THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO

Blind Woman Told To Get Off Bus

Megan Taylor, 22, was on a bus with her guide dog Rowley when an unnamed woman approached her and said: ‘Why is there a f*****g dog on the bus? Get it off.’ But when Megan attempted to politely explain Rowley was an assistance dog, she alleges that the woman called her a liar because guide dogs were yellow Labradors and her dog was black.

Megan, from Merseyside, said that she sought to clarify that her guide and assistance dogs can be any colour and don’t have to actually be Labradors, even though Rowley was, and the woman told her that she was mistaken. So Megan decided at this point that there was nothing she could say to educate this woman and that it wasn’t deserving her time in doing so, and Megan instead decided to ignore her while the woman proceeded to talk rubbish.

Megan has suffered from episodic blindness since she sustained a head trauma at 15, which also produced a number of other medical problems including hearing impairment, impaired balance, frequent fainting attacks and vertigo.

She stated that the incident was not the first time she has been vilified on public transport and it has left her anxious to go on the bus again, and she stated that she doesn’t believe that she’ll ever have a stress free trip on public transport, and that’s why she’s nervous when using it now.

On other occasions, she’s been spat at, stepped over, shoved out of the way and accused of being another drunk youth when losing consciousness due to her heart condition and neurological dysfunction.

Rowley helps Megan with numerous everyday tasks including retrieving dropped items, emptying the washing machine and getting undressed, but more importantly, Rowley can keep Megan calm and can even phone for assistance if she loses consciousness.

Megan said that she tries to stay positive and not let events such as what happened to her get her down because she’s not ashamed of her disability, and that despite having so many adverse experiences, she knows that these people are the minority and that most people are helpful and understanding.

Service dogs are incredible creatures, it’s just a shame that many of the human race can’t be as highly trained, and why didn’t the bus driver make this arrogant woman get off the bus so that everyone could have a peaceful ride?

It’s so obvious that this despicable person appeared to enjoy watching others suffer but then that’s what it’s like in the United Kingdom now with all the governments attacks of the disabled, and this is what it’s enabled because people now believe its okay to insult anyone who fits the disabled characterisation of what a disabled person is deemed to look like.

Not only is this a bad way to treat anyone who has to go through life with such medical problems it’s also a kick in the teeth for the people who do an excellent job training these animals to do the work they do. And any person who thinks they must make a point of how they feel with a reference to any point will stand on their soapbox to be heard and they’re the attention seekers.

All of these people need to walk a mile in this woman’s shoes and see if they feel the same reference to their words and then see how they feel because they should be ashamed of themselves, but then again, the police should have been called and this woman was at a shocking disadvantage, and such examples of poor behaviour can be terrifying, and people should show more concern, step up and help, and clearly the woman who did this was not only narrow-minded, cruel and rude, but also too believe that guide dogs et cetera have to be golden must have the mentality of a pea, considering the black Labrador is a pretty well know breed.

Growing Numbers Of Children Are Living In Appalling Conditions In The United Kingdom

In some parts of England, the state of housing in some areas is like a Dickensian novel. There are families of five or six or more in one bedroom properties, and children are being bitten by rats, and teachers have observed children reaching in bins for food, and going through other children’s pack lunches.

We should be generally shocked at the conditions that children and families are living in, and it’s hard to believe that we’re in the 21st century and people in a wealthy country are living in those conditions.

A teacher looked into a child’s mouth and she had these brown and black pegs, these were her teeth, they weren’t even teeth shaped anymore, and teachers have two-year-olds coming into the nursery school with missing teeth because they’re rotten.

It’s one of those things that people learn about and say, that’s absurd, children shouldn’t be going to school to learn about brushing their teeth, that’s something parents should be teaching them, but it’s pretty disturbing to discover the number of children who don’t actually have their own toothbrush at home.

Coats are being passed around three siblings, one day the older brother will have it, the next day the sister, the next day the younger brother, one coat between the three of them. Then you get a child whos shoes are too small for them, and when the teacher mentioned it to the parent; when the child came in the next day, the front of the shoes had been cut off, and this sequence of poverty is simply going to continue if we don’t get children and young people in a place where they can live their lives in a joyful and fulfilling way, and then education is essentially secondary to that.

Gone are the days when Britain was one of the greatest countries to live in. Gone are the days when NHS, Education system, Public Transport, Emergency Service, Bin Collection, Social Housing et cetera was all at its best. Now is all a huge mess and the party in number 10 couldn’t care less.

But the onus lies with contemporary politics, and all main parties are liable, Labour and Tories alike, even though it was the Tories who insisted on austerity supposedly to get the country out of debt, and they closed services that Labour had put in place that supported families, but the debt meanwhile got bigger and bigger while affluent families paid less and less in tax, and too many people have forgotten that austerity was and is motivated by the Tories.

And there’s no point saying that if a person can’t afford children they shouldn’t have them, the children are here now, and they’re suffering, so how will the government morally obligate to alleviate that, and where is their humanity? It’s called poverty, which means that most families incomes dropped after the recession, so you can’t then question whether these children should have been born because it’s then like closing the barn door once the horse has bolted, and the fact that any child is hungry and hunting through bins should horrify everyone.

But then this government want to pit ordinary people against each other, and we need to quit condemning the poor and look at the top of the food chain, and where our money is going, and to stop people who dodge paying their taxes, these children are starving, and they deserve more than this.

Any family could find themselves without an income due to sickness, disability or loss of a job, and the benefits system used to provide a security net which met a families essential need, but obviously, it doesn’t do that anymore.

The fact is, the child is now alive, and the parents are poor, and something has to be done no matter whose fault it is, and judging debate doesn’t help them, and the truth remains that numerous families have children whilst they’re financially stable, but anything can happen, none of us knows what’s around the corner: accidents, sickness, redundancy can change that, we are all two pay cheques away from poverty.

What about those girls and women who fall pregnant by mistake, maybe as teenagers or through a failed relationship, should they be punished because they don’t have the means to support their children? What about domestic abuse situations?

Families are on the edge income-wise, and some are poverty-stricken, but the government won’t do anything about the low wages, the zero hours contracts and job insecurity. Then there’s the growing cost of living and the state of our welfare system, but those who have watched a few episodes of “Benefits Street” think that they can judge, but if they spoke to those people for a little while, perhaps then they might find how real life is lived and the physical challenges that they face and their judgement of them might fade away.

There are those families that have children and everything is fabulous and they’re eating healthy and life appears normal, then there’s this financial shift and they say well we’ll manage but little by little things get difficult until one day they find themselves eating cheap jam sandwiches so that their children can eat, and glueing their shoes back together and using a black sharpie to cover the marks so that the shoes look okay, but no one wants this to happen, and it’s not always about having children you can’t afford.

It’s also a basic human right to have children; after all the United Kingdom is deemed to be the fifth wealthiest country on the planet, the problem is the uneven distribution of wealth, but that’s not the responsibility of the children, it’s the government’s fault for allowing it to happen.

People have been demonising the poor and putting the blame at their door for hundreds of years rather than putting the onus where it rests, with governments and exploiters.

Fortuitously, during that time there have been politicians and social commentators, like, Engels, Marx, Dickens who’ve highlighted the situation of the poor and over time we’ve produced a more balanced culture, but it was a lengthy aggression as there are those who believe the poor are there to be exploited and believe they have only themselves to blame.

