Disability Discrimination in Trafford

[Image description: the writer in his wheelchair]

Since October 2016 I have been waiting for Trafford Council (Greater Manchester, England) to offer me a care-support package. They already know I need the assistance from a review done earlier in 2016. Since then I have been eating just once per day (at most) and missing most of the two out of my three lots of medications per day. From unused meds, I calculate I have missed a minimum of 77 (seventy-seven) daytime sets of meds. I have missed innumerable meals (I have memory issues so cannot say exactly how many; but if we say one meal X five days X thirteen weeks, that comes to a minimum of sixty-five (65)). During the week, I have had no-one to help me change my clothing nor help me clean myself. So, I am left abed without help and unattended till my housemate comes home each evening around six to seven. I have limited energy, which means it usually has to be used for eating my one meal.

If I am not considered a priority, goodness knows who is. A social worker did finally visit on 19th January, but I am still awaiting the assessment & recommendations. The situation has not been this dire for disabled folk since the creation of the Welfare State.
 
Thankfully, I have a housemate (who has no legal nor contractural obligation) who checks on me and feeds me of an evening and at weekends when at home. What happens for those totally on their own?

Apparently, the article in the Guardian (link below) apprises that this situation is now widespread throughout at least England (who knows about the rest of the United Kingdom).

We disablies are often forgotten - including by ministers of the government who only speak of "the elderly" when mentioning social care. This is overt disability discrimination and quite possibly disability hate.

The Social Care Crisis Hits Disabled People Hard.

So Why Are They Forgotten?

The Language of Disability

The language used around disability is complex and can be nightmarish to traverse without causing someone offence. So stay chilled and just apologise if someone takes umbrage, without getting into justifications &/or arguments. That's my personal advice anyway.

I personally have no problem with calling myself crippled - by disease & by pain - or handicapped - in the context of "by society". I do not mind calling my impairments, disabilities. And when tweeting I often use - hear the overly-PC-brigade tusk - "disabled" rather than "disabled people" because I can use those six characters more usefully. I also regularly use the term disablies in an attempt to humanise us.

 

[Image description: the author in his wheelchair]

The name of my personal blog is Crippled, Queer, Anglo-European Ranter and hence my nom de plume, Criquaer.

The following article from The Guardian newspaper authored by professional comedienne Penny Pepper is well worth a reading.

We’ve had all the insults. Now we’re reclaiming the language of disability

 

No More Austerity Demonstration, 21st June 2014

[Image descriptions: the crowd & the march; via One Honest Man © u/k]

According to The Guardian in an article published at 20.45:

"An estimated 50,000 people in London addressed by speakers, including Russell Brand, after People's Assembly march"

However, details of the number actually on the march are not known and are estimated at tens of thousands, because:

"The Metropolitan police [aka The Met] refused to provide an estimate."

As far as I am aware, of mainstream media (MSM) outlets, Russia Today or RT was the first to broadcast an item on the demonstration at 13.43. The news channel linked the march to recent reports on poverty in the UK:

"The Poverty and Social Exclusion project found that more than 500,000 children are living in families who can’t afford to feed them properly and 5.5 million adults have to go without essential clothing."

Under the title "Russell Brand Calls for 'joyful revolution'" ITV (via ITN) commented at 19.20 as follows:

"Comedian Russell Brand has called on thousands of protesters to be part of a "peaceful, effortless, joyful revolution" that seizes power back from Westminster.

The former Big Brother's Big Mouth presenter, who this year implored readers of the New Statesman magazine to abandon the current political system, told crowds gathered in London's Parliament Square that MPs no longer represented the people.

Speaking in the shadow of the Houses of Parliament at the end of a march marking the one-year anniversary of the People's Assembly being formed, Brand stripped off his T-shirt and replaced it with one carrying the message "Firefighters rescue people not bankers".

An estimated 50,000 people took part in the march, which started at the BBC in Portland Place where protesters accused the broadcaster of ignoring the plight of impoverished Britons."

A little later, at 20.17, The Huffington Post also reported on the protest in central London. They quoted Sam Fairbairn, the national secretary of the People's Assembly:

""Soon we will reach a size and influence where neither the BBC nor this austerity Government will be able to ignore us."

He said the group will aim to hold the biggest protest in British history later this year."

Even the normally right-wing Express newspaper reported on the events and even-handedly at that, saying:

"An estimated 50,000 people took part in the march, which started at the BBC in Portland Place where protesters accused the broadcaster of ignoring the plight of impoverished Britons."

Whilst Google did not provide me with a link, I checked Sky News and they also reported on the demo at 10.09 quoting and character-assassinating Russell Brand:

""This will be a peaceful, effortless, joyful revolution and I'm very grateful to be involved in the People's Assembly."

Around 50,000 people took part in the march and Brand was joined by speakers who also included comedian and commentator Mark Steel, MP Caroline Lucas and journalist Owen Jones."

So, the reader is perhaps wondering where are the link to and quotations from Britain's national broadcaster, paid for by every television-owner via the licence fee, the once balanced BBC. Well, Auntie Beeb apparently did not notice the marchers meeting outside its news-gathering HQ, nor the 50K folk who streamed through London. It is really odd, because I live in Manchester, and find that London and the South-East (London's Hinterland) are usually the idée fixe of the Corporation's reporting.

As on previous occasions when I have criticised the BBC, I tried to ensure that I had not missed anything from its website.

