Tory onslaught on welfare is not an austerity agenda

Opinion: The Tory onslaught on the poorest and most vulnerable people in Britain continues and if you believe it is based on austerity measures you are mistaken.

These cuts are about fulfilling a Tory agenda, one that helps the rich get richer, shores up the establishment and outs we the little people back in what they view as our place.

Last week a majority of MPs voted to scrap a £30 a week ESA payment which was created to help people with disabilities try to return to the workplace and offer financial support.

But that cut must not be considered in isolation as the entitlements that are being scrapped are many.

On it goes in relentless fashion with DWP boss Iain Duncan Smith and sidekick Priti Patel spending a small fortune to implement damaging cuts.

The debate and votes on the work and welfare bill last Tuesday had more than a touch of Groundhog Day. The bill was sent back to the Commons for further debate after the House of Lords refused to simply rubber stamp the cuts.

This has not led to a period of soul searching by the Tories but rather a commitment to appoint more right-wing Lords and Ladies who will agree to push on with the party's damaging Social Security cuts, rebranding and reforms.

The cost of buying votes in this way is not cheap, nor probably cost-effective, but it does help the Tory party push forward their vision of England in the 21st Century.

In early February BBC News reported "Nearly 14,000 disabled people who rely on a specialist motoring allowance have had their cars taken away from them following government welfare changes. Figures seen by the BBC show almost half of those having to be reassessed for this support under the changes lost their Motability vehicle. Many had been adapted to meet their owners' needs and campaigners warn it could lead to a loss of independence. But the government says the new process is fairer and people can appeal."

But of course following the 2015 General Election defeat that party under the temporary leadership of Harriet Harman let the Tories get a firm footing back in July 2015.

At that time the Independent wrote "The Government's bill that will cut spending on welfare by £12 billion has been passed in the House of Commons, with 308 votes to 124.Despite 48 out of 216 Labour MPs going against the whip and voting against the bill, far more abstained, letting the bill pass with a large majority. Abstainers include many contenders for the Labour leadership, including Andy Burnham. However, he did vote for a Labour amendment which came just before the main vote, which said the Government's bill should not get a second reading. This vote was defeated, by 308 votes against 208.Leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn was the only candidate to vote against the bill, going against the whip's instructions. The other potential leaders, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall, both abstained - although all are believed to have voted for the defeated Labour amendment."

Little wonder then that support for Jeremy Corbyn continues to sky rocket.

Harman was of course in a damned if I do damned if I do not position and misguidedly believed whipping MPS to support the bill but try for an amendment would somehow show the party as electable but it did not. It spectacularly backfired but was too late to make an election difference nationally.

It was however one more reason people voted Jeremy Corbyn to lead the party as after all England does not need another middle-of-the-road, centric or right-wing party it needs a party that is comfortable owning the left-wing of the political spectrum.

As the Tory axe gets into overdrive again, probably following the March budget, there are many things we all should consider.

Cameron promised to triple-lock entitlements for pensioners in the UK but only until 2020.
He may yet have to break that promise but if he does not the so-called grey brigade, which includes this writer, should not be complacent.

By 2020, Cameron will have stepped down as Tory party leader, boundary changes which are coming into effect will have redrawn the political landscape of England and the UK and in doing so strengthened Tory election hopes while weakening that for other parties including Labour, the number of older citizens in the UK will have also grown but people will not be able to retire until older unless they have an independent income, so overall the one-party-state will be well on its way.

In other words your vote in 2020 will have been weakened unless we fight back now.

There has never been a more important time for Labour supporters to unify and the conclusion made when some do not is that they prefer a self-serving route.

The media makes much of Corbyn’s record as a backbencher of not obeying the party whip and voting with his heart and conscience but is that so bad. Check out his voting record here.

Note from above text “This vote was defeated, by 308 votes against 208. Leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn was the only candidate to vote against the bill, going against the whip's instructions.”

Like me you may admire him for that.

More at:
Disabilty Rights UK and members respond to Commons defeat of Lords amendments last week which begins by saying "Liz Sayce DR UK CEO says: "There is no evidence that the £30 a week paid to disabled people in the work related activity group acts as a disincentive to work. Instead, all the evidence from a recent Parliamentary review finds that the cut will make it difficult for disabled people to be able to afford to take part in things like training and work experience. It will also lead to disabled people struggling to pay food and heating bills which will have a damaging impact on their physical and mental health.

---