The Indy Scapegoats The Poor!

This balderdash from The Independent newspaper really gets my goat!

“Reeves stealth taxes ‘hammering’ workers while pensioners and benefits claimants ‘better off’” 02.01.2026

There is zero balance to the article, but rather a deliberate anti-social neoliberal slant.

40% of folk on benefits are in employment, but jobs pay so badly that the State is topping up their income. It ought to be pointed out that UK benefits pay mere survival rates no where near reaching the level of a Living Wage, with many foregoing food, heating &/or medications. Most users of food-banks are benefit-recipients with disabilities, severe illnesses or children.

Yes, children! Some 4,500,000 children in the United Kingdom live in poverty. Scrapping the two-child limit means that more Child Benefit will be paid out, a desperate fillip that in no way makes up for the ever-ongoing cost-of-living crisis.

As to pensioners, UK pensioners are by far the worst-off in Western Europe, and below average for OECD countries.

That the once-balanced and fair Indy cites an example of someone earning £50,000 (£31,602 is the median UK annual income per O.N.S.) per year having to pay £505 p.a. more tax without explaining that those receiving Social Security are on such low levels of support and have experienced real-term cuts* for years, absolutely disgusts me.

* Increases based on general inflation do not recognise the above-inflation increases in food & energy prices, let alone medications & prescriptions & optician & dental-care & mobility-aids, etc. that force folk in the lower income deciles to often borrow money to pay for basic necessities of life.

Link to description of data of DWP benefit claims.

International Day of Persons with Disabilities 2018

Today is International Day for People with Disabilities (#IDPD2018).

[Image description: the writer in wheelchair sporting WoWPetition paraphernalia]

Here in the UK, matters are deteriorating for disabled folk. Despite treaty obligations, the UK has reduced support for individuals with disabilities. For example, Legal Aid to take action to enforce one’s rights when one has been discriminated against, has been so severely restricted, that is now almost impossible to access one’s rights. Social Security benefits have been reduced or even taken away from individuals. This has then resulted in people having their Motability vehicles, their mobility-scooters and even electric wheelchairs taken from them. Multiple reports, including several by UN agencies, have castigated the UK Government, but they pay no heed. Instead the Conservative Executive continue with dogmatic policies with no evidence base and ignoring the great harms they have caused and still do. The Tories even ignore the evidence that some of their policy changes cost more than the policies they replaced. The UK Parliament also issues reports evidencing the damage done, but has proved impotent when it comes to taking any actions to counter the heinous actions of the Government and its agency the notorious Department for Work and Pensions (aka DWP - which is found to be constantly in breach of the Law but it considers itself above the Law) nor rein them in. The UN itself has also shown it is powerless to enact change for the better in the United Kingdom.

Between 1:5 and 1:6 UK citizens have a disability. WE deserve to be able to work, shop, travel, have relationships, enjoy entertainment, participate in sport, gain an education, just like the majority of Brits. We very often cannot.

Even when we have the ability and the relevant qualifications, we struggle to access the world of work due to the built environment and prejudice, having a much lower employment-rate than non-disabled folk.

The Government has come up with Purple Tuesday, one day a year when disabled people will be treated fairly and assisted at the shops. Imagine if you were limited to a single day per year when you might access all shops!

Around half of all train-stations are inaccessible to many disabled, and for that matter elderly folk, because they are not step-free.

Social services, G.P.s, carer agencies and even charities fail to support people with disabilities who want to explore relationships. As far as I am aware there is not a single English social services department that enquires after a disabled person’s sexual needs. Nor are there any who offer support in pursuing a relationship.

Many places of entertainment are inaccessible to all kinds of disabled folk. Wheelchair-users are frequently barred from entering night-clubs, bars, restaurants, pubs, cinemas and theatres. But they are not the only kind of disabled to be so treated. Folk with learning disabilities are also frequently refused permission to enter such establishments.

Many swimming-pools are inaccessible to folk who become less disabled once they can actually enter the water. Many Premier League stadia do not provide the mandatory number of places for disabled folk.

Statistics consistently and continuously show that folk with disabilities do not achieve as well as their non-disabled peers, due to lack of opportunities, discrimination by schools, failure by local education authorities to provide adequate home-teaching, and so on.

Only UK voters can ensure the position ameliorates. Alas, too many refuse to vote (abstain) or choose to vote wilfully blindly, without considering the consequences to people with disabilities let alone the effects of their vote on the rest of British society.