Ultimately, through trade unions, workers rights and equal rights the working family started to make economic progress until most families, with two working adults had a comparatively comfortable life, and deservedly so, but with a welfare state that would properly support them when needed.

Now though, through the near annihilation of our safety net, the welfare state, zero hours contracts, a parsimonious minimum wage, homelessness at an abnormal level, and victimising TV like Benefits Street, the disadvantaged and vulnerable are once again being exploited, and are oppressed and frequently have nowhere to turn.

So, we’ve gone backwards, we’ve reverted to levels of poverty and disgrace for the poor as seen in Charles Dicken’s day. There’s even a return of Victorian diseases, so all that laborious work by the generations before us, of which everyone profited, have been essentially wiped out by the far right, in the last 9 years, but they’d love to go further.

Now though, people have attitudes with an acceptance of the situation, turning a blind eye to poverty and the people of this country are allowing that to happen, but then we can all now blame it on the children, but of course, the entire method of austerity is a conspiracy to privatise all services, and really we should be condemning the government for the chaos, along with the “Oops” Conservative party, rather than criticising parents who have children.

Of course, there are some of us that make bad life decisions and do get pregnant, but they have to live with those decisions. The point is, you can’t make presumptions about people, even if on the surface they seem to have made poor life decisions, we’ve all done that at some point or another in our lives.

So, what should we do, support some deserving families but not others? So, who determines this, or should we just shrug our shoulders and do nothing to reduce poverty because we’ve concluded that some people are very bad apples and don’t deserve to be helped? After all, it’s easier to be ignorant, contentious and self-righteous.

If we go back in time it was rather normal for mothers to knit their children’s clothes, patch up holes in their clothes, cut their children’s hair, go without meals so that they could feed their children, use unused food for the next nights supper, no heating, or share bath water with the whole family, it was all rather routine back then, but we’re now in the 21st century and it’s still happening and it’s actually shocking, and it’s going back to how it was, but it shouldn’t be happening.

Although it’s not happening in quite the same way, we had a greater sense of community back then, but Margaret Thatcher whacked that over the head and cremated it in the 1980s. Now, all we have to do is blame the victims, and to be fair, it’s far simpler to do that and doesn’t require anything more from us than the capacity to pass judgement viciously.

I suppose everyone was in the same boat years ago whereas now only a tiny minority are suffering, but we have too many ‘I’m alright jack’ people being judgemental, and to be honest, I don’t remember it ever being this bad even in the 70s. I don’t remember there being so many homeless people all over the streets, or food banks, or shops, libraries, and community and youth centres shutting down everywhere.

This entire thing is unethical, especially when Boris Johnson is making more for a single speech than some of these people will make in 10 years, and then there’s poverty, abject poverty, people who are poor and then there’s the Uber rich who exploit the people and evade the tax system, and it’s not good for the country, but these Uber wealthy people expect the comforts and perquisites and protections of their government, but poverty is very wrong.

I was a teen in the 70s, and parents were a lot more practical back then. I can remember “hand me downs”, but nobody went without anything. A coal fire took care of the heating, hot water and the drying of clothes. My mum would mend socks and mend my clothes, and other families would knit jumpers for school and make clothes, but sadly these skills are dying out.

A lot of today’s children don’t even have basic skills, such as changing a plug or fuse or even how to stitch on a button, and schools should have someone there to teach pupils these basic skills, it would make all the difference in their adult life, and the more we look around us we realise that the Tories are going to be in control for a long time.

And if people don’t believe that modern poverty isn’t real, simply take twenty minutes to visit a food bank, take some toothpaste and chat to the volunteers, it’s only twenty minutes out of your day, less time than an episode of Eastenders, and our government should be doing more to help parents on low incomes because no children should stay hungry or eat from bins.

It’s shocking and it will only get worse when we finally do leave the EU, and how can the 5th wealthiest country in the world have children in this kind of poverty? And getting rid of this Tory government continues to be a national priority.

But at the moment it’s okay that the fat cats are getting fatter, and Tory values and policies have taken us back to low wages, poverty, inadequate housing and a wider gap in social mobility that’s not been seen since the first world war, and they should be ashamed of themselves, and according to Theresa May, we’ve never had it so good, can you all smell the bullshit?

Of course, this is nothing more than engineered devolution, and this is very disturbing as the Hitler regime rears its ugly head once more, and we should have complete compassion for those parents who find themselves in a bad situation through no fault of their own. Perhaps their husband or partner died or was made redundant, although it’s a little different when parents have children knowing that they can’t support them or have poor lifestyles themselves, but we can’t tar everyone with the same brush.

But the Tories don’t appear to have a clue why this kind of thing is happening, and they’re in charge of nuclear weapons, scary, isn’t it? And they’re happy to send food and money all over the globe, and in a rich country where sovereignty, government, members of parliament and all their associated business friends demand obscene, totally unnecessary luxuries, and cheat, manipulate and grow fat on those indulgences.

It’s not about giving advice about making ends meet, it’s about inequality, desire and a crap system that needs fresh air and new people in it that have integrity.

Should Parents Be Allowed To Smack Their Children?

An MP has stated the law about smacking children is complicated and parents should have more autonomy to control their children. David Lammy believes parents should be able to smack their children without having to worry about being sent to prison.

Legislation changed back in 2004 to help protect children against harm at home, but some people are concerned that stringent laws could mean that children aren’t being punished enough when they do something wrong.

Believe it or not, children don’t want to be in charge, and they frequently test boundaries simply to make sure that their caregivers can keep them safe, and when grown-ups offer positive and negative consequences, children develop and learn, but children who have permissive parents frequently experience anxiety because they have to make adult decisions.

Should parents punish their child? Well, the discipline of a child’s behaviour should be for the parent to encourage a child to stop negative behaviours, make more positive choices and finally become a better person, because through discipline, children are taught to become responsible, respectable, kind and sharing people, and parents that spank their children usually believe that it won’t harm them.

Without discipline, children lack the means needed to navigate relationships and difficulties in life such as self-discipline, regard for others, and the capacity to interact with peers, in fact, failure to discipline children frequently results in children who are troubled, hostile, and even resentful.

Various experts have said that spanking teaches children that it’s okay to hit when they’re angry, and that spanking can physically harm children and that it can make them fearful of their parents, but fifteen years ago the government took that right away from parents, and now fifteen years on we have children on the streets thinking it’s okay to stab and kill other people.

Parents should be permitted to smack their children, only if they have been bad. Of course, battery is different from a smack for discipline, and parents should be permitted to smack their children, and back in the day most parents smacked their children, and sometimes it’s necessary to discipline a child, but of course, there’s a wide spectrum of how people determine acceptable spanking.

Why do parents smack their children? Well, the aim is typically to alter or correct a child’s behaviour by creating a little discomfort in terms of altering a child’s conduct, and in the short run, smacking is mostly effective, but children also need their parents to love them, nurture them, and encourage them, but also when children are bad they need their parents to limit their freedoms.

Shouldn’t we all have the freedom to chase our desires? To do what we want? To venture down the road we find most appealing? Isn’t that what our social movements (civil rights, women’s movement, gay liberation) have been about?

