KUWG on Twitter

Showing posts with label benefit cap. Show all posts
Showing posts with label benefit cap. Show all posts

Tuesday, 30 August 2016

UK benefit cap, party conference season, BBC, Russia and hegemony

Blogger Johnny Void reports that when the overall benefit cap is lowered this Autumn, it will be for the third time in just five years. What does that all mean? How about, as JV writes, Hunger, Homelessness and Despair, The Stark Reality of the Benefit Cap?

Of course that is not the analysis we shall be hearing trumpeted this October when BBC News reports from Conservative & Unionist Party Autumn Conference 2016. What will other political parties have to say about this third lowering of the benefit cap in five years? And if they do say anything about the benefit cap at those Autumn conferences, will the BBC report it? 

Oh, no! What have I done now? I've probably sown the seeds for more and more page viewings of Kwug Blog from Russia, where it seems their larger population are dead keen to seek out reports of how nasty the UK Government is to poor people within the UK. (For the past month or two, there have been about four times more page viewings of this blog from Russia than from within the UK, until my health forced me to cut back on my output — reducing the number of page viewings of this blog per week to practically zero from Russia.)

Needless to say, while internal debate is potentially healthy, as a Green Party member too poor to attend party conference and very restricted by the agendas of DWP regarding how much money the law says I need to live on and what I need to declare, and the timetabling of Green Party of England & Wales Conference Arrangements Committee etc, I hope the Green Party Autumn Conference discussions about 'progressive alliance' politics do not entirely overwhelm matters of how nasty 'austerity government' is to poor people.

Dude Swheatie of Kwug

Friday, 12 August 2016

Benefit fraud by Atos nurse exposed, and other Disability News Service stories published 11 Aug 2016

  1. Atos nurse struck off over PIP assessment lies
  2. DWP silent over ‘fitness for work’ tests carried out by drunk Atos nurse
  3. DPAC will use Paralympics to highlight austerity impact in week of action
  4. Paralympic drug cheats from London and Beijing will escape exposure, admits IPC
  5. Government ‘could have saved £48 billion on social care’ with full funding of DFGs
  6. Arts Council funding is ‘vote of confidence’ in disability arts organisation
  7. Charity calls for WRAG exemption from benefits cap
  8. Countdown to Rio: Britain’s most successful boccia star bids for fifth medal

Link addresses

  1. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/atos-nurse-struck-off-over-pip-assessment-lies/
  2. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwp-silent-over-fitness-for-work-tests-carried-out-by-drunk-atos-nurse/
  3. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dpac-will-use-paralympics-to-highlight-austerity-impact-in-week-of-action/
  4. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/paralympic-drug-cheats-from-london-and-beijing-will-escape-exposure-admits-ipc/
  5. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/government-could-have-saved-48-billion-on-social-care-with-full-funding-of-dfgs/
  6. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/arts-council-funding-is-vote-of-confidence-in-disability-arts-organisation/
  7. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/charity-calls-for-wrag-exemption-from-benefits-cap/
  8. http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/countdown-to-rio-britains-most-successful-boccia-star-bids-for-fifth-medal/

Monday, 11 July 2016

KUWG statement in support of Jeremy Corbyn's mandate as Leader of the Opposition



(The statement below has been expanded slightly from the original. The figure for MPs' salaries has also been amended with the aid of referencing information given below.)

----STATEMENT STARTS----


KILBURN UNEMPLOYED WORKERS GROUP: CORBYN'S PLP OPPONENTS' CLAIMS THAT HE HAS NOT SHOWN ENOUGH LEADERSHIP LACK LEGITIMACY

The Kilburn Unemployed Workers Group (KUWG — aka 'Kwug') is non-party-politically aligned, including members of different political parties and none, as well as people with no vote in UK parliamentary elections and no vote in the recent UK EU Referendum. We are united by a commonality of interests in terms of maintaining and upgrading our basic living standards. The casework that we do helps promote our freedom of association and most fundamental rights.

Our casework by unpaid activists helps people prove their entitlements and continue living in the face of relentless attacks on 'public expenditure', our rights, our dignity, our health, our housing, and our character.

