THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO

Last Wednesday the Conservatives put you and your family in danger. Confronted with strong data proving that the NHS is on the verge of financial meltdown, the government disregarded the requests of patients and the advice of doctors and nurses.

Instead, Theresa May declined to give a single additional penny to preserve our NHS or striving social care structure when the Tories’ Autumn Statement spending policies were revealed. Furthermore, they made it plain they intended to stop the prevailing triple lock incomes protection for pensioners.

The NHS is the health service respected across the globe.

No matter your age or wealth, when you or your child is sick our medical institutions and our GPs are there when you require them. Following six misused Tory years, our hospitals will be around £30 billion in the red by 2020.

The government is pushing hospitals to draft up ideas for what services they will cut.

So far the plans incorporate decreasing the amount of Accident and Emergency departments by half. Maternity services will be slashed and thousands of beds lost. If you reside in Birmingham you currently have four hospitals, under these proposals that will be cut by half, leaving two hospitals to care for over a million people.

The A&E Unit in Huddersfield is one of many facing closures.

In southwest, London, busy St George’s, which highlights on Channel 4’s 24 hours in A&E, is on a shortlist of potential hospital closures. With waiting times rising, and four million people on waiting lists now is not the time to be cutting our health service, we must invest in it.

Apparently, a Labour government will adequately support the NHS, give parity to physical and mental health, and integrate social care to ease the dilemma of bed blocking.

There is an alternative to cuts, closures, and creeping privatisation. That’s why Labour is maintaining that they are putting the NHS front and centre stage.

Now Labour members are holding over 550 separate NHS events nation-wide. Furthermore, they are inviting people to add their voice, to improve care for our NHS.

You know something’s wrong when an eight-year-old girl wrote a tragic message to MPs questioning why a life-saving cancer medicine isn’t free and available after a family friend was diagnosed with the illness. Daisy, couldn’t understand why cancer medications aren’t free on the NHS in Wales but were free in England.

When her mum’s friend Carolyn was told she was terminal, Daisy began composing a letter to Vaughan Gething AM, Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing, and Sport, asking him to give medication to patients.
Carolyn was diagnosed with breast cancer while pregnant with her youngest child, Mira, in 2015.

The mum-of-two had to endure chemotherapy whilst pregnant to shrink the tumour, and had a mastectomy following her daughter’s birth.

Fewer than two months later, Carolyn was delivered the crushing announcement that cancer had reached to her liver and lung, and was now terminal.

She began an online petition to gather funds for life-saving medicines not available on the NHS in Wales and has raised more than £60,000.
Nevertheless, with one medication alone costing more than £5,000 every three weeks, she must raise almost £100,000 more to pay for a year’s worth of medicine.

When Carolyn’s friend’s daughter, Daisy, learned about her plight, she chose to take things into her own hands. Daisy’s mum Sarah told she was making Christmas cards in the kitchen to raise funds when the little girl questioned what she was doing.

They’re an open family, so she understood all about Carolyn, and when she told her that not all medications are free in Wales, the little girl couldn’t get her head round it, and she questioned what she could do.

So, she wrote a letter to the Government. It was posted, but ash hasn’t heard anything back.

In the letter, Daisy writes: “Dear the Government.”

“Why are the cancer tablets lots of money?

“It’s not fair because in England the tablets are free. Why did you choose to make the tablets cost?

“It is not fair for people who have some cancer in Wales. It’s very sad for me and my mum because my mummy’s friend Carolyn has cancer. She had it when she was pregnant and had a baby. Then she was fine.

“But soon after she had cancer again and she had lots of treatment. But she also needs those tablets so will you please make them free.”

Daisy had always been a kind girl and needed to improve things one step at a time. She’s a really kind young lady and has a tender heart. If people aren’t healthy, she studies about things quite a lot.

But the letter is merely a start for this promising diplomat as she’s presently contemplating beginning an appeal at her school in Coychurch, Bridgend.

Daisy, who is in Year 4, thinks that it’s sad for people with cancer, and it’s not fair for people in Wales, and she wants it to change.

A Welsh Government spokesperson stated that they can’t comment on specific cases or the conclusions or views of clinicians, wow, that’s passing the buck. Furthermore, the spokesperson announced that they are proud of making certain that sufferers have entrance to evidence-based, clinically cost-effective medications, not simply cancer.

Quite clearly they don’t, otherwise, Carolyn would have had those medications free of charge, and is this a deliberate act to suppress life? What are the drawbacks to giving medication to cancer suffers free of charge? Well, there aren’t any, and it really makes you question, when you actually sit down and study it, if there hasn’t been a cure for cancer all along, or at least for several years that nobody has been told about.

To hold life-saving medicines away from sufferers is unethical, and so far, it all comes down to funds and where you live. They can fabricate the facts as much as they like, but we need to dismantle those facts so that we can build a genuine system.

This sweet small girl needs to make the planet a safer place, and out of the mouth of babes, comes the truth.

However, if you come from the aristocracy, or are well-bred, you can have everything you want since you have the funds to pay for it, except for those that don’t have much at all, and cannot afford it, it’s not free.

This inoffensive lady just needs medicine that is out there to be free of charge, it’s not much to ask surely? However, what you have to bare in mind is, that it’s a postcode raffle, if you’re not in the right area, then you get nothing free, it’s all a gamble of uncertainty.

It’s all about making a profit, and spending out money for free on human beings is not one of them, too much expense and nothing coming back to them, what a disgrace, and because of that, they are leaving innocent people who are dying from cancer to just get on with it until eventually, they die, and of course once they are gone, nobody actually disputes why it occurred, since they are dead.

Notably promoted on Facebook and different social media is the belief that a medicine for cancer has been discovered but is being crushed. The purpose given for the suppression is completely the same. The assumption is that businesses stand to make extra cash by treating a lifelong condition than from curing it.

It’s a simple design with a simple appeal, however, the assumptions are staggeringly convoluted.

There have unquestionably been a number of conspiracy theories over the years that have turned out not to be true. Nevertheless, the revelation is that a great number of really notable conspiracy theories have turned out to really be reliable.

So the next time that you run into some tin foil hat wearing maniacs, you might want to actually listen to what they have to say. They may actually know some things that you do not. In fact, one new research discovered that conspiracy theorists are really saner than the overall population.

So, the next time you are tempted to disregard somebody as a conspiracy theorist, simply remember that the one that is insane might really be you.

The CDC has suddenly removed a page from their website, which is presently saved here, indicating that more than 98 million Americans got one or more doses of polio vaccine inside an 8-year span when a proportion of the vaccine was infected with cancer causing polyomavirus called SV40.

It has been determined that 10-30 million Americans could have got an SV40 contaminated dose of the vaccine.

SV40 is an acronym for Simian vacuolating virus 40 or Simian virus 40, a polyomavirus that is discovered in both monkeys and humans. Similar additional polyomaviruses, SV40 is a DNA virus that has been discovered to cause tumors and cancer.