So why not children? Why shouldn’t children engage fully in the freedom movement? And, especially throughout their teen years, why shouldn’t parents surrender to their child’s wants? Well, this is why not. We exist in a world with few external restrictions, and we all need to have the sense to say NO to fleeting desires and emotions, and children, except for the most conscientious children, don’t have that ability.

Left to their own devices, how many children do you know who will choose to eat a healthy meal over gorging dessert for dinner? How many do you know who would choose to do homework rather than indulge in video games? How many do you know who would willingly say “it’s time for me to go to sleep”?

The dream of “freedom from” works only if you know how to handle the “freedom to” part. You may think you’re very lucky if you have complete freedom. But if you’re unable to create a viable balance between freedom and restraint, you’re not lucky at all.

Witness all the grossly overweight people, the crazy-in-debt people, the chronically sleep-deprived people, the addicted people, and these are grown-ups who should have more control over their impulses than children.

So what happens when children are free to do as they please? Do you believe their nobler instincts typically triumph over their baser ones? If so, you are a fantasist. For most children have no concept on how to handle an abundance of freedom, even though they’re commanding it.

It’s normal for children to lobby for fewer constraints, and it’s natural for parents to ease up on restrictions as children get older. But if parents make a wholesale submission to continuous and persistent demands for more freedom, the effects are typically shocking.

Here’s the end result when children get to run the household. They eat only what they want to eat. They watch an excessive amount of TV. They play an endless amount of video games. They go to sleep when they damn well, please. They cuss at their parents. They don’t take care of their things. They demand that their parents get them whatever they want. They have no frustration threshold. Their wants become their needs. Their needs must be met. Their needs supersede everyone else’s.

And that’s just a summary of pre-adolescent behaviour. Once puberty hits, teens without restrictions rule the household, defining their most violent activity as acceptable because it could always be worse:

“I can’t get up today; I’m too tired. I’m not going to school. Get out of my room and leave me alone!”

“I’m having a keg party this weekend. I don’t care if I’m underage. You know it’s better if I drink at home than to be out on the street drinking.”

“Yes, I’m hooking up with a lot of girls. That’s good. You always told me not to get serious with any one girl ’til I’m older.”

“It’s only pot. I could be using heroin or cocaine like lots of other kids.”

Children need parents to limit their freedom, to narrow their choices and to put pressure on them to meet their responsibilities. Children may not like all this control, but they need it. And parents need to step up to the plate and implement it, even when it’s so much easier to simply give in to the continuous complaining and demanding.

However, smacking is a complex matter because a smack is just a simple method of discipline, but difficulties occur when parents don’t know where to draw the line, and there are some people that would say that smacking is what makes us who we are, more behaved and respectable to others, and those that were born in the ’60s and before then were frequently smacked and in school were given the cane, and we mostly had pretty decent people on the streets, less brutality, although there were some that would slide through the net, they were usually from extremely troubled family’s, but we certainly didn’t have the brutality we do today.

I myself can remember coming out of my home one day and there was a young boy outside my house, he could have been no more than about 7 years old, and he stared at me and told me to “fuck off”. My reply to him was that his mother should wash his mouth out with soap, his response was “she can’t do that, I’ll have her done by Social Services.”

I remember saying to my parents to “watch this space” because in about 20 years time we will have children running about the streets stabbing and killing one another, and look it’s happening all the time now because there were constraints on how parents could discipline their children.

It should be up to the parents if they want to smack their child for bad behaviour, after all, it’s their child, but the government have taken that freedom away from parents, and now we have no powers over our children at all, and now children have rights and are rewarded even when they act negligently.

Punishment was given out in schools all the time, and at home, and more than often, if a child was spanked at school and then they went home to their parents with a letter to say they’d been bad, they would get a smack again, and if we had more control maybe then children would be more well behaved as at present they have no respect for anything, especially their parents.

I had some good slaps when I was growing up and I turned out just fine, but I did deserve it when I got it, and it did teach me a lesson. I turned out to be a trustworthy and decent person with morals, and that’s what my parents taught me by establishing boundaries and making me understand that I couldn’t always have what I wanted, and even though I disliked it as a child, as I grew up I understood that their discipline of me was because they loved me, and not because they just wanted to get pleasure out of it.

Children now are the spoilt generation, and parents are far too soft with their children, and rules imposed on kids today are far less stringent than a generation ago.

Parents give their children an unfettered restraint than they had as children, letting them have later bedtimes and more high-value toys and games, and something should be changed about the way they’re brought up. Tougher punishment should be imposed, and children are permitted too many material possessions and waste far too much time watching TV and playing computer games.

But children of the older generation said that their own austere childhood meant that they were prepared to give their children more liberties, and seven in ten mothers and fathers have said that because their own parents inflicted hard punishment, forty per cent admit giving their children an easier ride then they had when they were growing up, and presently millions of children are underperforming at school because their parents are too soft to impose rules.

Children are now suffering from loving neglect, and many of these children are staying up very late, playing video games or watching television in their bedrooms into the early hours and then going to school too exhausted to work and they can’t concentrate, and children are allowed far too much access to technology and material possessions.

Every parent raises their child in their own way and they make the decisions that they believe are best for that child. Different people prefer to live in different ways, and every child turns out differently because of the way in which they are raised.

There are some who think that children should have a restricted measure of freedom and that most of their decisions should be made by their parents and other adults in their lives.

There are others who think that children should be given multiple opportunities to exercise their freedom and to do what they want, and each person has to determine what is best for their children, but there are times when too much freedom can be detrimental.

Children who are given too much freedom can feel as if their life is out of control. Children who have the autonomy to make all of their own choices may discover that it is scary to be in charge of their own lives and they may long to have someone else step in and make decisions for them.

Children who are left to make all of their own choices might wish for a concerned adult to step in and show them what they should and should not do, and it can be scary for a child to embrace all of what they do.

It can be scary for a child to have to make all of their own decisions without any guidance from adults and giving a child too much autonomy can be harmful because of the way that children with a lot of freedom feel scared in regards to their lives.

Children who are given too much autonomy can make mistakes that can change their behaviour in big ways. It can be difficult for a child to know what is and is not right, and having too much autonomy can lead to a child messing up.

A child needs to have someone looking out for them and supporting them to figure out the best way to live. A child needs to have a grown-up helping them learn what is good and right, and a child who is given too much autonomy can mess up their life in a way that will destroy their future.

A child who is given too much autonomy can become injured because life is not safe for a child when they do not have anyone looking out for them, and every child needs to have their freedom restricted in some way in order for them to live a good life.

A parent who wants to keep their child protected and who wants to make sure that their child will not mess up their life in any big way must restrict their freedom at times, and children who are given too much autonomy may end up having difficulties dealing with authority at varying times in their life. Those children who grow up without having rules that they have to follow may have a difficult time respecting those who try to tell them what they should do.

Children need to know that there are times that they have to listen to the adults in their life, and those children who are given too much leeway will feel that they can do what they want no matter what the adults in their lives have to say.

Too much autonomy can be harmful as it can lead to discourteous and unruly children, and it can lead to adults who will not listen to authority, and it can lead to a bad end for numerous people as too much freedom makes a child believe that they can do anything and everything that they want to do when it comes to the way that they live their life.

