KUWG on Twitter

Monday, 27 April 2015

Pollsters' vision excludes those offline?

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug

Pollsters exclude offline folk

Can canvassing methods used by opinion pollsters such as YouGov be linked to increasing disengagement of disadvantaged voters? I think so, especially after having attended over three years of weekly meetings of Kilburn Unemployed Workers Group and read a recent New Statesman article that actually argues tha pollsters are not too powerful, Living by Numbers: YouGov and the Power of the Pollsters.(1)

Before online communication became more the norm than the exception, the opinion pollster companies in the UK used the landline telephone as their main interface with the electorate. That methodology excluded people for whom the landline telephone was not really financially viable and people whose security of tenure was also a major problem.(2)

Then came online canvassing of pollsters. That creates problems for something between 1/10 and 1/20 of people who come through the doors of a Kilburn Unemployed Workers Group meeting who cannot access a computer because of, say, epilepsy.

Leading pollster company YouGov's modern canvassing methods are now exclusively online and government funding for charities and public libraries has plummeted. Thus accessing the interactive world has become increasingly more difficult for such offline voters.

YouGov's strapline is, "What the world thinks." (3) Its Mission Statement reads:
“It is our ambition to supply a live stream of continuous, accurate data and insight into what people are thinking and doing all over the world, all of the time, so that companies, governments and institutions can better serve the people that sustain them”(4)
The proposed Universal Credit registration method not only cuts DWP staff, but also cuts off folk who cannot access the online only registration method that includes having to sit at a computer for however long it takes the claimant to complete the application to register for Universal Credit.(5)

So how inclusive is YouGov's vision of 'the world'? And what is their attitude toward people who cannot access Universal Credit online?

And will such blinkered vision and an obsession toward government cost-cutting lead ultimately to online-only voting, that excludes those who cannot access the online world?

How can we best mobilise the offline voters in the 2015 UK General Election to help create a less exclusive world?

Notes

(1) http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/04/living-numbers-yougov-and-power-pollsters
(2) Input from a business banker to a Business Enterprise Training course I attended as jobseeker around 1991 emphasised the importance of a loan applicant having a landline telephone when they evaluated a loan application. Their acronym for assessing the credit-worthiness of the applicant was 'PAPERS':
Person
Amount
Period
Experience
Rate (of interest) and
Security
Possession of a landline suggested that the applicant intended to remain at the address serviced by that landline for some time, he argued, and that the applicant was thus less likely to be a 'fly by night' customer.
(3) http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/04/living-numbers-yougov-and-power-pollsters
(4) ibid
(5) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/sep/10/universal-credit-benefits-disaster

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en

Market forces, public money, electoral decisions

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug

At this 2015 UK General Election the Conservative Manifesto says that more people should have the 'right to buy' and councils and social landlords should be forced to sell properties in 'more desirable' areas.(1) Yet it is now fairly well-known that Thatcherite Right to Buy has increased the social housing shortage and that supply shortage led rogue landlords to sponge off public money before the 'benefit cap' that was brought in by the Conservative-Lib Dem (aka 'Con-Dem' coalition) that 'came to power' in the wake of the 2010 UK General Election.(2)

Yet it was a Daily Mail style mode of 'investigative reporting' that led to the benefit cap as Housing Benefit claimants — especially asylum seekers — that got the blame for how much was screwed out of the public purse for the benefit of the real spongers who were dodgy private landlords.(3)

Now, at the time of 2015 UK General Election 2015, it is timely that
  1. Panorama produced an investigation into rogue landlords milking the system, Panorama: The Great Housing Benefit Scnadal(4) and 
  2. Argotina followed that up with a blog piece relating such a private rented market's poor service to tenants in her 'more desirable' neighbourhood. Welfare Tales: Rogue Landlords and the Benefit Cap(5)

The enemies of 'red tape' have already extracted the legislation's teeth

Here is an excerpt from Argotina's blog piece, Rogue Landlords and the Benefit Cap:
The house next door to mine, once a family home, is now 4 flats containing 11 people, with no fire exit from the top floor. The tenants are frightened of a potential fire, they have small children and live in the converted attic. But they cannot tell the council because they’ll just be evicted, and its nigh on impossible to find an affordable flat in London, no matter how cramped and unsafe. This is a working family, not on benefits.

