the first place i.e. targeting the LEAST vulnerable.”

    And you sir, know perfectly well by even the most cursory glance at the numbers involved that your above statement complete and total falsehood. A deliberate politically motivated fabrication,

  21. Selohesra

    Hypothetically Bill are you in favour of cuts being applied to the benefits of the least vunerable or do you oppose all cuts. If it is the former could we not all unite to focus attention on the clear missuses of benefit money – give the government a clear run on that for the sake of the country and perhaps they would have more time left over to establish more safety nets for the very hardest off.

  22. Kate

    Many thanks to Sue for her article and tireless campaigning on behalf of the disabled. Many thanks too to DavidG, Barbs, Douglas and Jenna for their informed responses. I’m astounded and by some of the drivel that’s been posted on here. I can reiterate what has been said, only far more eloquently by those names mentioned above. If Mouse wants to attack anybody, s/he should be attacking the bankers who are now back to paying themselves obscene bonuses. S/he should be attacking the tax evaders and avoiders which dwarfes benefit fraud. S/he should be attacking the MPs who fiddle their expenses. Benefit fraud is about as low as it gets, you will never get a system that is 100% free of fraud. There are also millions UNCLAIMED in benefits every year.
    The fact that the old chestnut about people ‘living in mansions’ on benefits suggests to me that the readers have indeed been swallowing chunks of the Daily Hate Mail or its ilk. Most of the press are Tory-owned, with the exception of The Guardian, The Observer and The Independent. If you want to know the facts, instead of propaganda, then I suggest you read these.
    As for likening of this situation to Nazi Germany. It was, in fact, the disabled who were the first group to be targeted by the Nazis. It began with the propaganda. This makes it easier for governments to justify their attacks ie if they have the Daily Mail reading public on their side. Above the gates of Auschwitz was the sign Arbeit Macht Frei.
    As for talk about being a taxpayer on the minimum wage. Many people on the minimum wage won’t even come into the tax bracket. Does that make them any less of a taxpayer? So it is with people on Incapacity Benefit. They are taxpayers too which the government and the Tory Hate Press conveniently forget. Oh and before you accuse me (I can only speak for myself) about wanting a return to New Labour. For those of us old enough to remember, New Labour were more right-wing that Ted Heath’s government on the 1970s. They have bought into the whole market and global economy. Successive governments now are different shades of the same blue and are slaves to the market and monetarist economics. Each according to his ability each according to his needs comes from the true Socialists who have absolutely nothing to do with Labour. However, old Labour were much nearer the idea of social justice than anybody we have seen post-Thatcher

  23. Anon E Mouse

    Kate – I have attacked all those things you mention and will continue to do so. When Gordon Brown claimed £12500 in cash and no receipt to pay to his brother for cleaning a flat he had never lived in I was livid, Really was.

    Any paper like the Guardian that criticises bankers for their offshore accounts and tax avoidance whilst doing exactly the same themselves on a greater scale I have no time for. It’s called hypocrisy.

    When am organisation pays for the Wikileaks information whilst condemning phone hacking and employing the dreadful Polly Toynbee can’t really be taken seriously.

    I voted Labour my whole life until Brown and I never mentioned any Nazi’s you did. That’s just your smearing and spin against people who don’t share your twisted views on the world.

    Sue Marsh is a Labour tribalist, who according to Robert is putting her desire to get Labour re-elected before the needs of people with disabilities. She does the people she claims to represent a disservice but in terms of her own self promotion she seems to be doing alright.

    Finally before you praised DavidG who compared government cuts to Ethnic Cleansing did you actually click the link: and see that wretched human being?

    Because if you believe that the two are the same Kate then shame on you as well…

  24. joe kane

    Excellent article as usual Sue. Well done.

    Here is some more evidence of the effects of the ConDem Government’s ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing aimed at the lower social orders, and those who are too sick, ill and disabled to work – from the picket and protest outside the Atos interrogation bloc in Glasgow, which was holding a recruitment evening –

    “We got a clearer idea of the future some of us face as we chatted to some homeless people waiting for the Salvation Army food van who had also had their disability benefits cut despite having serious physical and mental health problems.”