Childhood is supposed to be the least worrying period of human life, but presently children are given far to much freedom, and once freedom is given, it can’t be taken back, but children really do want boundaries because they feel a lot safer when they have them.

They want the parent to say, “you must not do that”, and they like the feeling of authority because it’s a feeling of living in a little world where they know what is safe, what is right and what is wrong, and in a consistent world that’s not too complex.

If everything is permissible it can be overpowering, and it’s also unsafe because children don’t come into this world knowing what is right for them, and parents don’t do their children any favours by letting them get away with things.

For the first few years, a parent is nurturing their children, outlining behaviours and establishing structures, but encouraging discipline doesn’t mean that you have to stifle a child’s free will.

Children need to be able to have opinions and to express their individuality, and we should as parents be supporting them by giving them simple choices from a really early age. Such as saying “this drink or that one?” or “these shorts or those?” because it’s a restricted freedom that lets them examine their free will, but later on, the parent can connect outcomes to those choices, and that if they make the wrong choice, then there’s a price that has to be paid.

If the child decides to throw their food on the floor, then they don’t get their pudding, but the choice was still theirs, but the consequences acquaint them with their behaviour, after all, this is what they will have to face out in the real world. Rules, accountability and consequences.

Being Rejected For Disability Benefit

Approximately 8,000 people have died within six months of being rejected for a key disability benefit, with new figures unveiling that 7,990 people had an application for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) turned down, only to die inside six months since 2013.

3,680 of them were turned down less than three months before their death, and people who had PIP turned down, make up more than 10 per cent of the 73,800 people, in total, who died inside six months of registering a PIP application.

DWP chiefs maintained there was no evidence to suggest people died for the same reason they were attempting to claim PIP. And those hit were only a tiny portion of the millions of PIP claims since 2013, but campaigners have contended that the assessment is broken, with 72 per cent of PIP claimants who’ve been rejected and appeal to a tribunal win their case, and that there were instances of terminally ill people having PIP unfairly rejected, and those that have been hit, have tragically fallen through the cracks, when they needed help the most.

The figures, highlighted by welfare campaigner Alex Tiffin, were presented in a written statement to Parliament by the minister for disabled people Sarah Newton. They comprise a five-year period to April 2018 in which 3.6million PIP applications were made, including numerous people forced to change from the old benefit DLA.

PIP is worth up to £145 a week to manage the everyday costs of being disabled, and 3.8million people have been assessed for PIP since it began in 2013, and 2 million get it, but hundreds of thousands of former DLA claimants have been left with either less money or none at all after the switch, and claims for the terminally ill which were normally fast-tracked and dispensed with inside six working days was down from 11 when PIP was started, but some of the 7,990 people would have later got back their benefit on appeal before their death.

These shocking figures show how potentially gravely sick people who should qualify for benefits, have tragically slipped through the holes of a system that should be there to help them as they near the end of their life, and some cases have been uncovered where terminally ill people have had their PIP applications rejected when applying under Normal Rules and have died inside the year, and it’s shameful that some people who are dying have had their applications denied, and 17,070 people have further died waiting for a ruling on their PIP application over the last five years.

But DWP officials stated that people claim PIP for numerous reasons, the preponderance of which are non-life threatening, and that DWP decision makers take into consideration all the evidence presented and under PIP 31 per cent of people get the highest possible support, compared with 15 per cent under DLA, yeah right!

They said that they fast track the claim process for people who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness and that they’re ending unnecessary reassessments for people with the most severe and life long conditions, yeah right!

This is sickening and if this elitist government had an ounce of empathy they would change this policy immediately, and you would imagine with being the fifth wealthiest country in the world the very least they could do would be to look after their disabled people and the vulnerable, but clearly not.

This host of tax dodgers we have in government are quite prepared to stand by and watch disabled people die rather than give them the help they need, and these new developments to the benefit system has caused unjust hardship on those who can least afford it, resulting in thousands losing their homes and forced out onto the streets because they can’t afford to pay their rents.

And there is no doubt now that these variations in the benefits system had nothing to do with making the system better, it was simply a cynical and damaging plan to take benefits off disabled and vulnerable people, and for those who thought the nasty party had gone, you’re wrong, they’re back, only this time they’re even nastier.

There’s a bunch of people out there attempting to get sickness benefit, and are now sick because, before health and safety in the workplace, there were fumes and dust, but these people paid into a system to be looked after in sickness, and millions have paid into the system all their lives, but can’t get anything, just like the WASPI women that were due to retire and then the age limit increased another 6 years, but the government used all their money to try and scoop themselves out of the deficit.

This is the caring face of Tory Britain!

And some of these people that have been turned down for PIP and have either died because they have a terminal illness or they killed themselves because of it, so was it murder or suicide because those people from the DWP pester people to death.

But then this host of Tory toffs have never had to go without anything in their lives, but they implement some of the cruellest policies ever, and it’s had a destructive effect on the poor and disabled in society, and they should all hang their heads in shame because they’re despicable human beings, and they are the destruction of the United Kingdom and the most vulnerable. Welcome to the greatest country in the world, run by agitators!

This is just Tory Britain in total failure and a disgrace to its people. A shambolic Tory government clinging on by a thread, a Tory government in turmoil, a Tory government in denial, and a Tory government not fit for purpose.

Cutting Free Bus Passes For Disabled People

A Tory-led council has provoked anger after asking the public if they would support an end to free bus travel for disabled people and pensioners.

East Sussex County Council asked in a consultation whether it would be reasonable to charge elderly and disabled people half-fares for off-peak bus journeys that they can currently take for free, and East Sussex announced that despite being limited by legislation, it still wanted to test the water on what people thought of charges for a variety of services.

But even though East Sussex County Council are rigidly defined by law in the charges they’re allowed to make for services, they would still like to know if there are any additional charges people might believe is fair if the law changed to allow them.

Amongst the ideas that would ridicule prevailing legislation were: Half-fare on buses for pensioners and people with a disability; a charge to enter household waste and recycling sites; and a yearly charge for membership of the library.

The consultation infers East Sussex is unobtrusively measuring support for proposals to combat cut resources previously untested by local authorities, and the council said acknowledgements to the inquiry, which concluded on 31 December, will form part of their discussion with the government in the months that ensued and ahead of the next spending review.

The Local Government Association, which stewards authorities, warned last year that the way free bus passes are subsidised by the central government in Westminster has not kept up with rising demand and increasing costs, but disability and older people’s charities responded with outrage to East Sussex’s consultation, which comes after nine years of austerity and cuts of over £119 million to its budget, and the Royal National Institute of Blind People said that the charity was concerned at the prospect of half-fares for disabled people.

Buses are an important lifeline bringing independence to numerous people with sight loss, and this could hinder blind and partially sighted people from going about their daily lives freely, and with confidence, and disabled people are usually massively reliant on public transport.

Of course, many council’s are financially stretched, but surely life is more important?

Disabled people usually have no option but to pay more on basic goods and services like heating, therapies and equipment, but we should all be striving to decrease expenses for the disabled, not looking for ways to ramp them up.

Almost 10 million people qualify for concessionary bus travel in England, and being able to take free journeys adds to broader advantages to local restraints, and the free bus pass is unquestionably essential to countless older and disabled people, and local authorities need to realise that the free bus pass has extended benefits, and it’s estimated that for every £1 spent on concessions for older and disabled people, there’s a return of £3.80, and it’s disheartening to see that even as a consultative exercise, the idea of removing the right to free bus passes for older and disabled people is being considered.