And its not as if the government doesn’t know. Here’s a Panorama program saying the same thing from 2010: http://news.bbc.co.uk/…/fron…/newsid_9122000/9122529.stm This was before the benefit cap.

The benefit cap means that NOBODY on benefits can afford a private rented flat in Inner London, or most of outer London. There are no council flats, they are being destroyed in their thousands and replaced by ‘luxury apartments’. The local authorities are being forced to satisfy their statutory obligations to house the vulnerable by placing them into slum rat holes, or move them hundreds of miles away from their support networks to where rents are cheaper. This is pushing up rents outside of London, too.

The Residential Landlords Association agrees there’s a problem, but says we don’t need more legislation. They say the existing legislation is perfectly adequate, the problem is that savage cuts to Local Authorities budgets means they cant enforce the laws that already exist. Last week the Institute for Fiscal Studies showed that over the course of this Parliament, the budgets of local authority enforcement departments have been cut by over 37% per head of population in England. http://news.rla.org.uk/private-rental-market-is-being…/
So, Local Authority budgets need to be sufficinet to enforce legislation, does it not? General Election time is a time that helps instal the Central Government that will administer tax payers' money to local authorities to act locally.

You are not only deciding for yourself. Decide compassionately and wisely

This General Election is a time of decision. If you are registered to vote, think of those who are not registered to vote. How about people whose electoral registration letters have been opened by their rogue landlords and thus confiscated? Rogue landlords help being exposed, as the Panorama programme showed. Perhaps a vote for tougher enforcement will lead not only to such landlords being 'outed' but also to being forced out of practice?

So how about raising these issues with candidates in your area for the 2015 UK General Election? You can get in touch with them by way of the Your Next MP interactive portal website. (Of course, that is assuming that you are able to get online. Many people are not; and given the online-only methods of pollsters, what sort of world is being created with and for the exclusion of people who cannot get online? Universal Credit that Conservatives are pledged to bring in at even further taxpayers' expense really amounts to Furthered Offline Exclusion because you have to be online to register for it!)

See also

  • Vote for Policies interactive portal website (7)
  • Vote Match interactive portal website (8)
  • Councils' out-of-area placements breaking the law:  Councils in London have broken the law by placing more than 8,000 families in other areas without properly notifying the receiving authority.(9)

Notes

(1) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32295970
(2) http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/social-policy-blog/2009/03/iain-duncan-smith-admits-ghett/
and
http://www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk/manifestos-no-secure-tenancy-policy-for-families-to-raise-children-in-community-solidaritypensioner-parents-nearby/
(3) http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/social-policy-blog/2010/07/asylum-seekers-2m-home-but-who/
(4) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05s99p1/panorama-the-great-housing-benefit-scandal accessed 27 April 2015
(5) https://welfaretales.wordpress.com/2015/04/21/rogue-landlords-and-the-benefit-cap/
(6) https://yournextmp.com/
(7) https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/ accessed 27 April 2015
(8) http://www.votematch.org/ accessed 27 April 2015
(9) http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/councils-out-of-area-placements-breaking-the-law/7009398.article accessed 27 April 2015

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en

Sunday, 26 April 2015

CarerWatch, Pat's Petition and GE2015

Statement from Carer Watch and Pat's Petition

Hi there
Pat’s Petition and CarerWatch are issuing this statement today.
It’s a bit of a shock for us to have departed so far from the Labour Party. This isn’t where we hoped to be by now.
Frances

Emergency Ceasefire for ESA
Statement from Pat’s Petition and CarerWatch

 Pat’s Petition and CarerWatch have tried to find out from all parties whether, if elected, they would call a halt and make time to put right the mistakes that have been made in welfare reform for disabled people and carers. Thousands of people have signed petitions asking for the government to assess the impact of all the changes before continuing with the experiment. We have asked for a ceasefire on ESA until they can prove that work programmes are successful.(1)
Our findings are that the SNP, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru are supportive of these views.
The Conservative and Labour Parties are not.
Many thanks to all of you who have supported the Emergency Ceasefire campaign.
Please pass this statement on to everyone who may find the information helpful in deciding how to cast their vote.
The Contradiction that makes the WRAG(2) Inhumane
The primary legislation for ESA defines sick and disabled people awarded ESA as having a condition that means that they are not required to work.
However the conditions in the WRAG for the last five years – mandatory work activity enforced by sanctions and a time limit of one year – is a regime that appears to require people in the WRAG to find work within a specific timescale. This is in contradiction to the legislation.
This is despite the evidence that continues to show that people in the WRAG don’t and can’t find work: the work programme isn't working.
There is now also a terrible legacy of the many sick and disabled people who have been through the WRAG but have not found work within a year, and then been unjustly timed out from ESA. The disappeared.