    Report of the Atos Recruitment Evening Picket Glasgow
    Disabled People Against Cuts
    07 June 2011

  25. Sue Marsh

    “Sue Marsh is a Labour Tribalist”

    I still have absolutely no idea how that affects the argument I make in the article. I’m a cricket fan too and quite obsessive about Elvis Presley. I adore shellfish and Shakespeare.

    As I made the same arguments abut the sick and disabled under a Labour government, perhaps anyone with an aversion to the bard might like to start a little discussion here too?

  26. Sue Marsh

    “Sue Marsh is a Labour Tribalist”

    I still have absolutely no idea how that affects the argument I make in the article. I’m a cricket fan too and quite obsessive about Elvis Presley. I adore shellfish and Shakespeare.

    As I made the same arguments abut the sick and disabled under a Labour government, perhaps anyone with an aversion to the bard might like to start a little discussion here too?

  27. Sue Marsh

    Never let Anon E Mouse say I’m not generous. I saw this and thought he might be interested.

  28. Anon E Mouse

    Sue Marsh – You missed off the end of the very line I used: “Sue Marsh is a Labour tribalist, who according to Robert is putting her desire to get Labour re-elected before the needs of people with disabilities”

    So I am not alone in my assessment of your position Sue Marsh and I’m sure there are many others who feel the same as I do but are afraid of voicing an opinion here for fear of smearing in a Labour Party style.

    Your articles are coloured by your tribalism, it’s as if your hatred of any political party other than Labour prevents you from being able to differentiate between what is right and wrong.

    Then when I look at the thousands of innocent people killed overseas in Labour’s desperate need to support George Bush with their warmongering bloodlust (which I supported I’m ashamed to say) I realise just how bad Labour actually were and when their activists, like yourself start rewriting history it just isn’t credible.

    You have an attractive writing style – you are articulate and show an intelligent approach to the content of your articles and then the whole thing is spoiled by your obvious support for the Labour Party and whatever idiot you allow to write your headlines. Labour needs critical friends and not sycophantic supporters.

    To comment that Chris Grayling said: To summarise, his answer was “I don’t care, we can no longer afford it…”

    When in fact it was qualified in his statement: “We have had to take difficult, challenging and ongoing decisions about how we bring down the level of spending to one that we can afford, and this is one of them.”

    At no point can I remember any member of ANY government saying they “didn’t care” about the plight of anyone.

    What you stated Grayling said is not true and even if it that is your opinion you should have made that clear by qualifying it with “In my opinion he has … blah blah”. What you said in “summary” was nothing more than your opinion.

    That’s the problem with Labour tribalism – it’s just dishonest and you should be trying to bring people onside not alienate them with dishonesty.

    (Regarding Elvis try and listen to Brian Setzer and the BSO version of Mystery Train from “Live in Japan” (surely the kings finest hour). It’s probably on youtube somewhere or

    You’ll love it I guarantee…..

  29. Sue Marsh

    You’re just digging yourself a bigger hole Mr Mouse when it’s clear from almost every other comment that my politics in no way colours this issue.

    You sound silly and aggressive when I’ve done nothing but try to engage with you. In fact it does your whole argument a disservice, because people will read this thread and just think you unreasonable and unwilling to engage with the actual points. It also gives lots of other people a chance to answer you and put intelligent, factual comments in reply, widening the debate and meaning that much more info is shared here. So I suppose should say thank you for that.

  30. Anon E Mouse

    Sue Marsh – I don’t see anything agressive in my stance at all – you’re being too precious.

    Remember on this very page DavidG compared government cost cutting to Ethnic Cleansing and so far I haven’t seen you condemn it once:

    Also, despite your link, you won’t tell me if you think it’s fair a minimum wage worker like myself is forced to pay to keep others in a luxury unaffordable to me.

    All you are doing is the normal Labour “outrage” over small niggling points and ignoring the real issues in your personal hatred of another political party you don’t support.