Awkward and slow cash machines with clunky buttons and tiny hard-to-see screens could soon be a thing of the past thanks to a series of next-generation ATMs.

Ohio-based security firm Diebold has built a touchscreen cash machine that works like a tablet computer, and uses facial identification and QR codes to identify and verify users, and has built-in safety cameras – who’s looking at you, kid!

A shocking new investigative paper from the biggest daily newspaper in Germany claims that Monsanto, the US Military, and the US government have conspired to follow and meddle both anti-GMO activists and objective scientists who examine the adverse impacts of genetically modified food.

Supposedly, new fangled cyber war is being conducted by both eco-activists and independent scientists by followers and previous workers of Monsanto, who are defined as operationally powerful assistants and who have taken up sometimes high-ranking jobs in the US administration, regulatory authorities, and some of who have contacts deep inside the military industrial establishment, including the CIA.

The amount of genetically modified (GM) animals employed in scientific studies in Britain has surpassed a number of normal laboratory animals for the first time, according to official statistics that reveal a 9 percent all-inclusive rise in the management of laboratory animals last year.

Some 4,033,310 animals were employed in scientific experiments begun in 2012, an advance of 322,689, or 9 percent over the previous year. There were 1.91 million scientific procedures practiced with GM animals in 2012 opposed to 1.68.m procedures on healthy animals.

Not long ago, Chinese scientists inserted genes for human milk proteins into a mouse’s genome and have since created herds of humanized-milk-producing goats. In the meantime, researchers at the University of Michigan have a way of putting a human anal sphincter into a mouse as a means of discovering better methods for fecal incontinence, and doctors are building animals with humanized immune systems to help as subjects for new HIV vaccines.

Federal workers and contractors are required to pay special attention to the lifestyles, attitudes, and behaviors, like financial problems, irregular working hours or unexplained travel of co-workers as a way to predict whether they might do harm to the United States.

Managers of special insider threat offices will have regular, timely, and, if possible, electronic, access to workers’ personnel, payroll, disciplinary and personal contact files, as well as records of their use of recorded and unclassified computer networks, polygraph results, travel records, and financial disclosure forms.

The Department of Health and Human Services and Environmental Protection Agency are proposing the change because of a rise in fluorosis, a condition that causes spotting and streaking on children’s teeth. Nevertheless, we have identified that fluoride in our water and in our toothpaste has been dangerous for us for years, but we still continue to use it, why?

At the greatest vulnerability levels, using a mobile phone half an hour a day across a 10-year span, the research discovered a 40 percent increased chance of glioma brain tumors.

Prescription medications eliminate some 200,000 Americans every year. Will that number go up, now that the largest clinical tests are conducted abroad, on sick Russians, homeless Poles, and slum-dwelling Chinese, in areas where regulation is essentially nonexistent, the F.D.A. doesn’t reach, and mistakes can end up in pauper’s graves?

The act of doing any research on animals is wrong. Furthermore, if you think people believe this is not an act of abuse why aren’t the public lining up to be utilised for the experiments? Human beings still must learn to value all forms of life.

If you debate about the role of pharmaceutical companies in the treatment of mental health. There is indeed a remarkable confusion between drug companies and the medical occupation. On the one hand, the drug manufacturing develops new medication and encourages drug use in order to make money.

On the other hand, the medical service prescribes these medicines in order to treat people. One might believe that there would be a strong symbiotic connection between these two organisations. However, dismally there is emerging proof that this is not the situation and that the relationship is especially unhealthy in the case of drugs used for mental ill health. This situation stems from faults on both sides, and also from government policy.

In the 1950s a whole army of psychotropic drugs, drugs that alter the mind, entered the medical scene. These involved major sedatives such as chlorpromazine (Largactil), since developed into a series of antipsychotic drugs, antidepressants, tricyclics, and monoamine oxidase inhibitors, presently joined by the SSRIs such as Prozac, and so-called secondary tranquillisers, the benzodiazepines, Valium and Librium, now which includes a number of Z-drug hypnotics such as zopiclone and others.

These initial findings were quite interesting at the time, as they appeared to guarantee a remedy for all mental disorders. Schizophrenics using antipsychotics could be let out of the hospital to live, presumably securely, in society.

Subjects with depression could, supposedly, be released from self-destructive feelings and from the perceived peril of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Furthermore, the secondary or primary stresses of life could be completely restored with quiet and calm sleep induced by benzodiazepines.

One prominent neurologist, Sir Henry Miller, also wrote that from now on all mental disease could be corrected with a few tablets and there would be no demand for psychiatrists.

At the same time, it was thought, by a kind of stupid reasoning, that the reason of mental sickness would be shown by these medications. Antipsychotics were determined to prevent brain receptors for the neurotransmitter dopamine, consequently, schizophrenia must be due to an abundance of dopamine.

Antidepressants were determined to improve the activity of the neurotransmitter serotonin, consequently, depression must be due to a loss of serotonin. Benzodiazepines enhanced the activity of the neurotransmitter GABA, so anxiety must be owing to the absence of GABA.

These naive and simple hopes turned out to be incorrect. 50 years later we still do not know the cause of schizophrenia or depression or even how the medications work. The prediction of these ailments has altered little.

Furthermore, anxiety is as prevalent as ever. It has grown apparent that the medications do not remedy any mental disorder. They do manage some symptoms but have limited impact on the underlying processes.

And, of course, the drugs carry their own disadvantages. But these same drugs have made billions of dollars for drug companies.

Following the innovative drug developments, there was research in the pharmaceutical manufacturing for unique drugs acting on dopamine, serotonin or GABA. Once the necessary work had been done, drug firms did not have to foot the expense of producing new drugs.

It was much more inexpensive to produce (me too) drugs with comparable effects. As a consequence, our society ended up with over 20 separate but comparable composites in each group of antipsychotics, antidepressants, and sedative/hypnotics. They went where the demand was.

Plus there was a change in the way drug firms were run. At the start, the pharmaceutical trade was controlled by chemists. This was not so bad. Presently most of them are driven by people with MBAs, or things similar to that, people who could be the chief executive of Renault, Volvo or anything. They don’t know about drugs, but apparently, they do know where the business is.

It’s all about marketing and making money, and that is the architecture of how a corporation is run, and this is how our whole society is run as well. It’s a chilly concept, and we would be insane to think otherwise. It’s a solemn business making money off people’s disabilities because we suddenly become a prisoner to those companies who tailor our needs to their own pocket.

Parasites to the point of extortion, and it’s a costly business making money off those that are dying. No wonder citizens of the United Kingdom are discontented.

As Tony Blair faces further allegations over misleading parliament regarding the occupation of Iraq, another new rumour seems fixed to overwhelm him. A whistleblower, identified only as Major X to preserve his integrity, has declared that army employees attired in police uniform to act against organisations deemed fanatical.