Continued at http://carerwatch.com/emergency-call-for-ceasefire-in-welfare-reforms-2/
Notes
(1) ESA = Employment & Support Allowance, the out-of-waged work disability benefit introduced by a Labour Government in 2007 to replace Incapacity Benefit
(2) WRAG = Work Related Activity Group

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en

Saturday, 25 April 2015

Disability testing and General Election

Here is what Kate Belgrave says of Atos' successore on Work Capability Assessments for Employment & Support Allowance (ESA) entitlement: Not much sign of Maximus at Maximus assessment…(1)

With a 2015 UK General Election due on 7 May 2015, it's a chance for disabled people and their allies — as voters — to assess Conservative, Green Party, Labour, Liberal Democrat and United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) for voter accessiblity.(2) (3)

Which party of those is closest to meeting your descriptors of acceptable?

Notes

 (1) http://www.katebelgrave.com/2015/04/not-much-sign-of-maximus-at-maximus-assessment/
(2) Vote for Policies interactive website: https://voteforpolicies.org.uk/
(3) Vote Match 2015: http://www.votematch.org/

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en

Homeless? Get your rights?

The following is a transcript of a London Coalition Against Poverty leaflet from February 2008.(1) It may be good source material for questions to ask candidates in the 2015 UK General Election.(2)

Homess? Get Your Rights!

Council Homelss Persons Units (HPUs) are famous for trying to turn away as many people as they can — telling them they don't fit the criteria to be housed. In reality many of these people are entitled to help — and this might include you.

There are 5 TESTS that the Council must look at to sort what type of help you are entitled to. If you satisfy all of the tests you will be entitled to temporary housing and some priority on the housing register for a permanent home. Even if you don't meet all the tests, you may have the right to some help with housing.

THE 5 TESTS:

  1.  Are you homeless?
    This includes people who will become homeless within the next 28 days or are badly or unsafely housed as well as those who are on the streets (e.g. if you can't stay in your home because you are experiencing violence there).
  2. Are you eligible?
    Does your immigration status allow you to be housed by a public authority? Do you have recourse to public funds?
  3. Are you in priority need?
    Some people are automatically in priority need — e.g. pregnant women, people with children, 16 & 17 year olds, 18-20 year olds who have been in care and people who have been made homelss by an emergency such as a flood. Others will have to show that their problems make them 'vulnerable' — e.g., someone who has serious mental health problems, or someone who is elderly may be vulnerable.
  4. Are you intentionally homeless?
    If the Council think it is your fault you are homeless, then they may only have to house you for a very short time while they help you find your own accommodation.
  5. Local Connection
    This is the LAST thing a council should consider and not the first! If you don't have a local connection with the borough where you are applying and you have one with somewhere else, the Council may tell the borough where you have a connection to house you. But they can only do this AFTER they have investigated your case and made a decision about whether you pass the first 4 tests.

WHAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD DO:

If the Council has reason to believe you may be homeless now or within the next 28 days, they MUST take your application and start investigating the 5 tests. This application is not the same thing as being put on the housing register. At the end of their investigation they MUST give you a written decision about your case.

If the Council also has reason to believe you may be eligible and in priority need, then they MUST house you while they look into the 5 tests in more detail.