Please, when next you vote, consider the ramifications on others of that x!

#DisabilityRights #DisabilityDiscrimination #DisabilityHate #DisabilityDeath

________________________________________________________________
You can support the current WoWCampaign on Twitter or go to wowpetition.co.uk

Per ATOS/DWP: Able to Leave Home, Fit to Travel Anywhere

Those poor folk at ATOS appear to be working the bank holiday as I have just received a response to the complaint I did not make!

On 24th May ATOS issued the following letter in respect to my last email to them, outlined in my previous blog-post, ATOS & DWP question whether disabled can go abroad.

Dear Mr Hunter

Thank you for your recent communication, in which you expressed concerns regarding your application for Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

An investigation will now take place into the issues you have raised and we aim to complete our investigation within 20 working days. However, if the investigation takes longer than anticipated I will continue to update you of our progress.

Should you have any queries in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact our customer service team on the above telephone number or myself at the address below.

Yours sincerely

Annmarie Cowley

Client Relations Officer
Atos Healthcare
PIP Customer Relations
PO Box 1006
Stockton-on-Tees
TS19 1UL

Today's response is:

Dear Mr Hunter

Thank you for your email, in which you express your concerns with regard to your application for Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

As part of Atos Healthcare’s commitment to provide a service of the highest standard, it is important that we continue to be open and receptive to the views of those whose lives are affected by the service that we provide. I am, therefore, grateful for your feedback.

I understand from your correspondence that after you received a letter for a face to face assessment you contacted the Customer Service Centre and the Agent requested a Home Consultation (HC) which unfortunately was denied.

Home Consultations (HC) are reserved for claimants who do not leave their properties for any reason due to their conditions. In some instances, exceptions can be made to this rule providing that certain criteria can been met. Upon review of your questionnaire, it was established that you were able to travel abroad therefore could attend an Assessment Centre (AC), however you have explained the circumstances behind this and a Paper Based Review (PBR) has been completed after Atos Healthcare spoke with health professionals involved in your care.

I am pleased to tell you that the report has now been completed and returned to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), for a decision to be made. For any further update the DWP can be contacted on 0345 850 33 22.

This concludes the investigation carried out in regards to your complaint. I understand you feel we have not met your expectations during this time and I would like to apologise for
any distress or upset caused; I can assure you this is never our intention. I do hope that any future dealings you may have with our service will not cause you any further concern.

Yours sincerely,

Annmarie Cowley

Apparently: "Home Consultations (HC) are reserved for claimants who do not leave their properties for any reason due to their conditions."

What an absurd position!

You can get to a hospital appointment - no HC

You can get to your GP's - no HC
 
You can get to the dentist - no HC
 
You can get to the optician - no HC
 
You can get to the podiatrist - no HC
 
You can get to the physiotherapist - no HC
 
You can be wheeled out for a breath of fresh air - no HC

Such absolutist stances are disablist and contrary to common-sense. No account is taken of fluctuating conditions; the need for medication prior to, during and post appointments, nor their effects on one's mental capabilities; the ability or not to travel over distance; the amount of stress, whether physical &/or emotional; the need for support to attend appointments; the ability to travel on public-transport; and so on.

And note: I only got somewhere because I had the gumption to stand up for myself and wrote back to ATOS pointing out the stupidity of their position. Most folk would probably have done as instructed, i.e. refer back to the DWP. At the point where I raised the possibility that attending a medical examination centre would not be possible, ATOS ought then to have acted pro-actively and contacted my medics for their medical opinions. I had to press them to do so.

Health is not black and white: if x then y. It is innumerable shades of grey: if a then b or c or d or…

ATOS' standard of healthcare is illogical, unreasonable and contrary to common-sense and additionally costs the tax-payers of the country each time they carry out a review. As I stated previously, if ATOS returns cases to the DWP, they can then claim a further payment for a further review.

Scotland is getting rid of private contractors from the social security system. It's about time England followed suite!

 

 

Perfidious Treachery

[Image © Another Angry Voice]

The NHS is important to me;

Social Security is important to me;

Social Services are important to me;

Social Care is important to me;

End-of-life care is important to me;

Justice is important to me;

Public transport is important to me;

Energy is important to me;

Water, drainage & sewage are important to me;

Fairness, equality & equity are important to me…

None of these are important to Tories, save for any profit to be made.