Plus he has declared that Blair knew about the army’s operations and even approved them. The journalist at the heart of the turmoil encompassing the former Prime Minister is demanding a public investigation into the accusations.

In the beginning of November, the political weblog site SKWAWKBOX detailed assertions regarding the notorious 1984 Battle of Orgreave. It alleged that, throughout the battle, Margaret Thatcher employed the army against striking mineworkers.

In a meeting with an objective witness, the weblog asserted that the government employed military staff and horses. It further stated that the police and supposed military commenced the battle. Also, it affirmed that many police did not have official numbers on their uniform. Furthermore, that some of those were handling weaponry such as knuckledusters.

The eyewitness’s claims to further back up additional contemporary facts from the battle. But now, SKWAWKBOX has talked to a different whistleblower. On 22 November, the weblog announced that Major X, a previous army officer, had identified Blair in fiery revelations.

The affirmations point that Orgreave may not be the only time the army outfitted up as police. Also, the officer claims that Blair had an extensive understanding of the evil operations.

SKWAWKBOX says that Major X’s allegations:

Shows army employees dressing in police uniform to act not only against organisations that are anything but extreme. However, against the extremely shocking and questionable fanatics possible, with the extensive information of at least two serving Prime Ministers (John Major and Tony Blair).

Major X professes to be a former army officer. He said to SKWAWKBOX it was his responsibility to appoint army corps in support of police operations against any organisation deemed die-hard under both Major and Blair’s governments.

Major X maintains the army systematically assigned the army employees with false police ID and clothes. He further states both Major and Blair knew of the army’s activities and even sanctioned them. However, Major X goes further.

He maintains that armed employees imitated police against many organisations, groups, and people during the 1990s. These supposedly included striking firemen, prison officers, and animal rights activists. Yet most shockingly, Major X insists that even the Royal Family and EU representatives were spied upon by these possible hidden army corps.

He alleges that the purpose of the army against these organisations and people was:

Essentially for scrutiny, but occasionally for infiltration and arrest procedures.

Major X’s entire discussion with SKWAWKBOX shows even more shocking details. Basically, he maintains that the army was employed as Black Ops, to beef up police forces facing anybody considered a threat to the country. However, Blair’s supposed awareness and permission of these bad operations is possibly the most disturbing aspect.

If correct, this results to, at best, yet another effective clampdown by Blair on trade unions and left-wing parties. But at worst, Major X’s atomic declaration implies a blatant misuse of authority by Blair. One which extends the meaning of extremist to satisfy his own, alienating agenda.

However, Major X’s disclosures, when compared with the equivalent actions at Orgreave, further ask the questions, just why has the Conservative government rejected an examination into Orgreave? Furthermore what precisely is it attempting to cover up?

These are accusations necessitate a complete and total public interrogation.

Nobody realises it, but we are we living in a dictatorship, why do we vote these people in and let them control us like this? They simply run feral once they have control and do bidding for someone else since it unquestionably isn’t for our good.

A number of people are saying that Blair is a lawbreaker, megalomaniac, bordering on idiotic and somebody stated someplace that Tony Blair has got more skeletons in the cupboard than Fred West, and that Blair is a dangerous criminal.

The worst implication of this article is the obvious evidence that Parliamentary Leader Party star Tony Blair was as dangerous as the Conservative Party at stifling human rights and freedom of speech.

We want a true leader who fights for the common people, helping with their needs, by the preference of their own, or at least more fairness, one who actually understands that by attending our needs they serve their own.

That is a patriot, not all them unlawful constituents who make believe that wearing poppies whilst you screw the poorest, sick and extremely destitute out of a few quid per week so they can make nice with their billionaire sponsors. Is the best this country can do?

The Conservative Party and Tony Blair have no remorse, and the Mainstream Media encourages them in their excessive misuse of power and administration of the truth.

If Thatcher did it, Major did it and Blair did it then hands up anybody who believes for a millisecond that Cameron and Brown didn’t do it and May won’t.

Benjamin Giroux was assigned an open-ended homework task by his teacher. When challenged to compose a poem, Benjamin chose to utilise it as a chance to show others what it’s like to live with autism. Being autistic, Benjamin has perpetually considered himself different when matched to his peers.

Whilst he wants to be treated equal to everybody else, he realises his Autism makes him come across differently. In a poem titled “I Am,” Benjamin strives to show what his world is like. When his father Sonny read it, he was overwhelmed with emotions.

Once you read his poem, it’s clear to see why. Picture reading lines such as “I feel like a boy in outer space / I touch the stars and feel out of place” or “I say I ‘feel like a castaway’ / I dream of a day that that’s okay.”

As a parent, listening to these words from your child will choke you up. Sonny told that he and his wife were proud of their child for writing such a poem, but they didn’t realise he felt this way. They are so proud, although so sad, that this was how he felt.

The poem has gone viral on the Internet since it was first posted. The National Autism Association highlighted Benjamin’s poem and shared it with all of its supporters. Presently, people all over the world can get a real perception of what it’s like to live with Autism.

This is all thanks to Benjamin and his moving poem.

I am certain there are numerous people out there who would love to feel like they could reach the stars or listen to the sounds in the air, but Benjamin is not alone, there are countless children similar to Benjamin out there, that go through the same challenges every day of their life.

Sadly, these children don’t make friends easily, which makes their life really hard since regular people don’t understand them, and that makes them pretty confused since they sense that nobody likes them, that’s not the problem, the difficulty is, they just do not understand them, but these children are really beautiful, it’s really such a disgrace that nobody is ready to get to know them for who they really are, or even to attempt to understand them.

We are simply ‘normals”, however, to an Autistic child, they see us and think we are weird, of course, we are not weird, but to them in their world, we are weird, and they are normal, to us, they are weird and we are normal, but “what is normal?”

The thing is this, in their world, they are comfortable and secure, but in our world, our world is pretty scary for them. It frustrates them, so we have to take a tiny part of our world and make it secure for them, so they are not so disoriented since people with Autism don’t like change, and our world is infinitely evolving around them, whereas in their world, nothing shifts.

These children do have feelings, hidden feelings that they never show anyone, and they are all unique in their own way.

We are all of us, different in our own way, we are all individual in some way or another, none of us is identical. Nevertheless, conformism in our culture wants us all to be identical, but these children do not fit into that level of conventionality.

Benjamin’s poem is brilliant, his message is stark, but he has hit the nail on its head.

Some people feel guilty about a child with Autism since they don’t believe that they can talk to them, it seems like a whole different level to them, but actually, all they have to do is smile, you don’t have to manage the situation, they will do that for you because all you have to do is adapt to their world, and see them for who they really are.

It’s a touchy subject since there are a lot of people out there that don’t know how to manage the situation and display hostility towards Autistic people, also family members because they just don’t understand but let me acquaint you, these children are not monsters, and to think this is ridiculous.