But East Sussex County Council stated that the core offer consultation was a vocalisation of the level of assistance they believe residents should be entitled to expect from the council given the prevailing challenging financial climate, and that it was meant as a means to oversee their prospective financial planning and to show to the government the funding problems they encounter, what was important to local people, and to help them make the case for a realistic level of funding.

They further said that it wasn’t something they were aiming to do and to do it, it would, of course, need a change in the law, and they were simply seeking to assess what resident’s preferences were and what they considered vital services in the future if the prevailing funding squeeze on local government were to continue, and that they’re position remains that they’re calling on government for a truly fair funding review which takes into account the particular needs of counties, such as theirs, which are mainly rural in nature and have a large symmetry of older residents, so wouldn’t it only be right that they left bus passes in place so that their older occupants could get out and about, rather than being housebound?

It’s absolutely essential for older and disabled people to keep their independence, which is why local authorities are given £1 billion to provide the free bus pass scheme each year, and at the moment they’re no proposals to amend legislation, but it doesn’t mean that it won’t happen, put an idea in the governments thought process, and of course they will do it.

Why would they even contemplate taking bus passes away from OAP’s and the disabled who use the bus as a means to travel, and instead of even considering it, why don’t they just make cuts to the more affluent who promote this sort of drivel, and this is an authority on the brink of financial collapse, but perhaps in their desperation they might like to ask their various moneyed residents whether they would be prepared to contribute more freely, but I suspect that they won’t do that because they know what the answer would be to such a plea.

ad65f1f2a2794e9f42a4e08ca5953ba8a297c145bb70d22595fde4c28d294e1f_4003935.jpg

Before the General Election in 2010, David Cameron, on two separate television broadcasts, promised that the most vulnerable members of our society would be protected from the worst of the austerity measures. Unfortunately, since winning that referendum it’s been the most vulnerable members of our society that have borne the brunt of austerity.

Now 1 in 200 people are homeless, the Trussel Trust gives out millions of food parcels. Approximately 4 million working people are living in poverty. Universal Credit problems are adding to the hardships of God only knows how many people. Brexit preparations are costing this country billions. And now this.

Plus the Conservative Party are hellbent on selling us everything again that we already pay for, taxing tax on top of the tax. Perhaps they should try taxing these multinational companies that make billions of profit and line their pockets and the Tories keep it that way.

There are only two reasons why someone would want to vote Tory, one is if you’re stinking filthy rich, the other is if you’re deluded, to work out which category you fall into, just open your wallet, and look inside.

Labour, of course, couldn’t do any better, and I’m in despair of the people that are actually running our country and are so lacking in intelligence, and all striving politicians should be forced to live a year in lowly circumstances, and middle-class circumstances, this would give them an insight into how people live, and then perhaps they might become good politicians and not let their egotism and their own agenda’s run the show.

True Horror Of Universal Credit

A spirited group of unique mums reported the real chaos of Universal Credit in a damning testimony to Parliament. The ladies explained how the Tories six in one benefit, intended to be a better system that makes work pay left them with £1,000 childcare charges, overdue payment fines and even being booted out of the nursery.

One mum said she was forced to turn down her dream job because it would have left her with only £2 a day for food, bills, nappies and petrol.

Thuto Mali, a mum to a two-year-old boy, confessed: “We were at the food bank last Christmas because it got that bad, and it’s not that she didn’t want to work, it simply doesn’t pay to work.

ImageVaultHandler.aspx.jpg

Four women gave evidence to the Work and Pensions Committee, but Universal Credit has now been rolled out to 1.2 million people and is due to hit 3 million by December 2019 which is forcing the needy into rent arrears and food banks.

Theresa May is facing tremendous demand to pump more money into the benefit, which has been bundled up with billions in welfare cuts since it began in 2013, and so far campaigners have centred on this and other difficulties with the benefit, like the five-week wait for payment.

Nevertheless, the single mums talked about another side to the narrative, on how Universal Credit affects childcare.

Working parents on Universal Credit can claim back 85 per cent of their nursery fees, but they have to pay up front first, and then claim the money back later. This policy saddled mum of two Vikki Waterman with a £1,300 bill which she had to wait five weeks to be paid back.

The 34-year-old was further fined £50 by her nursery because the late benefit payment meant she was two days behind paying for childcare.

She told MPs: “We don’t want to sit at home when we didn’t plan to be single parents,” and she certainly shouldn’t be punished for that. These women want to be able to go to work and to provide for their own families, but at the moment it appears as if there’s a roadblock everywhere they turn.

Hairdresser and mum-of-three Gaynor Rowles, from Heywood, Greater Manchester, was required to pay up-front costs for her three-year-old twins. She was required to pay £188 per week, and she simply didn’t have that sort of money upfront.

In the end, she was only £9.37 a week better off in work, and she’s changed as a person, she’s really not her usual cheerful self, and it’s pretty depressing really, but there are more people out there that are much worse off than she is, and it’s fortunate that she’s got a good family, great friends and good support.

Thuto Mali reported her little boy was even suspended from the nursery. She was paying about half or three-quarters of it and his dad was supposed to pay the other, but it didn’t actually happen, so she got whacked with an £800 bill.

She was forced to turn down a job with a £32,000 salary but after paying £1,800 a month for a full-time nursery place for her son she would have been left with only £60 a month to cover bills, that effectively £2 a day, it just didn’t pay for her to work.

Nail technician Lucy Collins, from Manchester, left her position in the police because she couldn’t fit shifts around her children, aged 9 and 3, only then did she realise the difficulties of being on Universal Credit, she simply got passed from pillar to post, and she found it so complicated.

Astonishingly, MPs learned how the system was more kind to well-off parents than it is on people claiming benefits.

People on Universal Credit must present receipts and invoices on an “online journal” to ensure they get the money back, and there’s a really different burden of proof on more middle-class parents. You don’t need to present receipts, you simply need to have a registered childcare provider. The money’s in your account and you, as a parent, are able to transfer that directly.

A Department for Work and Pensions spokeswoman stated that they’re doing more than ever before to assist parents with expenses of childcare and by 2019-20 they will be spending about a record of £6 billion on childcare support.

But under Universal Credit, working parents can claim back up to 85 per cent of qualified childcare expenses, compared to the 70 per cent of expenses covered under the former legacy system, and supposedly, it’s the highest level of support ever, but if someone has accepted an offer of paid work, they’re expected to pay the costs for the month preceding starting work.

And why are people so shocked that the middle class are better off rather than those on benefits, after all, this government loathes anyone who has to rely on state support, yet they see nothing wrong in treating themselves to lavish expense accounts, or giving out bonuses to wealthy landowners, or giving the Windsor’s millions to restore their homes and afford security for their weddings, and all out of the public purse.

Universal Credit should be suspended with immediate effect, and even though it appears that the government alleges to have gotten millions into work, it’s failed to report on the fact that Universal Credit affects some more than others.

More specifically, those on lower incomes and single-parent families, largely women following a breakup are then left with the children. What doesn’t help is that some employers are not that adaptable when it comes to working hours, or when they set their rotas.