I cannot find any comfortable way in which to say this…

If you vote Conservative you are a TRAITOR:

to British values;

to your community;

to your neighbours;

friends,

family

and ultimately to

yourself!

Well, that's certainly what I think and feel at the moment. %///

Is DWP Harassing ESA Support Group Claimants?

I am not being starved by this contemptuous ConDem government's callous actions towards chronically sick &/or disabled folk due to being sanctioned. But I run the risk of being potentially sanctioned due to DWP incompetence, negligence or possibly harassment (if one believes the DWP are actually in control). The DWP appears to have a complete inability to deal with British citizens as individuals, but only as cases to be dealt with as quickly and as superficially as possible. The ConDems launched wide-ranging and extensive social security (they say 'welfare') reforms at the same time as cutting the number of workers able to deal with all the changes. The result unsurprisingly appears to be chaos. Folk are not waiting weeks for decisions and responses, but quite literally months. The DWP standard response is that they did not receive a letter - hence I send everything recorded, so know full well that they have received all my communications.

The latest instalment of my ongoing ESA50 saga follows. Today I finished drafting my response to a DWP letter which can be found below.

Dear Sir/Madam [I am unable to address this letter correctly as you failed to advise me as to by whom the letter was issued],

I was shocked, dismayed and then angry at receiving your letter dated 5th November on Friday 9th inst. in relation to a “Work-focused interview for Employment and Support Allowance claimants” as you caused me to have a full-blown panic-attack yet again and yet again I am presuming totally unnecsesarily.

My last communication from DWP in respect to ESA was ***’s letter of 4th April 2013, a copy of which is appended, in which he states, penultimate paragraph:

“You have been placed in the support group because your illness or disability restricts the possibility of working. This means you do not have to take part in any work-related activity…”

Nowhere in your current letter does it state, nor even imply, that this work-related interview is voluntary.

In the circumstances, I expect a full explanation as to why I am being harassed, given my health issues. Alternatively, if there has been a change of policy, please provide me with a copy of the relevant regulations as I have not seen nor heard anything about such a change. I can then take the matter up with Graham Brady MP.

I also append a copy of my letter of 10th - 27th April 2013 to *** Benefit Centre, which to date has remained unanswered. Perhaps you would be kind enough to provide me with the information I requested.

You should also be fully aware after all these years that I do NOT use the telephone due to disabilities. You failed to provide a reasonable alternative, i.e. an email address, and so are also in breach of disability legislation. You should review this matter urgently especially given that the Secretary of State desires that folk deal with benefit claims on-line.

Please ensure that your records are updated and confirm in writing that you have done so.

Given the number of failings by DWP and its agents in less than a year, I have to assume incompetency or negligence or deliberate harassment. If they continue I shall pursue all avenues open to me.

Yours faithfully,

Here are the scans of the DWP's letter:

If you would like to lend your support to those disabled &/or chronically sick folk, their carers and supporters who are fighting for a review of the way DWP treats individuals, please sign WoWpetition via wowpetition.com or via the official government epetition website. If you are a young carer or a child with a disability, you also can sign as long as you have your own email address and are a UK citizen.

NHS299 Demonstration March & Rally, Sunday 29th September 2013

If there is a G_d, then surely s/he was looking down on Manchester last Sunday. Instead of its world-notorious cloud and rain, the city was domed in pure azure, not a cloud to be seen - not even a wisp - and a blazing sun beating down on its historic bricks, stone, glass and concrete. Mancunians are usually an affable folk, but, more than usual, this late September heat and sunshine brought smiles to visages and friendly banter from kind mouths. As the day spread out the crowds of milling shoppers, residents and tourists were increasingly swelled by folk from all areas and countries of the United Kingdom, uniting to demonstrate against the maleficent ConDem coalition government’s policies.

[Image description: Deansgate, Manchester, aflood with tens of thousands of demonstrators,

placards, banners & flags; © Ray Smith/SW]

Despite having no mandate from the electorate, the Conservative and Liberal Democrats (ConDems) have forced through an increasing privatisation of our belovèd National Health Service (NHS) as well as unprecedented cuts to social security benefits, now labelled ‘welfare’ by most neo-liberal politicos and the vast majority of the main-stream media (MSM). This has all been done in the name of austerity, an economic policy with very dodgy antecedents and a bad history. The ordinary folk of the UK, whether working, non-working or even middle class, are all losing out. Salaries and wages are stagnant or dropping; inflation on quotidian goods and services is astronomical; food, energy and water prices rise inexorably; mortgages are unaffordable and rents go up and up. For the vast majority of Brits their standard of living is not gradually falling but is sliding rapidly off-piste. Jobs are taken off the low-paid or they have their hours reduced so that greedy companies and charities can give them to workfare ‘slaves’.