Being Autistic might make them slightly different, but what a dull world we would live in if we were all the same, and we must open our horizons if we are actually going to communicate with others, whether they be Autistic or not.

A premature newborn was left to die in a sluice room at a declining NHS Trust hospital in Manchester. The newborn, which was born too early to revive, was not cared for the two hours of her brief life and died alone in a place utilised for the distribution of medical garbage.

The upsetting occurrence was reported in a confidential private report into continuing deficits, poor team attitudes and clinical failures in the maternity departments of North Manchester General and Royal Oldham hospitals. A study of maternity services at Pennine Acute Hospital NHS Trust, which runs the two hospitals, was acquired through Freedom of Information inquiries by the Manchester Evening News.

It described a series of preventable deaths and long-term injuries made by failures over numerous years. The article described how one woman perished of a disastrous hemorrhage after her manifestations were put down to mental collapse and another was left with a colostomy because her condition was missed three times.

It further stated the Trust was putting women at unacceptable danger by taking on too many high-risk gestations at North Manchester General owing to the absence of beds at Oldham. The infant was born just ahead of the statutory age of viability, which is about 23 weeks. As by recommendation, workers did not attempt to keep her alive, however, the statement announced basic empathy was missing.

When the baby was born alive and went on to live for about another two hours, the team affiliates associated with the administration did not obtain a calm spot to remain with her to nurse her as she departed. They instead put her in a Moses basket and left her in the sluice room to die alone.

Long-term failures in the departments led to great levels of harm for babies in particular and reiterated warnings over years had not led to changes. The newspaper announced the trust sought to quash the story and even pretended it did not exist.

The article distinguished plain indication of bad decision-making which has resulted in significant injury to women and genuine problems on maternity wards.

This resulted in large levels of abuse for infants in particular, which has a vital life-long impact. The Trust had a huge reliance on locum workers, more than one-third of the specialist employees, and as such was quite vague in its structure and lacked particular abilities and capabilities, which had directed to adverse consequences for the women.

In one case, a newborn died because its mother had a unique blood type which workers declined to recognise. It quoted disturbing repeated problems across the administration, comprising failures to monitor fundamental important symptoms, bad documentation, important lab results that went unchecked, and important lost data left off patient records.

The trust announced that extra help had been taken on and improvement was being made to enhance care. A report outlined a set mindset amongst workers who favoured to see patients conditions as uncomplicated and repeated violation of the patient’s welfare methods and inadequate enforcement monitoring of the large amounts of agency workers on the trust’s books.

The Trust received numerous legal suits and spent out more in losses than any other mid-2010 and 2015, almost half of them correlating to mothers and babies, payouts which calculated at higher than £25 million.

The precedence is for all of the trust’s duties to reach the lofty criteria that patients demand and warrant. Evidently, they are unwaveringly making the needed changes so that patients can get safe, high-quality care across all of their services.

In addition to the placement of a new Head of Midwifery, 31 new midwives started in post across the two maternity units at North Manchester and Oldham last month.

One episode recognises that a newborn died following childbirth as the mother was not identified through her antenatal supervision as being rhesus negative and given the proper treatment to stop any opposing impacts on her baby.

Nevertheless, this is not good enough, no baby should die because of a clerical mistake. Obviously this was not intentionally done, however, this should not have happened in the first place, and the pain that a family has to face when they lose a newborn is so immense, and further preparation should be given to staff, and if there are not enough funds to do so, then the government must find it, and fast before any more deaths happen.

There have been too many cutbacks to the NHS by our government, this is fact. This is a conscious action by our government to cut funds to accumulate wealth, however, when you are bartering with life, there are no cutbacks to conserve funds, we are dealing with human beings, living people, with lifeblood coursing through their veins, you simply can’t put a figure on that.

Human beings are priceless!

According to Benefit assessors, dementia sufferers can now progress. I’m overwhelmed with excitement, I didn’t realise that medical science had advanced that greatly. Is there something that is not being reported, and are we being kept in the dark?

Numerous people living with degenerative infirmities such as dementia, Parkinson’s and multiple sclerosis (MS) are losing part or all of their disability benefits after being reassessed. Wendy Mitchell, who has early onset dementia, told that her benefits have been terminated following a reassessment, despite her knowledge that her health has got worse.

It took her independence away completely, it was terrible, by this, we immediately know that the system is completely broken. How can they tell this sick woman that she is better than she was? Hundreds and thousands live with an incurable illness, a sickness that can only get worse. Many depend on the state to fund the additional expenses of getting about, however, that help is being taken away.

It’s like having an especially bad dose of the flu, and you can’t walk like you usually do. Some days are better than others, some days people are much more mobile. Eight years ago Diane Barrett was diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease. Diane has trouble walking, but when she’s on the proper medicine she can drive small distances.

Diane did remark to her children that she was concerned as she had learned from people who had lost their mobility part of their allowance and lost their car, and all her relatives said, that wouldn’t happen to Diane because she’s got a debilitating illness that’s not going to get any better, it’s only going to get more serious.

But she was completely gobsmacked when the letter came. For 7 years Diane got disability living allowance, however, DLA is gradually being phased out, and being succeeded by Personal Independence Payments (PIP). The idea is to base the amount you get, not just on the disability but how it affects your daily life.

The change indicates that everyone has to be assessed. Diane was told her needs had changed and the amount that she received for getting about fell from £57.45 to 0. Without the Mobility Allowance Diane can’t have a car and she doesn’t have any additional money.

It completely affected her life, it has taken her independence away entirely. Without a car, she would find it extremely difficult to get about. There is a bus, but she finds it really hard to get on and off the bus, and they don’t wait for her to sit down, and she has fallen on them before she had the car.

She was really afraid, and it made her realise how serious her Parkinson’s was, and plus it’s very depressing, and with Parkinson’s you can get a little low sometimes. Therefore, Diane had to give up her old car, but she asked for the ruling to be reviewed and lost the second time. Six months later, she took it to a full appeal in front of the judge, the tribunal took just ten minutes to conclude the government was wrong.

Diane was so relieved because at last somebody was hearing her and accepting that she was speaking the truth.

The government would state that they are paying out much more as a nation on things like disability benefits, and that they have to run these checks and that they have to do this to people to make certain the right people get it.

Diane accepts that, but she believes straight away they see a piece of paper and it states somebody has Parkinson’s disease, Dementia, MS, any continuous things, that person is not going to get over it, they are just not going to get better.

To pass for a car under the government’s mobility scheme you have to get the highest rate of PIP, which gives you further other benefits, a disabled badge, and free road tax, but faced with that increasing bill for disability payments, the government has been toughening the rules, and say the evaluation method is more difficult.

This explains how this is affecting people with serious conditions. Under the former DLA system 82% of people with Parkinson’s disease received full payment, but under PIP that amount has fallen to 40%. It’s the identical fundamental design with other conditions like MS at 93% and arthritis at 83%, MS reduced to 50% and arthritis to 24% with PIP.

