KUWG on Twitter

Showing posts with label EU Referendum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EU Referendum. Show all posts

Friday, 24 June 2016

EU — Can I Stay Or Must I Go? — An EU National's Perspective

The blog publisher has belatedly received/opened the following from 'An EU National' who had no say in the UK's EU referendum. the blog publisher delights in publishing it on an otherwise very sad day, and in knowing Ivy and proclaiming greater allegiance to his 'EU National' commentator, friend and comrade and what she stand for than any allegiance for the British crown.


EU — Can I Stay Or Must I Go?


With lyrics such as:

Should I go there will be trouble
Should I stay it will be double...

I’m not surprised Mick Jones from Clash doesn't want his song associated with EU Referendum.

But then I’m really tired of same “In or Out” rhetoric ignoring our lack of voting rights.

If Scotland prevented its English citizens from voting – there would have been a public outcry. The Scottish Referendum would not have been allowed then.

But when EEA* Nationals lost voting rights in EU Referendum – who cared?

Certainly not LEXIT** or Abstain from Vote brigades, busy rebranding themselves as “not racists” only against the institution of EU. If they poured as much energy into fighting for equal voting rights at EU Referendum – then I would have believed them. Instead they enabled a right-wing narrative on how Britons only should vote. Rather than quit ignoring how EEA Nationals & other migrants have been denied a vote which will determine if we can stay or lose rights to benefits, etc.

Scratch the surface & this exposes a view of people as “us” or “them” instead of just “we”. Migrants are not seen as people living in UK, let alone as people settled in UK. Because migrants are seen as some external workforce which Britons can allow, restrict, send away or deny equal rights to.

So instead of colluding with EU Referendum being all about Britons staying or leaving EU, I ask those of you who are British to examine your privilege. This is similar to when white people are asked to examine our privilege, instead of pretending that people of all races are treated equally.

ü  The privilege of not being forced out of UK when you can’t support yourself.
ü  The right to claim benefits & not losing those right due to nationality.
ü  The privilege of having a UK citizenship & not been denied one
ü  The privilege of not risk getting deported if you’re an activist opposing the regime***
ü  The privilege of not having to pay around £1500 just to apply for a citizenship without getting any (or barely any) money back if you’ve been denied.
ü  The privilege of not having to apply for Permanent Residence Cards, pass English tests, redo complex life in UK tests & pledge allegiance with the Queen just to be British.

And as of today:

ü  The right to vote on whether EEA migrants should be able to stay, get benefits, etc.
ü  The privilege of not having to vote without losing any of your above mentioned rights

This is by no means an exhaustive list. And sure, it is a lot worse for non-EEA migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, paperless immigrants... 

I just wanted to show how people who wonder how & if they should vote today, enjoy rights that other citizens in UK don’t have. And how you will continue to enjoy these rights even if you don’t vote. Same cannot be said about EEA & other migrants whose lives will be dictated by your choices.

Secondly, I’d like you to imagine what it would be like if you didn’t have those rights. And how you would like others to vote in an election which will directly affect your life – right to stay & right to benefits.

-Ivy-

* EEA – European Economic Area  
** LEXIT – left-wing version of leaving the EU (European Union)
*** Operation Nexus – protecting us from terrorism, apparentlyhttp://www.airecentre.org/news.php/226/operation-nexus-the-unlawful-deportation-of-eu-nationals

Tony Cox trial and the EU referendum: Whose 'evidence'? Whose 'verdict'? Whose politics? Whose 'voting rights'

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug
16-06-23 Dundee Sheriff Court
Tony Cox' supporters rolled up outside the court in Dundee on his trial day

The report from Scottish Unemployed Workers Network (SUWN) — Class 'Justice' —regarding Tony Cox' trial yesterday does not make joyous reading for KUWG members (Kwuggies) and welfare advocates everywhere: 

The sheriff (judge) presiding in the case found Tony 'guilty' of 'threatening behaviour' towards the staff of privatised disability assessment company Maximus, acknowledging in his verdict that it all boiled down to whose evidence he preferred despite contradictions in the evidence provided by Tony's accusers. 