At 22.10 I searched for "austerity march". The Beeb had reported nothing, but did give a link to Russia Today:

At 22.15 I searched for "Russell Brand". Again nothing from the BBC, but links to Russia Today again plus The Guardian and The Huffington Post articles:

I tried a several searches for "London demonstration", but kept getting the following screen (I took screenshots at 22.17. and 22.19):

Finally, at 22.20 I succeeded in obtaining the following search result, which only referenced an article in the London Evening Standard from Friday:

What possible explanation could there be for the BBC failing to cover a huge demonstration about a subject clearly of national interest and, as such, importance? The ONLY possibilities now have to be political interference or political bias. Whichever: the BBC can no longer be considered an unbiased, balanced and fair news outlet.

The BBC has form: it failed to report on "Manchester’s largest protest in modern history" back in October last year when a similar number of demonstrators, including this author, protested outside the Conservative Party Conference.

Should you be unhappy with this situation you might wish to lodge a complaint; but don't raise your hopes, for as reader of this blog know, the BBC will just refuse to even take any notice. However, if like the chap in this video, you really want to have a go - he had his call cut off twice - he gives you the telephone number to ring at the end. Good luck!

For anyone interested in following events of the day, check out the hashtag #NoMoreAusterity on Twitter.

UPDATES

BBC

Some time between ten and eleven on Sunday 22nd June, the BBC finally put up a news report entitled "Thousands attend People's Assembly's first austerity protest". The full text reads:

"The first austerity protest organised by the People's Assembly campaign group has taken place in London.

Organisers say tens of thousands of people met at Portland Place and marched to Parliament Square on Saturday.

The group included politicians and union leaders and was protesting about the impact of cuts around the country."

ESTABLISHMENT

I should also point out that besides the Met refusing to provide an estimate of numbers on the actual march and the BBC failing to adequately nor appropriately report, the Guardian article referenced above also points out that the Prime Minister's spokesperson also refused to make any comment. It really does look like the Establishment closed ranks, doesn't it?

LAMPOON

[Image © Rick Campbell]

Ed Miliband, Andy Burnham, Labour & the Privatisation of the NHS

On Monday 12th May 2014, Ed Miliband gave a key-note speech on the NHS in Manchester. I was privileged to be invited, despite not being a Labour party member nor indeed affiliated to any political party - I am non-partisan.

The following is a long quotation from his (hour-long) speech:

"It is up to us. Up to a Labour government to make the changes we need to make sure the NHS is there for the years and decades ahead.…
And it’s about more than that too. It’s about restoring the fundamental values of the NHS.The basic principles.It’s about ending David Cameron’s dogmatic obsession with bringing competition and privatisation into the heart of the NHS. And reducing the huge costs that have come about because of that terrible Bill. The last Labour government showed how private companies can sometimes help bring down waiting lists or provide specialist services that the NHS can’t. So, of course, there is some role for the private sector in our health service. But this government doesn’t just want to do that. It thinks competition and privatisation should be at the core of the way the NHS works. As the government says itself: if it worked for the privatised utility companies why shouldn’t it work for the NHS? Doesn’t that say it all? Well, not under my government. We’ll go back to the right principles. To the right values. Why should a hospital have to spend money on competition lawyers instead of patient care? We’ll stop that happening. We’ll stop the regulators from spending their time on free-market competition in the NHS. We’ll cut back on the consultancy costs caused by the Tories’ reorganisation. We’ll reduce the number of very senior managers who cost too much at a time when resources are so scarce. We’ll stop the threat of European competition law forcing the privatisation of services. And, friends, we’ll repeal their terrible NHS and Social Care Bill. This will save money. At least £100 million. And we’ll put all of this money straight back into improving GP care. Labour will have the right priorities. This is how we plan to improve the NHS. A comprehensive service based on the needs of the whole person. Prevention not just cure. Co-operation not privatisation. The NHS is so important to Britain."

Interestingly, The Guardian published their take on the speech at "18.17 BST", before the speech and the Q&A session were over, so it omitted Miliband's and Burnham's critical promise. The New Statesman's article admits to having been drafted over the previous weekend, but was not published until the actual day at 18.15. 

And that significant promise was also referenced in the Labour Party's second party political election broadcast from 13th May 2014, (3"20 - 3"29):

"We've got to put the right principles back at the heart of the NHS: care, and co-operation, and compassion; not privatisation and competition."

The Q&A session afterwards gave Andy Burnham an opportunity to pledge a public NHS core. I cannot find a video clip of his actual response, but, from memory, he basically stated that the core of the NHS had to be public service with a role for private companies only where they could add value to the over-all service. Ed Miliband concurred with Burnham's comments (see 2"00 - 2"15 of the video below).

According to Left Foot Forward:

"Andy Burnham has pledged to repeal the Health and Social Care Act if he becomes health secretary. This would undo the hospital closure clause, the wholesale privatisation, and reinstate the duty of the secretary of state to provide universal healthcare to the people who voted for them."

I cannot track down any coverage by the neo-liberal MSM of this stance against the privatisation of the NHS. I do not think it is because Labour has back-tracked. I suspect the dearth of reporting on this aspect is due this policy being popular and in-line with the electorate, which is far to the left of all main political parties, excepting the Greens.

I believe both Miliband and Burnham are honest men, honourable politicians; they will keep to their word I suspect.