The government states that in general, more people get the highest degree of assistance under PIP than under DLA. Plus more people with MS, Osteoarthritis and Parkinson’s are getting the highest possible rate for daily living expenses.

That wouldn’t cover the mobility allowance, people who lose a car can get additional assistance to purchase their old vehicle outright, though that is paid for by a non-profit making organisation, rather than the government.

At Parkinson’s UK, they have set up a devoted organisation to deal with benefit cases. The foundation states that people with a degenerative illness, already on the highest level of support should not have their needs continually reassessed.

The experience of going for an assessment is very demanding, and people with Parkinson’s go to the trouble to look well and take their medicine and get up early in the morning to get to the assessment, and because they seem well on that day the assessor frequently says well you don’t look sick, you don’t require that support any longer.

The newest figures reveal the numbers appealing a ruling are expanding. There are presently more than 6,043 per month, and the vast proportion of 65% is overthrown by the judge. It’s shocking that 2 in every 3 PIP decisions appealed is successful, and its excellent that those decisions are then reversed and those people are getting the levels of assistance that they require, but we shouldn’t be in a situation where people have to depend on the appeals process to get that assistance in the first place, people should be able to expect that the first decision that they get will be the right one.

The government states that PIP assessments are carried out by qualified health professionals and that judgments are made following reflection of all the data provided, comprising supporting data from their GP.

Wendy Mitchell has dementia. And she began to forget the most ridiculous of words, and that’s when it hit her that something wasn’t quite right. Her life has changed, solely from the point that she had to leave work. Previously she could chat about anything and everything, but now she has loads of notes.

Wendy never got DLA, she was one of the first to be moved directly onto PIP following her diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease, under the current policy she still has to be reassessed every 18 months. When her latest decision came through she was told her requirements had changed, and her entire benefits would be slashed from £77 a week to nothing.

She just uses it to live, it allows her to live independently, that’s the entire goal of the benefit itself. It permits her to remain and to live in her own home.

Reliable statistics reveal that overall under PIP, numerous people with dementia, seem to be getting the higher rate of payments. The experts state that’s not the whole story, and the Alzheimer’s society maintains its gotten at least 250 calls from people having difficulties with the benefit covering the last 18 months.

Wendy doesn’t remember the content of the meeting, however, she remembers feeling that she wasn’t there very long and the person didn’t ask her many questions to encourage her to remember what she was supposed to be saying, and she didn’t believe that the person had any recognition of her health problems, and she thought that the person lacked any understanding of dementia whatsoever.

Furthermore, she then got the shocking letter that informed her that she was no longer going to get any payment whatsoever. Plus a list of all of the stuff that she was supposedly better at, that she was 18 months before. It’s absurd since she wishes that she was better, who wouldn’t when they have dementia.

It made her feel so demoralised. She immediately recognised that the system is broken since how can they tell her that she’s become better when obviously she will simply get worse, there is no cure for dementia, and there are specific situations when dealing with people who have dementia, MS and additional illnesses comparable to this, that are not reversible, and their infirmity will never get better.

You can’t just make them healthier with a snap of the finger, but their pain can be reduced a tiny bit if they are given the money that enables them to maybe live independently.

It’s a story we learn about in the papers every day, but these people haven’t hit the jackpot when given this money from PIP, it’s an indispensable component of their everyday life. People don’t simply wake one morning and pronounce, that they’ll be ill merely for the pleasure of it so they can get money and state they are sick.

PIP can spread faeces on the sick and disabled, they can present them as shirkers, but the critics know that is not actually the case.

Look about you when your out buying clothes, in a restaurant, or even simply out on the street passing people by. Observe and see, view with your soul, and you will see that almost every other person is impaired in one way or another.

See the person next to you, he/she has glasses, that is an impairment, or the person waiting at the bus stop with the hearing aid. Even your neighbour next door who is a Diabetic, or suffers from Epilepsy, we might not see these ailments, but they are there, right in front of our eyes, and simply because we do not see them, does not indicate they do not exist, and they are quite real.

My mum used to say to me that nobody else can feel somebody else’s pain, and that is very accurate. Just because you can’t see it or feel it, does not imply it’s not there, just because a person seems in good health, doesn’t indicate that they are. It’s called an invisible illness because that’s precisely what it is, invisible because it’s not visible on the outside, it’s on the inside destroying that person like a deadly growth.

Therefore, I urge people who work for PIP, when you next sit next to somebody on the bus or in a queue, take a careful look at that person, they might look well and in excellent health, but you have no concept of what’s going on within their body, and how it might affect their daily life.

As human beings, none of us are perfect, and the government should regard this message that one day it could be them that are in a comparable position as these sick disabled people that they are taking money away from, and if a hospital or doctor has confirmed that they are ill, and their situation will never get better, then that should be sufficient, full stop!

A Tesco store in Edinburgh has been cited of discriminating against state school children by making them line outside whilst private school students are permitted to come and go as they please. It has been alleged that pupils from Boroughmuir high school, bordering the city centre, were made to stand behind a barrier by Tesco workers and only permitted to access their local store in tiny assemblies.

However, pupils at the nearby George Watson’s college were not stopped at all. The problem was established by a parent of one kid at the state school, who stated it was a form of discrimination.

Everyone should line up or nobody should. It should not matter what school you come from, otherwise, it becomes bigotry.

On student who is at Boroughmuir, had to stand in the line each day. He was not one to fuss however, it was getting him down. He and his friends were frustrated since they had to remain outside while others went before of them. Tesco further guards the entrance in that they have a person there, making certain they line up.

Pupils were rather annoyed about the situation, but it’s very good that someone is ultimately sticking up for them, and they don’t want to get into trouble or to show their school in a poor light but they just believe it is wrong. Once they attempted to walk in behind a crowd of pupils from George Watson’s college. A team affiliate granted him, but not the Watson’s boys, out of the shop.

A post of criticism was put on Twitter last week and a Tesco spokesperson replied with a list of tweets. Basically, it is stated that the private school has a lesser number of children, which is faster and simpler for the store.

I find this really difficult to understand as most meager shops permit school children into their premises, however, if there are several kids, throughout lunch time recess or after school, the store will then allow two children in at a time.

Nevertheless, they don’t confine them like animals, they just make them remain outside until two come out and then two go in. It’s not rocket science, and I really believed that Tesco had more intellect than that, but apparently not, and think that prejudice is a good thing.

Not really, considering the founder of Tesco was a Jew, and I guess that Jack Cohen would be turning in his grave right about now. I know that Jack Cohen was born in 1898, and prejudice was prevalent back then, and it appears that nothing has improved since then, one would have assumed that we would have moved forth, but nobody should be victimized, so obviously things have not improved.