Against this background, the Tories arrogantly and contemptuously decided upon holding their annual party conference in a city where they have not a single seat or even local councillor. Manchester has a long and proud history of standing up against the Establishment (Peterloo, Women’s suffrage, Trade Unionism, Vegetarianism, etc.). Politically as well as musically, artistically, technologically, scientifically, we Mancunians live up to our creative and radical heritage. We issued invitations to all who wished to come and rally with us to protest our increasing indentureship and the theft of our historic rights and freedoms. The call did not go unheeded. More than fifty-thousand individuals flooded into the city. At one point the march through the city centre stretched for more than a mile and, for obvious reasons, took much longer than originally anticipated to wind its way to the rallying point in Whitworth Park. This meant that Conservative Party members and conference attendees had to strive to reach the conference centre. Many were polite enough to take leaflets off protesters; many others looked down their noses at us with looks of sheer disgust. Oh dear, the sullied masses intruding on their festivities!

The night before, Jane Wowchat and Rick Tenpercent arrived at my home so they would be rested for the following day’s events. On the morrow Jenny was delivered by hubby Andrew, both stalwarts of the Save our NHS movement. With my assistant, Richard, we all piled into the car and headed off in search of a disabled parking spot anywhere near the static protest site opposite the conference venue. Rick hung out our WoWpetition banner on the railings and Jenny and Jane broke into the box of leaflets. And off we went. Well actually, to find a loo (wc).

En route we bumped into the Royal Fusiliers who would later heckle the hapless defence secretary (as widely reported by the MSM) and who were also collecting signatures for their petition. We could not stop there and then, but did later add our monickers to their appeal as well as passing on some of our leaflets.

We met many police-officers who invariably smiled, passed the time of day or even joked with us. Greater Manchester Police (GMP) have a thing or two they could show London’s Met about policing by consent rather than threat. Over the whole day there were apparently only two arrests for minor offences (misdemeanours). In fact GMP issued a press release to praise the good nature and peacefulness of the whole event. Bless ‘em!

[Image description: RevPaul in white WoW T-shirt, myself in French navy WOW T-shirt and Rico holding the WoWpetition banner featuring the comedienne, Francesca Martinez; © Jenny]

After nearly four hours in my wheelchair, I had to go home to rest. It transpired that it took several days for my muscles to recover. But heigh-ho it was well worth it: to see so many travel so far to exercise their ancient right to protest and dissent.

I would have said that I am sure that the ConDems - and the Tories specifically - got the message. Alas, the MSM could not be bothered to cover the event. It was Manchester’s largest protest in modern history and even the so-called national broadcaster, the BBC, failed to report on it in anything other than a throw-away comment during a political commentary. The MSM are failing the British public, much as in the film V for Vendetta. Still, we have ways and means of sourcing the news. This is one of the main reasons for the authoritarians in all parties fearing and wanting to control social media (SM). SM has democratised the news in a similar way that the ‘net allowed access to information and knowledge.

Interestingly much of the print media insisted, as did David Cameron our Prime Minister, that the march was an act of bullying by the unions. But many of the disabled there certainly were not from trades unions. The church members, such as the Quakers, and other charitable workers similarly were not affiliated to unionism. Many of the folk walking in support of the NHS were patients or ex-patients of free medical care who simply wished to retain what has been our right as citizens for over sixty-five years. As ever rhetorical clap-trap from those in charge!

At the end of the day a couple of thousand WoWpetition leaflets were handed out. Hopefully that will transmute into more signatories to our Stop the War on Welfare entreaty. Perhaps you the reader will also consider signing the WoWpetition. %)

The Perilous Politics of Envy

I am disabled - hence the "crippled' in the name of this blog. I also live in the Manchester area (in North-West England). Our local newspaper is titled Manchester Evening News, which is locally and within the press sector abbreviated to M.E.N.

[Image description: a screen-shot of part of the cited article]

Today the paper published an article authored by Jennifer Williams and entitled: Revealed: Human cost of hard-hitting welfare cuts in Manchester.

Below is an extract:

The first detailed study into how benefits changes are hitting Manchester has revealed the ‘human cost’ of swingeing welfare cuts.