    Your issue is “coloured” where you make something up, such as a comment a person didn’t say in your case and then condemn them for the thing YOU made up.

    To be clear. You lied about what he said, which is why your response is about me personally and not the comments YOU made up.

    But do listen to Brian Setzer and the BSO Live in Japan. I’m right about that as well…..

  31. Daniel Pitt

    The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled #ConDemNation

  32. joe kane

    It’s not just the forcible ethnic cleansing of poor, defenceless British people, who are facing arbitrary cuts in their housing benefits because the posh want to take over their property and home, whom mousey supports. Here is mousey, in comment 6 on the following thread on this blog, showing their support for violent and racist Israeli ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians on the West Bank –

    6 “Great article – spot on and about time.

    The sooner the BBC stop calling the West Bank Palestine the better…”
    Comment by Anon E Mouse on February 3, 2011 at 1:29 pm

    It will be interesting to see how much force and violence the British authorities use in carrying out the Etonian Tory policy of ethnically cleansing poor people from homes and property the powerful and rich find desirable.

    As for supporting George Bush, mousey’s new pals in the Tory Party all voted for war with Iraq in the British Parliament back in 2003, except 15 – whereas 139 Labour Party MPs rebelled and 20 abstained. Maybe mosey can save some of their foam-flecked vitriol for their new buddies at Tory Central Office who were even more enthusiastic supporters of Bush than the New Labour Party was at the time.

    Keep up the great work Sue.

  33. Leon Wolfson

    You’re not going far enough, Sue. Bring back rent boards, and accommodation standards. If they want to raise rent, they need to improve the property!

    Slash the housing benefit budget by reducing rents to what properties are worth paying for. Shared flats, like the one I live in, which are draughty and have single glazing, should be cheap, period.

    Also, Sue, on the issue of shared housing – while I agree in concept with people up to 35 getting the single-room rate (I strongly /prefer/ to share, for several reasons I won’t get into), there could easily be exceptions to this where medically appropriate, for recipients of disabled benefits. It’s not always appropriate, of course, and in some cases they might do better sharing with others.

  34. Anon E Mouse

    joe kane – The Labour government, that you know I supported until Brown was forced on the country, lied in the commons. And the enquiry being demanded about the death of David Kelly, smeared by the Labour government will show that. We all know joe kane.

    To blame the Tories for voting on facts that were actually Labour government lies is typical of the dishonest lickspittle actions of tribal supporters like you.

    If you can honestly say you looked at that poor human being in my link and can compare that with government cuts then your value system is way off.

    You have also claimed that I somehow support ethnic cleansing because I called the West Bank what it is – the West Bank but that is your clear antisemitism joe kane and says more about you than the comment.

    I am frankly horrified that you can show so little humanity and empathy towards an innocent human being in that link and that you seeming agree that it is OK to lie in the commons which results in the deaths of thousands of innocent people overseas.

    That is a shameful position to advocate joe kane. What kind of upbringing can lead a human being to believe what you have posted? At least Sue Marsh and co don’t have the gall to suggest that picture was the same as government cuts as you seem to have.

    Next you’ll be saying it’s OK to murder disabled babies (as long as they are black and live in Africa) to save the state money joe kane and may I suggest that if your shocking position is indicative of other Labour activists then the party is in a bad bad way.

    To go through it’s proud history since 1900 and to end up with someone advocating your disgraceful position would make any real Labour supporter recoil in horror. Shocking.

  35. Anon E Mouse

    joe kane – Since you deliberately misrepresented my point and after checking some of your previous blog posts I realise that you do indeed appear to be antisemitic and actually show some sympathy to the Nazi’s who murdered people on an industrial scale. You said:


    “it wasn’t that long ago the Jews not only refused to inter-marry, but were even so hostile to the western society all around them and its western values, that they wanted to take it over in order to destroy it.

    And any poor Nazi who dared point out these Jewish crimes, was called an antisemite.