The Investigatory Powers Bill, or as it has been more aptly called, the Snooper’s Charter, is now as good as passed. It just requires Royal Assent before it becomes law. Therefore before you Google something, here’s the full list of agencies that can now ask for any UK citizen’s browsing history, as outlined in Schedule 4 of the bill:

Police forces maintained under section 2 of the Police Act 1996
Metropolitan police force
City of London police force
Police Service of Scotland
Police Service of Northern Ireland
British Transport Police
Ministry of Defence Police
Royal Navy Police
Royal Military Police
Royal Air Force Police
Security Service
Secret Intelligence Service
GCHQ
Ministry of Defence
Department of Health
Home Office
Ministry of Justice
National Crime Agency
HM Revenue & Customs
Department for Transport
Department for Work and Pensions
An ambulance trust in England
Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service
Competition and Markets Authority
Criminal Cases Review Commission
Department for Communities in Northern Ireland
Department of the Economy in Northern Ireland
Department of Justice in Northern Ireland
Financial Conduct Authority
Fire and rescue authorities under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004
Food Standards Agency
Food Standards Scotland
Gambling Commission
Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority
Health and Safety Executive
Independent Police Complaints Commissioner
Information Commissioner
NHS Business Services Authority
Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Care Trust
Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service Board
Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Regional Business Services Organisation
Office of Communications
Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
Police Investigations and Review Commissioner
Scottish Ambulance Service Board
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
Serious Fraud Office
Welsh Ambulance Services National Health Service Trust

 

If you care about this and don’t want it to get in, you should sign the petition here:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/173199

Everybody will be able to view your complete internet records, comprising the taxman, DWP, and Food Standards Agency. As the Investigatory Powers Bill establishes into legislation, internet providers will be obliged to retain a complete history of each site that all of its clients has toured.

Organisations comprising the Food Standards Agency and the Department for Work and Pensions will be capable of seeing UK residents’ complete internet browsing history inside weeks. The Investigatory Powers Bill, which was all but legislated into law this week, requires internet providers to retain a complete record of internet connection records (ICRs) for a year and to make them accessible to the Government if required.

Those ICRs in effect serve as a complete list of each website that people have visited, rather than accumulating which particular pages are toured or what’s done on them. ICRs will be made accessible to a broad variety of government organizations.

Those cover expected law enforcement organisations such as the police, the military, and the secret service, but additionally comprises organisations such as the Food Standards Agency, the Gambling Commission, councils and the Welsh Ambulance Services National Health Service Trust.

The corresponding part of the Bill further specifies the lowest office or rank that each person within those organisations must be if they want access to the records. In the police, for example, any viewer must be at least an inspector or a superintendent.

Consequently, the DWP will be watching the sick and the disabled to see how long they go online, any longer than ten minutes and they will declare them fit for work. Or the unemployed to view if they are only utilizing job sites 24 hours a day to obtain work, anything else and they get sanctioned.

HMRC will further be watching ebay for none payment of income tax. I get how the officials might want to look at records of where people have been touring on the internet, however, what bothers me is the fact that that the prying into people’s lives has no administrative oversight.

When you give agencies the powers to authorise their individual snooping, it ends up being exploited and utilised for petty things. A council, for instance, put an entire family under scrutiny because they believed they weren’t residing in the catchment region of a school, the children as well as the grown-ups.

It should be utilised for actually finding subversives and dangerous offenders.

The nobody has the right to encroach on somebody else’s personal life, and by snooping into another person’s private life, which then makes us vulnerable. It bothers me since once they can pry into our private affairs, they have complete authority over us and we need to take that on board, and not just go along with it.

We must endure and face the powers that be, we must wake up and smell the coffee, if we fall asleep, they will ultimately put us each into a unconscious state. We must be the weapons of war, be our own destiny, and not for somebody else to make it for us.

It appears exhausting, I know, but we need to fight against the establishment before they bleed us of all that we have. If we just give up now, then, in the end, we will have nothing, we will just continue to exist.

We should not have to haggle with the establishment, but still, we require the strength to do so. If they are not going to be compliant, then neither should we, and we should be inflexible and obtain the upper hand. We should not permit them to deceive us and fleece us of everything right that we have.

To strip us of our freedoms, and treat us less than human beings, is the image of complete and absolute servitude. Therefore, once again we must adapt but not for their advantage, but for our own. We need to open our eyes and be sharp because at the moment we are dying because we are voiceless and inarticulate and the consequences of that will be catastrophic.

Continue reading “Buckingham Palace To Get £369m Repair”

I noticed on facebook that a number of people from the Basildon District area had applied for housing because of special needs for their children or because they themselves were disabled. It used to be a very standard procedure when applying for housing because one might need a bigger home because they had more children, or because one might have become disabled, they simply filled out an application, it was sent off with the documents that were required and they went onto the housing register and waited.

Presently all has to be done online by way of the Internet, so you’re generally bolloxed if you are old and don’t have the internet, and have to rely on somebody else to do it for you.

I was filling out a questionnaire online for somebody a few of weeks ago, I won’t go into who it was for, as that would trespass into their privacy, and I’m not in the practice of doing things like that, contrary the council who desired to the know the ins and outs of this person, and their life, who I was doing the application for.

I am what I would call pretty internet friendly, therefore I felt that it would be a breeze filling in one of these forms, but crikey, was I mistaken. It took me three hours to fill in, and in the end. I was starting to tear my hair out!

Online application times out every 30 minutes, so if you’re not a highly skilled typer, it times out before you have even completed the page and you have to begin the page all over again. Fortunately for me I am a rather fast typer, however, as the person, I was filling the application out for had a bunch of stuff to put in, it still timed me out, and oh dear I had to begin the page all over again, therefore why it took me three hours to do.

I was browsing through many of the remarks that people had put concerning their housing application, and one woman had said that she had been turned down for housing, which I was completely devastated because of her child’s requirements.

One woman put. “My daughter is severely disabled and we’ve been refused. Currently appealing”.

She went on to say, following a woman asking her what she had been denied on, and she went on to state that she has a two bedroom house without currently a way to get her child upstairs. She has 2 children, one that is disabled, who can’t walk or talk and suffers from epilepsy.

The house is modified however owing to bedroom dimensions and the way they have had to adjust the quarters they can’t currently use the adaptions, and the council has declined them a modified three bed, stating that they don’t require it on medical grounds.

The woman was denied her application and was posted a letter saying that she had the right to appeal and to send in more supporting documents, so she emailed them affirming her reasons, with five letters from experts.

We realize that there is a housing deficit, but the difference, in this case, is that this woman has a disabled child, who can’t walk, or talk, and suffers from epilepsy, and she has five letters from specialists, isn’t this sufficient evidence, or do you really have to be dead before you are given something?

Obviously, Basildon Council wants your blood before they give you something. Furthermore, it beggars belief to suggest that the council will not house a family that has a disabled child and that child can’t get up the stairs, despite the fact that adaptations had been made to the home.