"Reason to believe" is not the same as proof or evidence. A recent case in the High Court said that if a person goes to a Homess Persons Unit to get help, this is enough in itself to give the Council reason to believe the person may be homeless.(3)

WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO:

Councils often do everything they can to refuse to or delay in housing people even if there is clearly reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible and in priority need. These are some of the things councils say to try to turn you away:
  • They can't help until they've done a home visit sometime in the future
  • They can't help until you've actually been evicted by the bailiffs
  • They won't help until you bring in a doctor's report
  • They won't help until you've gone through mediation (for example with your parents to see if they will change their mind about throwing you out)
  • They won't help until you show a police report about the violence you've been suffering

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

Most of these tactics are unlawful. If this happens to you, stand firm and tell the Council that you know your rights and that you won't be turned away! If they still refuse to help, ask for a written decision letter telling you why they won't help and take this to an advice agency or con [London Coalition Against Poverty — LCAP].

London Coalition Against Poverty (LCAP)

We are a coalition of local community activists and individuals working in advice. We believe that by coming together to combine advice work with direct action within our communities we can access the rights that we are often denied.

These rights are not enough but at least they're a start. If you want to get involve or think we can help you with accing your rights.

Contact us: 07932 241 737
londoncoalitionagainstpovertyATgmail.com

We are all volunteers, we can offer support and action, but not act as full time legal advisors. If a full time legal advisor is what you need, we can help you find one.

Notes

(1) http://www.lcap.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/homeless.pdf
(2) To contact your local candidates, try yournextmp.com: https://yournextmp.com/
(3) Date of leaflet is not February 2008.

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en


Friday, 24 April 2015

'Education' for politicians' peace of mind

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug

As regular readers of this blog will know, I am a member of a political party that is standing in the 2015 UK General Election. Something that few of you will know is that from my 24th year and well into my 40's I was a great follower of the writings of American 19th Century 'transcendentalist' writer Ralph Waldo Emerson, even while Margaret Thatcher seemed to enjoy elaborating on his statement that "there is no such thing as society."(1) Yet I reckon that before the jingoism of the 'Falklands Factor' came to her electoral rescue Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher would not have enjoyed the Emerson quotation I came across this morning by way of a youtube recording of a Noam Chomsky lecturer entitled Corporate Attack on Education.(2)

In about the opening ten minutes Chomsky cites Adam Smith's much neglected-by-capitalists'-spin views of the wealthy who control society - or at least like to believe they can control society while greed controls them.(3) And then around the 12 minute mark he presents an Emerson quotation that I could not initially recall having read before but is much easier to track down in print via a Yahoo! search these days than it is to track down the original hard copy books. Such Yahoo! searches are great aids to direct quotation by way of copy-and-paste into blog piece!(4)

And that quotation from the essay New England Reformers made me laugh so much that I want to share it with my readers, albeit in a slightly more expanded form than that used by Chomsky:
I am afraid the remark is too honest, and comes from the same origin as the maxim of the tyrant, "If you would rule the world quietly, you must keep it amused." I notice too, that the ground on which eminent public servants urge the claims of popular education is fear: "This country is filling up with thousands and millions of voters, and you must educate them to keep them from our throats."
— Copied and pasted from Wikiquote Ralph Waldo Emerson (5)
The essential trouble for those politicians is that while I am an adult with a learning difficulty that tends toward slowness in learning and internalising 'information', once I became a reader I was better positioned to become a self-directed learner, and not accept, say, BBC shortlists of which politicians are worth the public hearing.

Notes

(1) http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-nosociety.htm
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbMP-cy1INA
(3) ibid.
(4) https://uk.yahoo.com/?p=us
(5) http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ralph_Waldo_Emerson

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en

Steps toward affordable homes

By Dude Swheatie of Kwug
Dame Tessa [Jowell] said: “If you have a six-month lease in very poor accommodation, it doesn’t feel like home. It just feels like somewhere you can afford to live for a period of time.”
....
The former Olympics minister added that there was “a growing sense that London was a city for the very poor and the ultra rich” and that she was tired of investors buying up homes like “gold bars”.
The idea of rent caps has been floated within Camden’s Labour Party for several months. Last year, council leader Sarah Hayward wrote a newspaper article on the difficulty facing those searching for an affordable home.

It might just as easily be said that the UK is a nation populated by the very rich and very poor and that human traffickers overseas are like dope peddlers when they sell dreams of peace and prosperity to those desperate to flee war situations.

But what would be your 'steps toward making homes more affordable'?

Leave comments on a blogspot blog post

https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/42399?hl=en