It would also seem — at least according to this blogger's perception of things —that regarding the Sheriff's apparent contempt for the evidence available from the vulnerable woman Tony attempted to accompany to her Work Capability Assessment, he sided with the view that as the taxpayer-funded privatised assessor, Maximus and its staff knew what was best for the vulnerable person Tony was attempting to support. And it did not matter one jot what the vulnerable person herself had to say in response to very loaded questions from the judge.(1) 

Loaded questions betray one's prejudices, and that is a clear basis of rapport between Sheriff Griffiths and what MaximusUK likes to represent its 'Eligibility Support' [sic] as.
Maximus | United Kingdom: Eligibility Support — "Processing eligibility support claims quickly and efficiently" [sic]


Whose 'evidence'? Whose 'verdict'? Whose politics? Whose 'voting rights'? And allegiance to who and to what?


The SUWN blog post reports on an 'in our experience' framework regarding MaximusUK and its 'output' or the fruits by which Maximus and Tony shall be comparatively 'known' and omits reference to, say, Labour MP Louise Haigh's evidence regarding the 'corporate outsourcing giant's "track record, ethics and even criminal behaviour of Maximus in delivering public contracts in the US" before being appointed to replace Atos as WCA company of Conservative Government choice. Haigh has said of MaximusUK 'Eligibility Support' output on the basis of her publicly funded casework:
"There seems to be an alarming trend of cases being rejected based on factual errors or even — I hesitate to say this — falsification.

"I have had several cases of people telling me that their assessment report bears absolutely no relation to the assessment that they experienced with Maximus or Atos [the company that it took over running of Work Capability Assessments (WCA's) from].

“One or two cases could be dismissed as an honest mistake, but the situation appears to reveal a disconcerting pattern of behaviour that indicates that the trade-off between cost-cutting and profit maximisation is being felt by very vulnerable people.”(3)
This blogger would say that MaximusUK's claims in general are about as valid as those of the Vote Leave campaign regarding how much money could be re-allocated to the NHS by Britain leaving the European Union. Now that Britain has apparently voted to leave the EU, we shall probably see what truth there is regarding such claims, and what the real public spending priorities of those left in charge will be.

Regarding the downfall of David Cameron resulting from the Vote Leave decision of those who were deemed 'eligible' to vote in that referendum — whatever their reasoning for that decision — there will be new 'leadership' in Downing Street. I suppose that that 'leadership' will reward its BBC News supporters for all their 'services to democracy' in favouring Vote Leave propaganda during that referendum.

As a Green Party member, I shudder regarding the diminishing prospects for furthering of equalities legislation and democracy that EU membership has brought us. Further, to combat such international issues as climate change, terrorism, tax evasion, imbalances of economic power, international disputes, etc, UK involvement in EU cooperation is essential and will be tragically absent

Kilburn Unemployed (KUWG) members are of various political parties and varying positions regarding EU membership. Some though have had no say in this referendum because of their nationality not being British. 

One of the huge advantages that birthright British citizens have over those wishing to claim British citizenship is that they do not have to 'pledge allegiance to the Crown'. As someone who very much prefers monarchy and finds the kowtowing to court decisions such as the 'Tony Cox is guilty despite absence of CCTV evidence' that would 'reward' Tony with a lighter sentence to the detriment of welfare advocates everywhere.

I regard such directives as worthy of contempt rather than allegiance. (I have greater 'allegiance' to my non-UK citizen friends and comrades in Kwug than I have for a birthright publicly funded family of benefit claimant royalty and the courts operating in its name that make some very dodgy decisions.) What do you reckon?


Link addresses

  1. https://scottishunemployedworkers.net/2016/06/23/class-justice/
  2. https://www.maximusuk.co.uk/health-programmes/eligibility-support
  3. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/maximus-has-falsified-results-of-fitness-for-work-tests-says-mp/



Taxpayers Against Poverty: No change in TAP policy outside the EU

It seems that those who did have voting rights in the UK's EU referendum and excercised those voting rights in the extremely limited two option format of the ballot paper preferred for Britain to leave the EU.