Consequently, when the council did the modifications, they simply did not take other things into reckoning, and it was a misuse of funds on the modifications in the first place, when really they may as well have simply rehoused this family into a home that would have been more fitting, like a bungalow without any stairs.

The problem is, the council has too many departments operating on various matters, and the one hand doesn’t know what another hand is doing, in other words, there is a total and absolute cock up going on in the offices at Basildon District Council.

Plainly, the alterations that Basildon Council did for this family were of no value to them, and actually somebody in the council should have attended the home and speculated about what was going on, and acted respectively, but apparently they thought they were cutting corners when making these modifications, and in the long run, it will end up costing them more capital than they first thought.

It will not make any difference to the council to rehouse this family to a more fitting home for ie a bungalow. This family would just move out of one home into another, leaving that home vacant for somebody else to move into.

Consequently, the council will not lose out on a home, they will just have to make adjustments to the home that the family will be moving out of, which of course will cost the council more money, but had they done their job properly in the first place, they wouldn’t have wasted any capital at all.

This is not the family’s dilemma, nor did they create the problem, the council did, therefore, why should this family suffer for the councils total cock up?

Immigration. That’s what we hear, that’s one of the central battlegrounds of the future EU referendum. It’s everywhere. Everyone is declaring that they’re taking our jobs. They’re stealing our benefits They’re killing our national identity. Curse those emigrants. There nothing but trouble.

It’s correct, there is little disputing how the 1992 Maastricht Treaty forced European borders to free passage of people, sparking an increase in European emigrants coming into the United Kingdom. Of this, there is no uncertainty.

Furthermore, let’s not pretend there are no concerns resulting from such changes, and it would be ill-advised to do so. We can call on Joanne Harris’s Chocolat Effect to see that when others come into a neighborhood with their different ways, they can start to shape the foundation of that community.

Plus now, with other nationalities bringing their individual cultures, languages, and ways of doing things, there will unquestionably be changes we witness on the streets of our communities, cities, and towns.

Plus it does become a numbers contest, the more newcomers that come, the more everything can be replaced, the more our distinguished British values will gradually change in front of our very eyes, whether they be queuing customs, driving customs, social conduct customs, whether it be communication obstacles in the classroom, at the doctor’s surgery, or in the supermarket.

New patterns of behavior have been adjusted and different foods have arrived on our high streets. Unquestionably, things have changed, the start of Polski schlep into our vocabulary is proof enough of it.

It becomes less when in Rome and more if you can’t beat them, join them.

My great grandmother came to Great Britain when she was a young teen from Russia because of the anti-Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire. She and her two sisters put down roots, together with other Jews that were immigrants at the time.

However, there was still anti-Semitism even back then. In Britain, too, Jews were classified as a negative unrest within the nation, and they figured extensively as an advocate of representative government. In addition, Jews were continuously used as a negative foil for the meaning of what was English or British.

It is likely that throughout the ages, nothing much will improve since people don’t like reform, clearly, change is not sound. Nevertheless, when I was growing up, there were no corner shops that opened until the early hours of the morning, in some areas, or at least 7am until 7pm at night.

Presently we definitely rely on those corners stores, and if they disappeared from our neighborhoods, people would not know what to do. We rely on those stores, even though we whine that they are operated by newcomers, therefore we literally have no right to whine about them.

We appear to have separated ourselves from communities completely, though previously, societies held collectively, supported each other, nursed the weak and sick, and looked after each other’s kids when it was required.

We Britain’s were a force to be reckoned with, we were an assertive nation, and we attempted to stay away from hatred, particularly following the second world war. It took a long time to clean up the mayhem that was created by Hitler, and we should have learned from it.

Now all our government wants to do is go to war with other nations, and its weird that America wants to provide arms to other countries so that they can blow themselves up, and for some strange reason we get the blame for it in the United Kingdom, but of course, we are just as much to blame.

British firms ship military devices and technologies to handfuls of nations globally. Figures published prove what shipments are made and to who. In 2011, export Licenses were given for 45 different kinds of shipment to Egypt, 43 to Saudi Arabia and 38 to Iraq.

Licenses were given for the shipping of 10 types of weaponry and munitions to Saudi Arabia, comprising sniper rifles and submachine rifles. Things have not improved following World war 2.

The issue, nevertheless, actually, is how much of this is a dilemma? Or to put it another way, what aspects of our culture are we really striving to protect? After all, according to the newest developments from the Council of Europe, England and Wales have the largest prison population in Europe, balancing squarely with the United Kingdom, having some of the greatest rates of car robberies, brutal attacks, thefts and dog attacks in Western Europe.

This certainly shouldn’t be defended. Furthermore, in terms of education, according to the PISA report 2016, the United Kingdom has literacy rates behind Lithuania, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, and Hungry.

Plus, the most struggling assembly is the ethnic assembly illustrated as white British. Again, something we certainly should try to improve. And in terms of health, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of The United Nations, Britain exceeds the list of the most overweight countries in the European Union.

In short, the United Kingdom has multiple problems inside its personal culture that we should not be proud of, and for which the small symmetry of immigrants coming into the realm cannot possibly be condemned.

Many of our difficulties are home-grown, they come from within. So let’s be realistic about this, the actual problem is not immigration. It might be a sideshow, however, it surely is not the central issue.

Immigration is not the source of all the evils in our society today. The true problem is that we, as a society, appear to be refusing to face up to the reality that our own citizens are far more accountable for the decay of what is good and grand about Britain.

The answer is not to be distracted by where people are from or what color their skin is or what doctrine hovers around their neck. These things distract from the actual point. What we should be concentrating on who is ready to roll up their sleeves, dig in, live by the law, look after their well-being, make the effort in our schools, and make our society cohesive in a way that serves for all of us, one that is secure for our children, nonviolent for our aging, and cleaner for our tomorrow.

And we can only do this if we work collectively and support each other. If we talk with one another and get to know the people in our towns, wherever they’re from. We each of us must support the lady next door and look after our neighborhood parks.

We collectively must ride mindfully through our roads and not bait our dogs. We communally must keep our roads clean and consider those around us. These are the things we should care about. These are the things we should embrace, our shared values.

It’s our collective duty to do so. Furthermore, we all need to buy in. As a nation, collectively. Since these are the things which are so frequently missing in our culture today. These are the things which are letting us down.

Furthermore, pulling up the EU drawbridge will not resolve our difficulties; it will just change the people we accuse. However, change, as they state, must begin at home. Additionally, there are lots that remain sound and excellent about Britain, it is solid, it is flourishing, it has an antiquity of freedom and liberty, and it is kind and generous. Additionally, we should be pleased that people want to come and live here.

Nevertheless, England is a pretty small place, and we can’t possibly provide for everybody. It’s not a case of not wanting people from other countries to come and live here, it’s a point that this is a really small country, and we cannot fit everyone in.