New research warns of overcrowding, new social ghettos, soaring levels of debt and mental illness – with minorities bearing the brunt.

The analysis – by the council, housing providers and Citizen’s Advice Bureau – examines a string of policies, including cuts to legal aid, the ‘bedroom tax’ and the benefits cap.

It finds minority groups – including the disabled, women and certain ethnic groups – are being hit disproportionately hard by the policies.

As far as I am aware this is the first time our respected rag has printed such an item since the creation of the UK's ConDem coalition government. Most of the the twenty-odd comments were rather reactionary. This stimulated me to submit the following commentary.

"I am simply appalled by some of the comments listed under this article; but wish to express my gratitude to M.E.N for publishing the item.

It looks like many commentaors (sic) have bought into the insidious polemic in the mainstream media: the rhetoric of divide & conquer and the politics of envy.

I am non-partisan. I am disabled. I worked for the Civil Service in the 1980's where each year under Thatcherism I was a recipient of annual salary cuts due to below-inflation 'rises'. I retrained as a teacher, a job I loved until disability forced me to retire on ill-health grounds. I have no regrets: life took me where it took me.

However, I have no compunction about claiming the benefits to which I am entitled. I paid and still pay thousands in taxes (income tax, duties, VAT, etc.) as well as National Insurance Contributions. There's a clue in the latter's nomenclature - 'insurance'. I paid into the scheme and now, due to circumstances beyond my control, I am making claims on that scheme; in the same way one makes a claim against car insurance, home insurance, health insurance, credit-card insurance, warranties, and so forth.

Some commentators seem to be under the impression that I should exist in penury just because I claim social security payments. Instead of envying that to which I am entitled, I should suggest such commentators support moves for all citizens to be paid a living wage (not to be confused with the minimum wage) including our pensioners, who are some of the worst looked after in Europe. Additionally, I should suggest that folk sign up to campaigns, such as wowpetition.com, that are attempting to ensure that our treasured social protections are not removed.

British culture has long had the values of fairness and justice at its heart: I sincerely hope we don't lose such treasures. %)"

Update:

A commentator retorted:

"Colin, the majority of people have no problem with people like yourself. As you I and millions of other people have a problem with those who have not contributed put it you have "Paid In". 
a single bean, but expect to be given something for nothing.
I managed to retire at 48, having been sensible and making provision to have a decent pension. I hate to think how much i have paid into the system, and will continue to pay into the system as i am taxed on my pension.
The only benefit i will get is the oap, thats if the goalposts are not changed in the next 15 years or so."

So I responded:

"Disabled children have not paid into the scheme; youngsters in local authority care have not paid into the system; qualified unemployed youth and young adults cannot get jobs, so cannot pay into it either; then there are the carers who save the nation a fortune (usually estimated at £Billions) in care costs, their insurance is paid for them by a grateful nation.

On your logic, these folk should not receive benefits to which they have not directly contributed.

I iterate that this is against British values of fairness & justice."

Billions removed from local economies - due to Government folly

The UK ConDem coalition government in its economic stupidity and arrogance is part-way through slashing social security payments to those in need - the vast majority of the British population benefits from such payments, now euphemistically termed 'welfare' by the spinning propagandists amongst the neo-liberal élite.

For those unfamiliar with UK taxation: inter alia, all employees, self-employed and carers pay (or have paid on their behalf in the case of the latter) national insurance contributions. These monies are supposed to be used to fund social security payments: for those who find themselves in straitened circumstances (the unemployed, the underemployed & the working-poor); for those with disabilities (to help towards the extra costs they face residing in a disablist society); for those with illnesses which mean they cannot work; for the terminally ill; for parents to help raise children. It is a type of insurance scheme. As such, not everyone will need to claim; but most do at some point in their lives, even if for example only child benefit.

The ConDems have cut billions of pounds from benefits whilst they have in practice turned a blind-eye to tax avoidance & evasion by international conglomerates and wealthy individuals. In April they gave millionaires a whopping tax-break whilst at the same time cutting benefits to tens of thousands causing misery through penury, hunger (hence the concomitant rise in the use of food-banks) and increased homelessness. The ConDems in their rhetoric call this "fairness" to taxpayers. However, every adult is a taxpayer, paying a least one of the innumerable taxes in the UK: from income tax, duties, television licence fees to VAT and car tax.