In response Revd Paul Nicolson as Chairperson of Taxpayers Against Poverty has issued this announcement:

Dear All
There is no change in TAP policy in or out of the EU. We will continue to fight for "No citizen without an affordable home and an adequate income in work or unemployment." We of course mean citizens of all races, faiths and languages who understand the suffering of migrants.
There will probably be a Human Rights Bill in which case we will be lobbying Parliament. Our objects are based on the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights — see About TAP. (1) (2)
TAP needs as much support as you can muster. (3)
All good wishes
Paul
from the Reverend Paul NicolsonTaxpayers Against PovertyNo citizen without an affordable home and an adequate income in work or unemployment. 
93 Campbell Road, Tottenham, London N17 0BF, 0208 3765455, 07961 177889, https://www.facebook.com/Taxpayers-Against-Poverty-299911526728884/https://twitter.com/taxpayers_a_p www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.ukwww.z2k.orgwww.prohousingalliance.com

Linked addresses


  1. http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
  2. http://taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk/about
  3. http://taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk


Monday, 20 June 2016

BBC News reportage of the EU referendum vs its reportage of the Housing and Planning Bill 2016

A Google search of items related to the "EU referendum" on the BBC News website reveals 1,430,000 results at present:
About 1,430,000 results (0.98 seconds) (1)
A Google search of items related to 'housing' on the BBC News website reveals just 380,000 results:
About 380,000 results (0.64 seconds) (2)
A Google search of items related to "housing bill" 2016 reveals just 212 resuls:
About 212 results (0.63 seconds) (3)
A major thrust of the Vote Leave / 'Brexit' camp in this EU referendum has been that laws made 'in Brussels' have little or no scrutiny from within the UK. Yet if "democracy presupposes knowledge" has the BBC's focus on the EU referendum to the virtual exclusion of the Housing & Planning Bill 2016 contributed to a stifling of debate about its contents prior to the passing into UK law of the Housing & Planning Act 2016 last week?

The EU has brought some measure of Proportional Representation to UK politics. Has the debate about EU referendum matters obscured mainstream public debate about the Housing & Planning Bill 2016 to the point that it has been passed against the interests of vulnerable people by a very lopsided 'winner takes all' lopsided Parliament that was elected by a 'first past the post system' that the EU did not impose upon us? 

And has the British Broadcasting Corporation's bias eclipsed potential scrutiny of those already marginalised by a diet of 'home owner TV'?

Links — note: results are likely to vary through time; your results from clicking these links are likely to differ depending on when you do the searching

  1. https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=LRNoV8OcMeqg8weqq4HYBA&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22eu+referendum%22+site:+http:%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk
  2. https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sclient=psy-ab#q=housing+site:+%22http:%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%22
  3. https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sclient=psy-ab#q=%22housing+bill%22+2016+site:+%22http:%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%22






Friday, 10 June 2016

UK Governments' adopted rationale for disability benefit cuts under attack

Several news stories worth checking out at Disability News Service (as ever).

  1. 'Biopsychosocial' basis for benefit cuts is 'cavalier, unevidenced and misleading'(1): relates to the way that disgraced US health insurance company Atos' adopted alternative to the Social Model of Disability has led the UK collectively astray.
  2. UK Government set for grilling in Geneva over 'breaches of disability rights'(2)
  3. "Wake up!" Baroness Campbell's plea to disabled people over EU referrendum apathy(3)
  4. Britain must stay in the EU if independent living is to thrive, says pioneer(4)
  5. EU laws 'have played crucial role in fight for disability rights'(5)
  6. Equality and Human Rights Commissioner calls on sports bodies to act on disabled board members(6)
  7. Concerns over watchdog's 'alarming cancellation figures'(7)



Links


  1. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/biopsychosocial-basis-for-benefit-cuts-is-cavalier-unevidenced-and-misleading/
  2. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/uk-government-set-for-un-grilling-in-geneva-over-breaches-of-disability-rights/
  3. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/wake-up-baroness-campbells-plea-to-disabled-people-over-eu-referendum-apathy/
  4. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/britain-must-stay-in-the-eu-if-independent-living-is-to-thrive-says-pioneer/
  5. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/eu-laws-have-played-crucial-role-in-fight-for-disability-rights/
  6. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/ehrc-commissioner-calls-on-sports-bodies-to-act-on-disabled-board-members/
  7. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/concerns-over-watchdogs-alarming-inspection-cancellation-figures/

Monday, 11 April 2016

Revd Paul Nicolson on Appeal to Appeal Court, EU referrendum, housing crisis, caps, cuts and council tax, and Mail columnist's change of heart