The land size of the United States is so immense, the whole of the United Kingdom could fit within it more than 40 times over. Whilst Russia, with the greatest land mass of any nation, is 8.5 million times larger than one of the smallest, Monaco.

Nevertheless, immigrants are not to blame. When nations that are under distress require assistance, they will go wherever to get away from that crisis, it is simply survival of the fittest, and they are escaping to preserve their life – can anyone blame them?

If we were in the equivalent position, and Great Britain was in the same position, we would do precisely the same, not only for ourselves but for our children, and it’s an animal impulse to flee from whatever is threatening, and take solitude anywhere they can.

Why would you stay in a country, even if it is your homeland to be blown up? You would want to shield your children, your family, and rightly so. After all, it’s an extremely solemn business, the continuation of your people, that’s why in countries like Africa, woman have more babies. Since, people from those countries, the survival percentage is lower, and more children die young, therefore, they tend to birth larger. amounts of babies.

However, for countless immigrants, the United Kingdom is a core for migrants attempting to find work and people wishing to further their studies. Work and study star quite profoundly as the grounds given by the 526,000 migrants who came to the United Kingdom in 2013.

The number of migrants traveling to Britain for family purposes from outside of the EU did decline, although the numbers have since started to rise. Work is usually quoted as the chief reason migrants come to the United Kingdom. Plus people traveling to the United Kingdom for work incentives is the biggest and fastest-growing category of immigrants.

However, this has not invariably been the cause. In 2011, 232,000 people traveled to the United Kingdom for formal education compared to 184,000 who came here to work. This has shifted since then and in 2013, 177,000 came here to study compared to 214,000 people who came here to work.

This does not imply that our education system is better, it just implies that our education system is better than theirs.

Tightening up visa controls would change how many people come into the United Kingdom.

Immigration is a typical part of an open economy and culture. The difficulty is the current measure of immigration, almost half of it now from the EU, which is just unsustainable. All nations have border restrictions and procedures about who to accept and who to turn away.

The important policy questions are about who and how many people are good for the United Kingdom, and Immigration procedures, just like any other policy area, should be conducted in the best interests of the United Kingdom.

We understand that most migrants come here for a very logical goal, to seek to better their lives and that many make a real contribution to our society and to culture. The problem is the scale that immigration has presently reached with severe results for the proportion of our population and for the ability of our public services to cope.

Great levels of net migration to the United Kingdom are a comparatively new happening. The United Kingdom has periodically encountered stages of immigration, however, never on this current scale. High net migration has produced in fast population increase. The UK population currently stands at about 65 million.

On a large migration situation, which estimates net migration of 265,000, outlines that the UK population will soon grow by about 500,000 a year, the equivalent of a new city the area of Liverpool each year.

This is unsustainable. It would result in the population increasing by almost eight million over the next fifteen years bringing it to 73 million. 75% of this development will be down to future migrants and their children.

The residual population increase will come from the United Kingdom’s existing population, comprising births to immigrants now here. Population growth would not end there. It would proceed to rise towards 80 million in 25 years and continue going upwards.

The United Kingdom is already densely populated by international standards and has a continuing lack of housing. England is twice as crowded as Germany and almost four times as congested as France. To cope with this population boom large sums will have to be used for the development of school places, roads, rail, health and other infrastructure.

This is at a moment when the government is operating a budget deficit and tries to decrease public spending over the long term. Enhanced migration will not create the additional tax income required to meet for such infrastructure development.

The only important inquiry ever administered in the United Kingdom into the financial influence of immigration was carried out by the Select Committee on Economic Affairs of the House of Lords in 2007/08. In April 2008 they reported that the overall economic impact of immigration is expected to be meager, although this disguises important differences across various immigrant groups.

These conclusions have been confirmed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development which noticed in its yearly statement that accounts for the economic consequence of immigration vary, though in most nations it serves to be modest in terms of Gross domestic product and is about zero on average across OECD nations.

The UK economy is presently in a phase of financial increase that was determined by the Office of Budget Responsibility in 2015 to extend over the next few years. Mass immigration contributes to this increase, only because more people make for a healthier market.

This is why it is normal to understand the debate that immigration is great for the marketplace since it raises GDP. Nevertheless, it does not significantly boost GDP per head so does not significantly make for a healthier economy.

The most current Office for Budget Responsibility report estimated that prevailing raised levels of net migration would continue and that this further inflow would total no more than a tenth of one percent of GDP per head of the population. The House of Lords report previously referred to said that they had seen no proof for the debate, made by the government, business and various others, that net immigration, immigration minus emigration, produces notable financial gains for the present UK people.

The expanding marketplace is generating further work opportunities and the numbers of both UK born and migrants in work are rising, however, the vast supply of labour from overseas has been compared with sustained flat growth in wages as businesses have not had to give higher salaries.

Mass immigration is perhaps holding back salaries for those in direct opposition to work, which is usually those who are already economically paid, both British native and former migrants alike. A comparison conducted by the Bank of England recently concluded that the immigrant-native proportion has little bearing on the average occupational salary comparisons of that region and that the greatest influences were seen in the semi and unskilled services division.

Public sentiment is obvious. A vast majority of society want to see immigration reduced. That covers voters of all ethnicities. This is hardly surprising as we all share the same concerns about housing, schools, and the health service.

The higher number of new immigrants, the more challenging it is for everybody to become completely integrated into British society, and it was predicted back in 2005 that the United Kingdom was sleepwalking into segregation.

We are not a well-organised nation since there are no building blocks, and we appear to be at our weakest position, and we are gradually sinking. We appear to have various responses from different people about immigration, some state that they agree with it, some state that they don’t, most don’t.

Nonetheless, we as a nation, the people, people that work, don’t work, disabled or retired appear to have much to say regarding various matters, yet we rarely do anything regarding it. People appear to believe that they can express their way of thinking, however, it’s not essential to do anything regarding it.

You can’t have an appraisal over something if one is not ready to do something about it, if you have something to voice, then it’s important enough to do something about it since nothing is hopeless, and by going ahead with something that we feel strongly about could really end up being successful.

People will tell you it’s not feasible to do something since it will end up being wrong for you, except what if it isn’t? What if it really ended up being beneficial for us as a country? Would that not make us very pleased with what we had become since we had made it that way, and not the government?

Of course, as far as the government are concerned the individuals of this nation babble total and absolute garbage, and we have no concept of how this nation should be run! I beg to disagree with that notion, and I proclaim that we as a country know favorably than everyone else how this nation should be run, recognizing we are the ones that have to survive and endure in it.

Therefore, if that is the case, then shouldn’t we as the people of the country be permitted to determine our future? After all, it’s our continuation that the government is messing about with like some entertainment. We are not pawns on a chess board, we are human beings, and hence should be treated as such, and if that indicates that we should choose our own future, then so be it.

After all, it is stated that “The meek shall inherit the earth” Not Theresa May and her Tory electorates.