Which then means it enforces some need to additional childcare costs, which then generates more hassle and financial hardship on those workers, whilst waiting for Universal Credit to compensate them, and if they’re not sorted out and quickly could mean that they end up in debt, can’t pay their rent and end up homeless, or resort to giving up work as they believe they would be better off, but then the government can pretend they’re helping record numbers of people into work, so it’s an ongoing cycle, but with salaries hanging behind inflation it will make it more difficult for some to see any advantage in going to work.

The money is there to support people but of course, we wouldn’t want to end austerity, and besides it’s bound up in company tax fiddles and offshore banks, and the people who can prevent this, won’t because they’re profiting from those tax fiddles, and in case people don’t realise who I’m talking about, it’s MPs and I do include Labour MPs as well.

A parent can’t be in two places at the same time when they have children, but there are countless people out there in the same situation, and they certainly don’t need other people’s mocking pity, especially when the father makes a run for it and leaves the mother with the child. Someone’s husband may have passed away, which is really sad, but then they become a single parent, after all, not everything in life can be rosy.

You might have had several children, but at the time you could afford it, and then something terrible happens in your circumstances to change that, but how were you to know, not everyone has a crystal ball attached to their behind!

And it might be true that some people have children to get things, but most people aren’t like that, but those people that do deceive the system get what they want, well, that’s what people will say, but then so do people from the middle classes, and wealthy people do it, not only people on benefits, and if you earn the minimum wage and work 40 hours a week, you may as well not bother working as that will be your days pay, and you will end up in arrears, especially if it then costs for you to travel.

How does anyone come up with these outlandish prices? £1,800 to look after a child, how exactly does this service justify that amount of money? And after tax one would need to make at least £32,000 a year, so to live and pay bills everyone would need to get a minimum of £50,000 a year, and clearly, that’s not plausible.

The sad fact is that our government don’t care about the poor, and they never will, and it’s felonious how they get away with the policies they come up with.

Of course, it’s not cheap running a business and for one member of staff, it will cost approximately £1,500 a month in salaries for a 40 hour week, more if they’re over 21. On top of that, there’s the insurance, supplies, resourcing, business rates, rent, consumption costs, electric, and heating et cetera.

But yet the government want people to go back to work, and there are numerous people out there that really want to, but they simply can’t afford to because by the time they’ve paid out for childcare expenses all their money has gone, and now they can’t pay for things like insurance, rent, consumption costs, electric, heating et cetera.

YOU COULDN’T MAKE THIS STUFF UP IF YOU TRIED!

But the government apparently think it’s okay for people to live on the breadline indefinitely, but if they believe that it’s such a great idea, maybe they should be living on the breadline as well, after all, if it’s good enough for the goose, it’s good enough for the gander, but then perhaps if they quit sending money overseas we might not end up like a third world country, I wonder who will send us aid when we need it?

The problem is, the family is breaking down in 21st century Britain. Childcare never used to be a problem because parents stayed together and were happier with less. The world has evolved, but not everybody has evolved in it.

Once upon a time families with children who needed to work relied on their parents or aunts and their relatives to help out with childcare, it wasn’t fail-proof, but most of the time it did work because the family unit was solid, there’s no family unit as such these days, and we’re being torn apart by radical idea’s that families can’t childcare because they need to be CRB checked and vetted because there might be a paedophile in the family unit.

As I said, it’s not all fail-proof, but it did work most of the time. It meant that families got together, they played with their cousins and sisters and brothers as a unit, and that’s when families were families and not something out of the Stepford street gang.

But sadly, there are countless people out there that think that being a single mother is a life choice, and those people are literally yesterday’s child, and no wonder there’s so much suffering in the world today, and people’s views of single-parent families is truly pretty repugnant.

Some of these people didn’t put themselves in this situation deliberately, there are many complex situations encompassing each family, and many of those parents have disabled children and people shouldn’t stick their nose in the air and judge for most of those people left school and worked hard, got married and worked hard, or went back to work following maternity leave and worked hard.

But things can turn on its head and we never know what’s around the corner, and these people don’t ask for much, just a little help and basic understanding from the government, but instead, it’s a sporadic shambles, and people shouldn’t judge what they don’t understand, and people should open their eyes because if you’ve never been in the system you wouldn’t know how difficult it is, and this is what adds to a single mother’s suffering, this mass premise that everyone on benefits is living the good life, and that’s really not true.

I mean, how can you actually plan for a relationship breakdown following ten years of marriage, and then you end up falling on difficult times because for most of the marriage you’d been a stay at home mum and homemaker, I mean, really, who’s going to employ you with no CV to talk of and no skills or the ones that you did have are now archaic and not worth the paper their written on?

It appears that having a child now is simply for the vested and not ignorant, greedy or shallow people because the government don’t want to pay for them to have children, the thing is, it’s not the common joe that’s selfish or stupid, it’s our government that are the greedy shallow ones because they seem to be able to do as they please, and not only that, they get away with whatever they want and people simply turn a blind eye like it’s something they were born to do, and yet people make excuses for this government.

Maybe our government should explain to the children whose father has died that really they shouldn’t have been born if their daddy was going to die, heaven forbid, they didn’t see that coming, but then maybe no one should have children because at some point their parents are going to die, but the Royals keep knocking out children and they’re the largest benefit receivers in Britain, especially if they’re feeding them on taxpayers money.

Forced To Quit Job To Look After Relatives

With social care funding cut to the bone, more and more families are forced to step in to look after vulnerable family members owing to an extreme shortage of trained assistance, and many are leaving work and endangering their jobs and their own well-being and happiness to shoulder the responsibility of a task that should be done by qualified personnel.

Research implies the nation’s army of voluntary carers has risen from three million in 2011 to five million today, and so extreme is the situation that over the past two years, more than 600 people have left their jobs every day to fill the gap in social care left by £7 billion cuts since the Tories came to power.

The Mirror has started the Fair Care for All campaign, with seven demands to stop the crisis sparked by years of harsh Conservative austerity, and this deluge of people having to give up work to care for an elderly relation is the direct consequence of harsh Tory austerity which has seen fewer and fewer people and families able to access social care.

Cuts to council funding mean £7 billion has been lost from social care spending since the Tories came to power. That suggests limited social care for vulnerable people and poorer quality care for those that do get it, adding pressure to give care on to their hard-pressed families.

State funding for social care has declined by 27 per cent since 2010. This has left 400,000 fewer people getting expert attention, and Carers UK is calling on employers to support staff who have to look after elderly or disabled relatives.

Better workplace provision for people balancing work with caring is becoming an increasingly major problem, yet the Department of Health and Social Care have stated that they’re determined to help carers to stay in or gain employment, including through the Carers Action Plan, which is a two year plan of targeted work, including working with councils on the best practice for carers breaks and respite.

Terry Kirton gave up a well-paid job and went back home to care for his frail 92-year-old father, Rod. He gets an allowance of £62.40 a week, which hardly meets the expenses of running the house, and Rod’s benefits were cut when his son returned home.

Along with Income Support, the two survive on about £400 a month, but when Terry went back home one time something had changed, he just looked like a fragile old man.

Terry asked him how he was doing and he simply said “Okay”, but he could see he wasn’t coping, and his father just broke down sobbing and said the house was too large and too difficult and it was too much.