At our weekly group meeting on Thursday 7 July we discussed the attacks by some Labour MPs on Jeremy Corbyn's leadership and the prospect of a response statement from us to be posted on the Kilburn Unemployed Workers Group 'Kwug blog' regarding Jeremy's position as a democratically elected leader of the Labour Party. This initiative was enthusiastically welcomed.

The vast bulk of the media coverage of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership — as illustrated by the above Andrew Marr youtube video of an interview with Jeremy — focuses on Jeremy's support or lack of support from Labour Members of Parliament. Those Labour MPs who have attacked his leadership generally argue that he 'showed a lack of leadership' in the EU Referendum. In the above interview, Jeremy rebuffs that idea. Jeremy also draws attention to his 'real mandate', a mandate that got non-party-politically aligned KUWG members to join the Labour Party with rekindled hope in the electoral process even after what Tony Blair's Government did to their faith in the Labour Party.

(Lies of Tony Blair and his allies preceded the invasion of Iraq in 2003; their 'benefit thieves' lies also preceded attacks on the welfare state.)

We point out in our turn in this statement as members of a non-party-political organisation, that it is wrong to focus on a party leader's 'mandate' or 'leadership credentials' as being the number of elected Members of Parliament who support him in Parliament.

  1. The 'first past the post' electoral system lacks Proportional Representation and scope for proper representation of the most marginalised people socio-economically in a society dominated by the interests of home owners and salaried classes;
  2. The majority of his detractors within the Parliamentary Labour Party are MPs who failed to stand out in opposition to the Conservatives' worsening attacks on all people in unemployment and precarious working conditions. When it came to the vote regarding the Welfare Reform & Work Bill their failure to be an effective opposition and support other opposition parties in voting against that legislation, that Bill passed as an Act of Parliament while the majority of Labour MPs abstained; and
  3. The gulf between MPs' nearly £75K salaries plus parliamentary expenses and the degrading level of 'overall benefit cap' that the Welfare Reform & Work Act introduces reduces the credibility of those now-dissident Labour MPs. They did not act against the reduced overall benefit cap and spread of more and more benefit sanctions while Universal Credit is actually set to destroy the welfare state rather than redeem it.

We concur with Jeremy Corbyn that he would be wrong to 'walk away' under the attacks of such opposition to his leadership. He really does have a mandate, and he should have more time to outline our interests than he got in that interview and the like. Such a surrender to lobbyists and media interests with dubious credentials and motives would be a desertion and a kowtowing to the interests of those MPs who do not represent our views and fail to support vulnerable people.

----ENDS----


Related link addresses:








Monday, 13 July 2015

Budget 2015 – what have the Tories got against young people?

Analysis of George Osborne's July 2015 Budget by Joan Grant of KUWG


It is with some relief that I can report that the Government decided not to make all Housing Benefit claimants pay 10% of our rent.

However, the budget took away the right of young people (18-21) on JSA to claim Housing Benefit. There will be an exemption for those young people who are parents. There are less than 20,000 young people on JSA claiming Housing Benefit. Many have troubled backgrounds and are not able to live with their families. Their situation will be made more vulnerable. Saving: £40M

They abolished maintenance grants for students from low income and replaced them with loans. Saving: £2.5B. This change just means that young people will be saddled with more debt. A measure like this makes it harder for people from low income backgrounds to get access to higher education and therefore better paid jobs.

The Apprenticeships that the Tories harp on about are just 6 months of providing cheap labour. They are nothing like the 3 or 5year apprenticeships that young people used to get in the 1970s when they learnt a trade properly.

We really must highlight the unfairness of the treatment of young people. The Tories are blighting the futures of a whole generation of young people: they are saddled with debt, paid low wages and have no security. It is interesting to note that pensioners have not had a penny of cuts. Is that because they tend to vote Tory? Pensions go up by at least the rate of inflation. There are of course some pensioners on low incomes. But overall pensioners are more likely to be home owners than young people. This will be the subject of a detailed post at a later date.

The rumours about tax credits were right. These have been cut back quite a lot. People already claiming tax credits will be affected from April 2016 and they will be £1000 a year worse off on average. April 2017 is when the major changes, such as only paying Child Tax Credit for 2 children, take effect.

The really unexpected measure was the new National Minimum Wage for people over 25. However, experts have now calculated that people who get tax credits will still be worse off, despite higher wages. That to me, takes some doing. Humans can put satellites in space and send astronauts to repair them quite easily. But we cannot figure out how to spend literally billions of pounds in a way that ensures low earners have enough money to live on and do not have to use food banks. Obviously, the Tory Government has no interest in solving the problem of low pay.

At this point, I have to declare an interest. I am someone who argued that tax credits need to be cut back. To me, it made no sense that people in work cost the nation 6 times as much as people who are out of work. We needed wages to rise which has now happened. However this new National Minimum wage is less than the Living Wage of £7.85 outside London and £9.15 an hour that low paid workers need right now in order to make ends meet.

Some of the other rumours proved fairly accurate.

Working age benefits were frozen for four years – we had been told that they would be frozen for two years. That freeze now goes on for a further two years. This freeze does not apply to most disability benefits including ESA Support Group. Saving: £4bn

Changing the amount of ESA-WRAG to the same as JSA happens in April 2017. It will not affect anyone currently getting ESA WRAG. Saving: ££640m. I think the Tories will have a go at making this reduction apply to people already in the WRAG at a later date.

The Benefit Cap was reduced from £26,000 to £23,000 in London and £20,000 everywhere else. As this includes rent, it will lead to more people not being able to afford their rent, especially in London. Saving: £200m. They also reduced the LHA’s (Local Housing Allowances). They reduced the grants to Housing Associations, and plan to make them cut rents by 1%. There were no measures to cut private sector rents. Private rents are extortionately high and cutting them would actually reduce the housing benefit bill.

In stark contrast, they raised income tax thresholds and raised the Inheritance Tax thresholds.
 
Cutting back tax credits saves a significant amount of money, but most of the other cuts save very small amounts. They raised more in taxes than they gave away. So it proved to be a fairly typical Tory budget – they took from the least well off and gave more to the better off. All the signs are that Labour will support the reduction in the Benefit Cap.



For further info see a report by the IFS: Andrew Hood - Benefit Changesand Distributional Analysis.

Monday, 27 April 2015

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

Friday, 3 October 2014

Conservative Party woes for welfare claimants — including those working for tax dodging companies that pay too little

Article from Z2K website. Above title by Swheatie of the KUWG

Conservatives pledge further Welfare Cuts

cameronThe Conservative party conference has produced a rash of announcements committing the party to further welfare cuts should they win next year’s general election. These include lowering the Benefit Cap to £23,000pa, freezing benefits for two years, barring 18 – 21 year olds from receiving housing benefit and limiting the same age group to claiming Job Seekers Allowance for only 6 months. Taken together this package of measured could have a devastating impact on the lives of low income individuals and families.

The rhetoric espoused to justify this policy is, as always, focused around ‘fairness’ for hard working tax paying families. But this belies the fact that the benefits freeze, because it includes tax credits and housing benefit, would hit twice as many working families and workless. George Osborne says that it’s unfair that benefits should rise faster than wages but if action was taken to push up poverty wages then millions of low income working household would no longer need to rely on benefits.


The other side of the poverty trap equation is rents. The 1% cap on LHA rate rises, alongside a host of other changes, has made private sector accommodation in London and the south east increasingly unaffordable to housing benefit claimants. A complete freeze for two years would have a catastrophic effect and significantly reduce the number of properties available to benefit claimants.

Continue reading on Z2K website....

Protecting the vulnerable — listen to people who know by firsthand experience

By Swheatie of the KUWG

Induced by debt related to a JSA sanction and then eviction, Nygell Firminger's eviction was followed by his suicide in the same week that the Welfare Reform Act of 2012 was passed. Our campaigning and casework for the living continue.

There is a line in the play 'The Trojan Women' as adapted by Jean-Paul Sartre from the original by Ancient Greek playwright Euripides: "Those who give the order seldom see the mess it makes."

Revd Paul Nicolson of Taxpayers Against Poverty in the piece linked below, cites how bad UK poverty was as far back as 2001 for vulnerable people. Yet — established in 2010 — the KUWG has its own, more local stories.

Nygell Firminger of the South Kilburn Estate committed suicide in April 2012 after being evicted by his so-called 'social landlord' Genesis on account of rent arrears. That was after he had fallen into the clutches of loan sharks and thus into rent arrears after Kilburn Jobcentre had sanctioned him for a period of time and he had fallen into rent arrears over which he had attempted to negotiate reparations — accumulating volumes of correspondence.

Tragically, by the time he was sanctioned even, he had left the Kilburn Unemployed Workers Group in the expectation that the job he had been offered or given would 'see him through'. When we eventually heard of what had transpired since his departure from the group, we — meaning mostly people who had never met him — determined to seek 'justice for Nygell' who was 'all too human'. So we gathered evidence from the people closest to him who we met at his funeral.

To cut a long story short:

  1. In May 2013, Haringey Solidarity Group reported further heartlessness by Genesis Housing Association toward tenants who could be made vulnerable to rent arrears by "significant changes ... to the Welfare Benefit system." — Genesis Housing Association to evict benefit cap families
  2. The North London Coroner eventually ruled on 10 July 2013 that Nygell's death had been the result of "suicide due to the threat of eviction," severely criticised Genesis Housing over their handling of Nygell's case and issued a 'Rule 43' notice saying that landlords should implement measures to protect tenants in such circumstances who have mental health problems. (It was clear from his friends' testimonies that he should have received Employment & Support Allowance as a person with mental health problems, rather than a sanction from the jobcentre and an eviction from a 'social landlord'.)
  3. In December 2013, Genesis Housing reportedly sold the flat that Nygell had committed suicide in after he'd been evicted from it, for £375,000.
  4. Building expertise from within, and with currently no paid staff, the Kilburn Unemployed Workers Group acquires collective expertise to help people get the state benefits they require.
I wonder how many coroner's reports on the deaths of vulnerable people those politicians who say that they will protect vunerable people have read in their research toward the welfare reforms that they are now implementing? (Note that the first case presented in the piece linked below is from as far back as 2001, and Revd Paul Nicolson launched a petition for UK Government to consider the implications to the UK in the 21st Century of Revd Dr Martin Luther King's 'I Have a Dream' speech that was made on the 28 August 1963 centenary of the Gettysberg Address 'emancipation proclamation'. Martin Luther King petition.)
How many coroners reports have those who say they will protect the vulnerable read in their research?


Continue reading on the website of Taxpayers Against Poverty....

Monday, 27 January 2014

Important date change: Benefit Cap Appeal and Protest to be held on Tuesday 28 and Wednesday 29 January


This is instead of Monday 27 and Tuesday 28 January dates that were previously posted. For more details, go to
Benefit Cap traps women in violent relationshipsFr...

Friday, 17 January 2014

Benefit Cap traps women in violent relationships

From Women Against Rape


Please sign urgently.  The legal challenge this petition supports is coming to court on 28 & 29 January. 
The petition has just under 500 signatures.  We need as many as possible

Signatories include:
Dr Bridget Anderson
Natalie Bennett, Leader Green Party
Dr Lynn Bindman JP
Zena Edwards, poet
Dr Charmian Goldwyn
Selma James, Global Women’s Strike
John McDonnell MP
Mrs Jessica Mccarnun, Bedroom Tax campaigner
Waveney Women’s Aid - Jenny Webber
Women’s Health Project, South London
Splitz Support Service - Jacqueline Mundy
Dr Felicity de Zulueta

Dear friends,
 
The benefit cap is trapping women and children in violent relationships.  A legal challenge in defence of women who have already been affected will be heard on 27 and 28 January at the Court of Appeal.
What you can do:
·         Sign the petition to scrap the cap NOW, get your organisation to endorse it, like it to you friends on facebook and twitter – we need as many signatures as possible. 
·         Join the protest outside the court on 27 & 28 January, 9.30 am, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand WC2A 2LL.
·         Listen to Kim Sparrow from Single Mothers’ Self-Defence, who has endorsed the petition, on BBC Radio 5 Live about the reality of the Benefit Cap. (Starts 1:08 minutes into the show, move cursor along.) Like it to your friends.

Petition to Scrap the Benefit Cap
which traps women and children in violent relationships.
In support of legal challenge to be heard 27-28 Jan 2014

WAR outside the High Court in Oct 2013
Women Against Rape (WAR) and others have launched a petition asking the public to support women and children impoverished by the Benefit Cap after escaping violent relationships.  A legal challenge on behalf of affected families will be heard in the Court of Appeal on 27 and 28 January 2014.
Solicitor Rebekah Carrier describes the Cap as ‘catastrophic, cruel and arbitrary’.

Please sign online here

For more information about the petition contact WAR
Tel: 020 7482 2496 
war@womenagainstrape.net

About the legal challenge: Rebekah Carrier, Hopkin Murray Beskine.  
Tel: 020 7272 1234 
·     One third of women have suffered domestic violence.  Every week two women are killed by partners or ex-partners, in England and Wales.
·     The Benefit Cap limits a family’s total benefit to £500 per week, including rent and Child Benefit.  Extortionate rents, including for some refuges and hostels, leave mothers and children with little or no income to live on. 
·     A test case is being fought in court on behalf of families impoverished by the Benefit Cap after escaping violence.  So far, there is no exemption from the Cap for victims of violence. 
·     Many victims of violence are unable to get a job immediately or to move to a cheaper area – they need to stay close to friends and relatives for support, and time to recover and to reassure distressed children.
Women Against Rape was among the groups demonstrating at the High Court in October.  We heard in court what the mothers and children have gone through, including living for years in rundown housing. 
They are represented by Rebekah Carrier of Hopkin Murray Beskine, who describes the Cap as catastrophic, cruel and arbitrary:
"Two of the families have fled domestic violence in circumstances where they were financially reliant upon their abusive partners, and they now face a stark choice between descending further into poverty and risking losing their homes, or returning to their abusers in order to escape the imposition of the cap."
Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape says:
We call on the government to put the safety of women and children first by lifting the Benefit Cap so no one is trapped in a violent a relationship where they risk injury, trauma and even death.” 
The petition is endorsed by the Black Women’s Rape Action Project, Legal Action for Women, Single Mothers’ Self-Defence, WinVisible (women with visible and invisible disabilities) and Women Against Rape.

Friday, 20 December 2013

Women Against Rape oppose the Benefit Cap — how about you?


Launch of petition to Scrap the Benefit Cap
which traps women and children in violent relationships.
In support of legal challenge to be heard in early 2014
WAR outside the High Court in Oct 2013
Women Against Rape (WAR) and others are launching a petition asking the public to support women and children impoverished by the Benefit Cap after escaping violent relationships.  A legal challenge on behalf of affected families will be heard in the Court of Appeal in early 2014.
Solicitor Rebekah Carrier describes the Cap as ‘catastrophic, cruel and arbitrary’.
Please sign online here
For more information about the petition contact WAR
Tel: 020 7482 2496 
war@womenagainstrape.net

About the legal challenge: Rebekah Carrier, Hopkin Murray Beskine.  
Tel: 020 7272 1234 
·     One third of women have suffered domestic violence.  Every week two women are killed by partners or ex-partners, in England and Wales.
·     The Benefit Cap limits a family’s total benefit to £500 per week, including rent and Child Benefit.  Extortionate rents, including for some refuges and hostels, leave mothers and children with little or no income to live on. 
·     A test case is being fought in court on behalf of families impoverished by the Benefit Cap after escaping violence.  So far, there is no exemption from the Cap for victims of violence. 
·     Many victims of violence are unable to get a job immediately or to move to a cheaper area – they need to stay close to friends and relatives for support, and time to recover and to reassure distressed children.
Women Against Rape was among the groups demonstrating at the High Court in October.  We heard in court what the mothers and children have gone through, including living for years in rundown housing. 
They are represented by Rebekah Carrier of Hopkin Murray Beskine, who describes the Cap as catastrophic, cruel and arbitrary:
"Two of the families have fled domestic violence in circumstances where they were financially reliant upon their abusive partners, and they now face a stark choice between descending further into poverty and risking losing their homes, or returning to their abusers in order to escape the imposition of the cap."
Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape says:
We call on the government to put the safety of women and children first by lifting the Benefit Cap so no one is trapped in a violent a relationship where they risk injury, trauma and even death.” 
The petition is endorsed by the Black Women’s Rape Action Project, Legal Action for Women, Single Mothers’ Self-Defence, WinVisible (women with visible and invisible disabilities) and Women Against Rape.