    Comment by joe kane — 29 April, 2010 @ 12:06 am”


    Seems to me that your views are indeed as disgusting as I have described above. No wonder the sight of that unfortunate human being meant nothing to you. Even more shocking…

  36. joe kane

    blah blah blah mousey.

    Everybody knew Blair was lying. Nobody supported the Blairites except the Tories without whose crucial support there would have been no Iraq war. You believed his lies at the time which puts you in a fanatical minority along with Blair’s allies in the Tory Party.

    You support the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

    Mousey, why don’t you use images of ethnic cleansing caused by British Government foreign policy and the British empire?

    Your using images of dead human is revolting. It proves nothing except how revolting you Tories are and the tactics you’ll stoop to in order to degrade and prevent decent, honest, civilised public debate which is critical of the Tories.

    Whatever they quotes are they aren’t mine, but nice try zionist racist ethnic-cleanser mousey.

    Keep up the great work of mousey. I couldn’t agree with you more. You Tories are so intellectually and morally bankrupt you do have to resort to degrading public discourse and public discussion by any and all means possible.

  37. Anon E Mouse

    joe kane – I have never supported the ethnic cleansing of anybody and really think we need to move on from the old British Empire and dated terms like “zionism”. Grow up.

    As readers can see you have compared genocide with government cuts and have shown you are antisemitic. You have condemned the views and opinions of members of a religion as “crimes” – basically thought crimes and you have actually excused “poor Nazi’s” as you call them for the holocaust.

    If we didn’t know you were a socialist I wouldn’t be surprised to see you voting BNP, along with others that hold your inhumane, racist and fascist views.

    You are sick in the head joe kane and the Labour Party really doesn’t need support from people like you. It’s time to move on now…

  38. joe kane

    I do so love mousey’s attempts to deny reality.

    Ethnic cleansing isn’t genocide mousey. Try again.

    I don’t accuse Judaism and Jewish people of the crimes of the Israeli state. Only zionists like you claim the crimes of Israel are the responsibility of Judaism and Jewish people everywhere. To blame innocent Jewish people of crimes they have never committed and have never been involved in in any way, and don’t support, is typical antisemitism.

    I am not a Nazi and have never expressed the opinions which you claim I have. Those aren’t my own words. They are your lies and your invented defamations – which is the only method you know of how to deal with the intellectual and moral arguments of others. Throw mud and hope some of it sticks.

    Mousey supports the violent racist ethnic cleansing of Palestine and Palestinians by the war crimes racist zionist state of Apartheid Israel.

    Like his fellow Tories, Mousey supported the Blair British Government when it committed the supreme crime of “unprovoked aggression” against Iraq. Without a UN mandate, the Tories voted in the clear knowledge they were committing the “supreme crime” of international aggression. Nazis were hanged by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal for committing this exact same crime.

    As you are a keen autobiographer mousey, which is mostly what your comments are comprised of, as they seem to be some sort of talking psycho-therapy of you telling everyone what you hate most about yourself, I don’t vote for or support the Labour Party. This thread is actually meant to be an intellectual discussion and debate about government housing benefit cuts and their effects on disabled people, and is not about me and my support for whichever political party.

    Keep on foaming Daily hate Mail Mousey. Your are a typical tory. Always in a constant, perpetual state of outrage and personalised indignation about everything really. Intellectual, abstract, neutral, sociable interaction with others is completely beyond you.

    The more vile filth and lies you pore out in public forums, the more people see how morally and intellectually bankrupt you Tories are.

    Keep up the great work mousey. We can’t do it without you. You are a great example of a typical Tory for us all to point to –
    – and Sue Marsh and the way she carries herself in public debate, despite the appalling abuse she receives on unmoderated blogs like this, is a great example to us all and convincing that her arguments are indeed correct and unanswerable.

  39. Anon E Mouse

    joe kane – You need help…

  40. joe kane

    Comment 91 by mousey –
    “It’s time to move on now…”
    – Even that is a lie.
    On an unmoderated blog mousey is simply unable to show any self-discipline.

    Coment 93 by mousey –
    “joe kane – You need help…”
    – The childish playground tauntings of a morally and intellectually bankrupt tory supporter of a democratically bankrupt party that stole the British general election through lies and fraud.