So, there was no other choice but to go back home to look after his father, but being a carer is extremely isolating, you lose your individuality, you lose your colleagues at work and going to social functions.

Only child Terry was a manager at a Harley Street hospital in London before going back to Monmouth, South Wales, and it’s shocking that there are so many unpaid carers, and if all these carers decided they couldn’t cope and stopped for just one day, then the entire system would fail.

The Government needs to understand there’s so much goodwill out there amongst families, but you can’t pay the bills on goodwill, and there needs to be a creation of a National Care System that works beside the NHS.

Professional carers need to be paid the Living Wage, and there also needs to be an end to carers coming into homes and staying 15 minutes or less because people that I’ve talked to have stated that carers are coming in, and the families are timing them, and they’re in and out in less than 15 minutes, consequently things are not getting done correctly, beds are not being made how they should be, food is not given correctly and countless elderly and disabled people are not being washed well enough.

They should also increase the carers allowance for unpaid carers, and promote a national system of volunteering to spend time with the elderly and disabled because many of these people are housebound and have nobody to talk to, and are usually pretty isolated.

They should further have a dedicated Minister for the Elderly and Disabled, and a National Commission on how to finance the care revolution that the elderly and disabled need because many people leave employment to care for their elderly or disabled families and have no idea how to cope.

The Department of Health and Social Care stated that they’re determined to help carers to stay in or gain employment through their Carers Action plan, they’re having a laugh!

The reason most people have to give up work is to look after a family member, it’s not like they even have enough time to look for work, but technically they’re employed because they’re looking after a family member, they simply don’t get paid for it.

Giving up work to become a full-time carer will steal that person of their job, their friends, social life, well-being, their money and their dignity, and eventually, it will take its toll on the one thing they have left, their relationship with the very person they care for.

The government don’t care, why should they, they have a cheap labour force working for them under the pretence of the title of “unpaid carer”, but most people would do the same all over again because they love the person they care for, but one should consider really carefully before taking this step because it’s a slippery slope to a life of hell where you have nothing much coming in and creditors hunting you for debts that you’ve built up, and it’s no picnic, and there’s no respite, and any assistance you do qualify for you will have to pay for because nothing is free.

Inside The Newcastle Food Bank Made Famous By ‘I, Daniel Blake’

Stepping into the Newcastle West End Foodbank made famous by I, Daniel Blake, Ken Loach’s scorching film about the victims of Tory austerity, a humble little old lady held a cheque.

Aged 80 and living nearby, in a faint Scottish dialect she modestly declared a regretful life had been made harder than in her salad days so she wanted to support families less fortunate than her own.

Manager John McCorry, who runs the venue Church of the Venerable Bede in the Tyneside city’s Benwell area thanked the pensioner and coaxed out her address to send a polite letter of appreciation. He noticed the cheque was for £250, but she asked him not to publish her name as she was doing only what was right and warranted no public recognition.

She was one of the fortunate ones because she got a nice council house and a decent job, and now a modest pension, and she’d wanted to go to the Church for weeks, and believed that it was evil what was happening to people, and that they should be helped, not punished, and that formulating poverty is inexcusable.

Earlier a couple of handsome siblings in stylish trainers and designer threads, sauntered into the food bank located in the Church of the Venerable Bede in the Tyneside city’s Benwell area, and builders Behzad and Behnam Emami, 29 and 34, started to clean up.

Four years ago they had been asylum seekers from Iran who began volunteering when banned from paid employment, but they continued volunteering after the Home Office let them stay and find employment, and when they’re available they simply come to help out because helping people is great.

Later in the city’s famous indoor Grainger Market, with its famous Marks and Spencer’s Penny Bazaar, an old man in shabby garments also wanted to help. He had a handful of coins as he meekly approached a unit the food bank operates with Newcastle United fans to collect “Toonaid” donations from a Geordie nation doing what the Conservative government isn’t, and the kindness of people is amazing and completely touching.

The food bank gives life-saving packages from two centres, including the Church of the Venerable Bede, and a warehouse in Newburn co-ordinate delivery, but without these amazing volunteers and all the people collecting and donating food and money, it makes you question what might happen to the people in genuine need and that are going hungry.

It’s not only adults, but it also’s the children too, and demand is growing, and poverty is growing as well.

The Newcastle West End Foodbank is part of the Trussell Trust network and the biggest in the country, serving close to 50,000 families this year with 106 tonnes of food worth £209,000.

Hot meals are served and packages are given to take home. Meanwhile, an integration programme seeks to sort out problems with landlords, benefits, health, both physical and mental, plus treatments for addictions, and the gut-wrenching stories of families left in desperation by gaping holes ripped in the welfare state by the Tories are commonplace everywhere in the country.

Slum landlords, DWP sanctions, bad bosses and Universal Credit are evils either endured or administered by self-righteous Conservative Ministers, and people sleeping on the streets or in cars and vans is expanding.

One mother was £3,500 in debt after the council charged her £30 a week bedroom tax despite her readiness to move into a smaller property the local authority couldn’t find, then if you look around Newcastle’s West End food bank you’ll see two unkempt young men who were once soldiers and are now living rough.

One was ready to give up, feeling rejected by the country which put him in a uniform and sent him to war and then dropped him like a sack of potatoes, but to those people out there who are going about their everyday life and have a job, it’s not always that apparent to them that there are people out there that are struggling.

People simply don’t have the time to consider stuff like this, it’s like material that comes out of a Dicken’s novel, and it’s expanding at such intensity that people are blind to what’s going on.

Christine Wood, a retired library worker proud of her MBE, represents herself in I, Daniel Blake’s food bank scenes, and she sees genuine people being treated badly, and sometimes you’ve really got to bite your lip when they tell you what’s happening, now they’ve got no money and are very desperate.

You could cry but you can’t afford to cry or let yourself go downhill, and you couldn’t help them if you did. So you show compassion and try to put a smile on their faces.

We all know who are formulating this misery, and what the government’s doing, and they’ll never be forgiven, but ordinary people have the ability to change these things, and we all need to stop voting Tory.

Austerity is not over, but then Theresa May doesn’t appear to think that people going to food banks is a problem, but then the Tories simply don’t care because they’re cruel.

What Could A No-Deal Brexit Actually Mean For You?

Theresa May’s Brexit Deal has been voted down by MP’s, meaning we’re getting nearer and nearer to a No Deal Brexit, but what could a No Deal Brexit mean for us?

So, we wake up on March 30th 2019, and the United Kingdom has now left the EU. The idea was to have a deal in place by the time we left, making sure we had a farewell and ease out of the union.

Theresa May announced that she believed that she could get a deal delivered for Britain, and Philip Hammond said that we would be able to strike a deal that will work for us and that will work for them.

But now, none of that’s in place, so what’s really going to happen?

One of the first issues would be, what about the UK border? If there’s no agreement about customs checks there could be significant delays. Lorries that used to be weighed through will probably now require their details checked, which will then require reams and reams of paperwork to be verified before they can go through.

According to the freight industry, that could mean queues of up to 17 miles at the port of Dover, and because of that, there are concerns it could interrupt distributions of food and medication coming into the United Kingdom.

But, the Deputy Mayor of Calais has stated that on the French side, they’ve been planning for a No Deal for over a year, and he announced there will definitely be no holdups at the border in the event of a No Deal.