[Image description: Cameron transmogrified into a Ferengi]

A week ago I reported that the BBC chose to ignore the Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion's (CESI) report commissioned by the Local Government Association (LGA), which represents all English and Welsh local authorities whatever their respective political colours.

I have taken details from pages twenty and twenty-one of the report and list below the effects in roughly ten percent of these local authorities. The reader will note that local economies are losing millions of pounds. The knock-on effect is that local businesses have less custom and end up closing. This results in even more money lost to local authorities, not taken into account in the figures listed, due to loss of business rates and so forth. Furthermore, the Exchequer loses out on corporation taxes from once profitable companies. And so on. This is economic madness all done in the name of austerity, a policy adopted in the early part of the twentieth century and which led to the length of the Great Depression.

Everybody, including the middle classes, is losing out. Only the ultra-rich continue to prosper. And this is "fairness"…

The Stats

Woking Local Authority’s economy loses c. £14,400,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,735.30 to 8,287 claimant households.

Burnley Local Authority’s economy loses c. £29,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,736.49 to 16,874 claimant households.

Waltham Forest Local Authority’s economy loses c. £70,400,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,739.64 to 40,487 claimant households.

West Somerset Local Authority’s economy loses c. £8,000,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,757.22 to 4,526 claimant households.

Hounslow Local Authority’s economy loses c. £57,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,758.32 to 32,597 claimant households.

Islington Local Authority’s economy loses c. £55,900,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,761.23 to 31,735 claimant households.

Tower Hamlets Local Authority’s economy loses c. £71,600,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,761.64 to 40,621 claimant households.

Luton Local Authority’s economy loses c. £55,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,770.39 to 31,448 claimant households.

Rossendale Local Authority’s economy loses c. £19,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,771.81 to 10,892 claimant households.

Blackpool Local Authority’s economy loses c. £57,600,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,778.63 to 32,365 claimant households.

Oldham Local Authority’s economy loses c. £72,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,788.95 to 40,652 claimant households.

Croydon Local Authority’s economy loses c. £91,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,792.01 to 51,171 claimant households.

Hyndburn Local Authority’s economy loses c. £27,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,819.52 to 15,222 claimant households.

Blackburn with Darwen Local Authority’s economy loses c. £53,500,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,826.31 to 29,276 claimant households.

Brighton & Hove Local Authority’s economy loses c. £67,000,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,830.55 to 36,591 claimant households.

Hammersmith & Fulham Local Authority’s economy loses c. £38,800,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,832.17 to 21,204 claimant households.

Pendle Local Authority’s economy loses c. £28,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,835.59 to 15,406 claimant households.

Lewisham Local Authority’s economy loses c. £81,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,835.65 to 44,511 claimant households.

Newham Local Authority’s economy loses c. £98,500,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,869.03 to 52,682 claimant households.

Slough Unitary Authority’s economy loses c. £37,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,873.91 to 19,925 claimant households.

Kingston-upon-Thames Local Authority’s economy loses c. £25,100,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,874.66 to 13,400 claimant households.

Redbridge Local Authority’s economy loses c. £65,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £1,881.08 to 34,695 claimant households.

Haringey Local Authority’s economy loses c. £81,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,019.10 to 40,487 claimant households.

Enfield Local Authority’s economy loses c. £97,600,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,019.26 to 48,315 claimant households.

Harrow Local Authority’s economy loses c. £51,800,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,046.22 to 25,320 claimant households.

Ealing Local Authority’s economy loses c. £91,700,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,076.59 to 44,181 claimant households.

Barnet Local Authority’s economy loses c. £81,400,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,105.62 to 38,664 claimant households.

Hackney Local Authority’s economy loses c. £89,300,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,132.97 to 41,863 claimant households.

Camden Local Authority’s economy loses c. £58,600,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,194.93 to 26,677 claimant households.

Wandsworth Local Authority’s economy loses c. £66,200,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of 2,242.61 to 29,257 claimant households.

Brent Local Authority’s economy loses c. £124,000,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £2,774.80 to 44,688 claimant households.

Kensington & Chelsea Local Authority’s economy loses c. £57,000,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £4,068.80 to 14,048 claimant households.

Westminster Local Authority’s economy loses c. £129,200,000.00 due to an average loss from social security cuts of £5,161.14 to 25,038 claimant households.


WoWpetition

If the reader is a UK resident or a UK passport-holder resident outside the UK, you may wish to support the campaign against the War on Welfare, known as WOW. The link to the official petition and more information can be found at wowpetition.com .