  41. Anon E Mouse

    joe kane – you REALLY need help…

  42. Richard

    “You are actually proposing that people on minimum wage like myself should pay”

    So now you’re on minimum wage, are you Mickey Mouse? Wherever you go, you make up a life style and occupation (or not, which is actually your case – and yes, you might hide on here, but your guard slipped elsewhere long long ago) to suit your line of argument. You are nothing but a sad, attention-seeking fantasist.

  43. Richard

    “and is essentially involved in self promotion” Mickey Mouse, summmed up in his very own words.

  44. Anon E Mouse

    Richard – If I was a “sad, attention-seeking fantasist” as you put it, involved in self promotion I’d hardly be using this site as a vehicle to achieve that aim would I?

    Furthermore I take a salary which is at the minimum wage so I am effectively a minimum wage worker.

    What you don’t like Richard is that people like me can see the truth about the chances Labour have under the useless Ed Miliband and it colours your opinion. Every week at PMQ’s you must look at the mauling Ed Miliband regularly gets and wince. And just as I predicted what would happen if Brown stayed as leader the same will happen with Miliband.

    I’d wager that you actually voted for the hopeless Gordon Brown and thanks to you Richard, people like myself will not vote Labour again until they admit where they went wrong.

    The fact is Tony Blair never lost an election and Gordon Brown never won one. Instead of being insulting in blogs why don’t you try to offer something positive about Labour and stop supporting their lies and spin – it does not do the party any favours when people like you keep defending the un-defendable and rewriting history.

    This post was supposed to be about Sue Marsh and her comments on Chris Grayling. I read her link and she misquoted him then condemned his comments which he had never made. If you think that will endear people to the party you are sadly mistaken and the sooner they start being honest and ditch the hapless leader the better.

    This country deserves a credible opposition party and with Ed Miliband it hasn’t got one and you know I’m right Richard and that’s your problem…

  45. joe kane

    mousey’s phlegm-spattered, white-eyed bulging, weeks long tory hate-fest against Sue Marsh personally, amounts to the fact she didn’t accurately quote Grayling but sort of paraphrased him, as her blog article can be interepreted as.

    The tory rodent is endless entertainment.

  46. Rachel Hubbard

    RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled

  47. Joliebella

    Good heavens. How this completely encapsulates the daily battle in which the disabled have to engage. Sue Marsh begins with the facts and is immediately beset with vitriolic nonsense. Anyone can find themselves sick or disabled and challenged in their daily lives in ways they would not have imagined. The sign of a civilised society is the manner in which we treat and speak of our sick and disabled – and of course the converse is likewise true.

  48. Jane66

    I am both disabled myself and have personal experience of being a carer.I have also stood as a Parliamentary candidate. There are two obvious steps which would remedy the situation here:
    1.) Increased supply of social housing, which is more affordable for those on low incomes, whether in or out of work, able bodied or living with disabilities.
    2.) Restore the Fair Rent Tribunal, abolished under the Thatcher government, which has allowed slum landlords to profit at the expense of the taxpayer, as housing benefit is claimed by those in work as well as unable to work if their wages are low.

    The abolition of the Fair Rent Tribunal and the introduction of the 1988 Housing Act were followed by a burdgeoning of Buy to Let investing, in which landlords expected tenants to pay their morrtage + costs + profit, meaning that private renting woudl alost always cost more than buying your own home.

    I do not see wht the state should support privater investors building up a property portfolio.

    However measures to corect this should not unfairly and unequally penalise vulneraable tenants such as those with disabilities. People do not choose to be disabled; it is not a ‘lifestyle’.

  49. WRITING CAMPAIGNS: Template Letter to Lords Re: Welfare Reform Bill – URGENT | Black Triangle Campaign

    […] achieve savings as pressures will only be shifted to the NHS or social care provision.They will increase homelessness, mental illness and poverty amongst this most vulnerable group of allThey will leave many in […]

  50. Pamela Heywood

    The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.