Now, problems at the port are one thing, but there could be even bigger dilemmas at the land border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. There used to be a physical border there with customs checks, but for numerous Irish Nationalists, this was regarded as a symbol of British rule.

All those barriers were removed as part of the Northern Ireland peace process, so for many on both sides of the border, putting up barriers once more would seem like a return to the problems of the past.

But the EU has stated that if there’s a no Brexit deal, there would be no alternative to a hard border, so on top of all the trade delays a No Deal Brexit could create, there’s also the likelihood of renewed violence.

There’s real potential of fear from extremists wanting to exploit the chaos of a possible No Deal Brexit, but then Northern Ireland has seen this time and time again, no matter what the issue is in Northern Ireland, that people do tend to go onto the streets for either a short period of time or a more protracted period of time that they do see some serious public disorder, or indeed terrorist-related violence.

Now, what if you’ve booked a flight to Europe? But then we have a No Deal Brexit. Well, airlines will lose their automatic right to fly between Britain and EU member states. Authorities will have to reach some kind of agreement on air travel so that planes could carry on landing in other countries.

The EU has said that there’s an emergency plan in place to ensure some air routes remain running in the case of a No Deal. So, hopefully, people’s holiday plans won’t be affected, but also, the UK government will try and get a more comprehensive agreement, while EU countries, they still want to fly here, so it’s in their interests to keep the air space open.

But if things don’t go to plan, it could end in plans being grounded, meaning people won’t be able to take off, and they could be left stranded.

Now, what about those of you waking up in the United Kingdom on March 30th who are EU citizens? Well, your status in the United Kingdom will eventually change after a couple of years. Although, that would happen regardless of whether we leave with a deal or not.

That’s because freedom of movement will end, so EU citizens will no longer have an automatic right to live and work in the United Kingdom, also likewise Brits who live in Europe will also lose their guarantee to free healthcare in the EU, and on top of that, the value of your UK state pension could be in danger down the line.

However, before everyone starts panicking, the government has said there’s no need to worry. That’s because if you’re an EU national living in the United Kingdom, you can apply for “settled status” for £65. So, providing you can show that you live in the United Kingdom and that you’re not a security threat, all of your current rights and privileges will be protected, and once you’ve got “settled status” you can carry on living in the United Kingdom just like before.

EU countries are also in the process of announcing comparable schemes for Brits living abroad, but what other differences are people expected to see? Well, perhaps the biggest of a No Deal Brexit is the possible collapse of the economy. The Bank of England believes the value of the pound will fall, the economy will shrink, and that it will be even worse than the 2008 financial crash.

Now that’s founded on a lot of detailed predictions, but remember, they have sometimes been mistaken before.

A large part of our economy is our trading alliance with Europe, and being in the EU means we can buy and sell goods with EU countries without paying tariffs at the border, but if there’s No Deal, Britain would have to treat all countries equally whether they’re in the EU or not, that’s according to the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

So what does that mean, well, take cabbages for instance, under WTO rules, we could introduce charges on cabbages coming into the United Kingdom from the EU. That means cabbages and other food would get more costly for everyone.

On the other hand, it might be good for the British farming industry because it would make their cabbages more competitive. On the other hand, they could simply set additional charges really low, or even at 0.0 per cent, but because we now have to treat all countries equally, that would apply to the entire world, so on the positive side that might help keep food prices low for consumers, but it would further mean that British farmers might be undercut by competitors from around the world, and don’t forget because of problems at the border, EU countries exporting stuff to the United Kingdom might face additional paperwork and customs checks, and that all costs money, and it’s possible that the consumer would have to foot the bill.

So, will there be anarchy if we leave without a deal? Not necessarily, because the government have been planning this for a while, and it maintains emergency procedures are in position. For example, there’s an airfield near the port of Dover which will be turned into a lorry park, and companies have been selected to run extra ferry services to carry goods, and those measures are intended to reduce gridlock at one of Britain’s bustling ports.

The government has further announced plans to stockpile medicines and fly in essential supplies if needed, but much is contingent on whether the government will be able to strike so-called mini deals on various aspects of life following a No Deal Brexit.

These would be separate stand-alone agreements to solve problems like air traffic and congestion at the borders, but the EU has maintained it will only agree to basic contingency measures, allowing some flights and cross border trade for a short time, and don’t forget that many MP’s, they actually don’t want a No Deal Brexit, and have said they will seek to ensure it doesn’t happen.

In January for example, Labour and Tory MP’s came together to defeat the government, and give MP’s more control in the event of a No Deal Brexit. So, what about the rest of Brexit? Most EU law will simply be transformed into British law, so it’s doubtful that anyone will notice any immediate differences to the way their life is dictated, but there will be one enormous constitutional difference, EU institutions will instantly cease to have any say in how the United Kingdom is controlled, so any ultimate decision will come straight from our parliament.

Army Is On Standby To Help Police

As many as 10,000 troops could be deployed on the streets of Britain in case of a No Deal Brexit chaos, and plans have been put into motion for soldiers to assist the police and the NHS if the United Kingdom ends up leaving the EU without a deal.

And as well as the thousands of military troops that have now been set to be deployed under the proposals, an extra 1,200 troops will be on 24-hour standby. This will supposedly be overseen by around 20 Operation Temperer officers, who are typically reserved for army response to terror attacks.

Segments of the military will help to keep order and bring medical supplies to hospitals, and further help with traffic problems near to ports such as Dover, and troops are on standby to take part in a No Deal situation, and of course, it’s always good to make sensible emergency procedures for all kinds of eventualities, but clearly the government are anticipating trouble, perhaps complete out and out anarchy!

At this stage, people appear to be convinced that there will be a deal, but if there isn’t, the army is ready to assist in any way they can…

At this stage I can’t see us leaving at all, it’s simply taking to long, not that I wanted to leave, and I did choose to REMAIN, yes, I did! It was a bad thing to join the EU in the first place, we all know that, don’t we? But it would be worse to leave now, sometimes it’s better the Devil we do know, than the Devil that we don’t, and why change something if it’s not broken?

And there will never be a good deal Brexit, this government couldn’t negotiate a kiss in a brothel, so getting anything that was going to be remotely good, was never going to be an option, but what a mess the UK is in, there’s just so much chaos everywhere you look, Brexit, NHS, Social care, the Prison system, Education, Housing, Universal Credit and the Transport system. Potholes on the roads, homelessness and people living rough. Twenty-one thousand police officers lost from our streets, and what do the Tories do? They gave the rich tax cuts.

But perhaps there will be no call for the army to step in because sadly the British people are like sheep, they will do a bit of bleating, and then settle down and form an orderly queue to their slaughter, led by their new leaders.

So, do they actually expect our soldiers to repress objectors? And what powers will they give them? Powers of arrest? Powers to shoot to kill? It’s a sure indication that the elite are getting worried that the peasants might rebel, mind you, there’s always that possibility that the peasants might revolt.

On the other hand, the government has been exploiting the Armed Forces for years with continuous cuts, pay freezes, neglected accommodation and the overall treating them like trash, and now they’re planning to let them loose on the very people they swore an oath to defend.

I’m not sure where we go from here because once we had an Empire run by an Emporer, then we had a Kingdom run by a King, and now we have a country run by ****!

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this: