Advertising watchdog launches investigation into Universal Credit adverts


The DWP are continually stating that these new benefits are better than the old ones, but where is the proof.

There are many stories where the new benefits appear not to be good, be they ESA (Employment & Support Allowance), PIP (Personal Independence Payment) and now UC (Universal Credit), ranging from the assessment processes and then the beginning of payments.

We are told that the majority of claimants are OK with the new benefits, but how is this known for are they going to come forward and state this, but maybe when things go wrong the claimants may object.

However, do all the claimants advise when they are not happy, but just put up with it.
In my experience in dealing with Local Authorities many who are not happy do not complain for numerous reasons, they cannot be bothered, do not know how to, think it will be a waste of time, perhaps do not have the time, some will feel they will be treated worse if they complain and many other reasons.

So just looking at the percentage who come forward to state they are not happy is not an accurate record. But unfortunately, it is the only record or the only record that is recognised.

Now do we have to assume Governments and Government departments are always telling the truth, when it has been proved that there are instances when they are not.

Quite a few of the population are fearful of Authorities and will therefore never complain.
What we need to do is work from the premise that things will go wrong and not that they will not.
People are treated like ‘cattle’, where what is done for one will be done for everyone, but people are different and maybe different from one day to another and in many instances different through the day and night.

Systems need to be based on ‘person-centred’ principles and not on ‘institutional’ principles, but it is easier for systems to be based on the latter, rather than the former and maybe more cost effective.

But to make systems equal for all the person-centred principle needs to be costed into the process, that is, if these authorities even understand, or are willing to understand the principle of person-centred.

Systems should not be there for the sole basis of the respective organisations but for all, now that will be true ‘equality’ and not just some play on words.
People have ‘rights, ‘human rights’ and should be respected.

How four seriously ill people battled to get their PIP awards


The DWP is practising the ‘3 Wise Monkeys’ here is what ‘A DWP spokesperson said: ” We are committed to ensuring that people with a health condition or disability get the support they’re entitled to.

“Since PIP was introduced there have been 3.7 million decisions made and of these only 5% have been overturned at appeal. “In most successful appeals, decisions are overturned because people have submitted more oral or written evidence.” ‘

The evidence is there, as shown in this article and they have the audacity to say the above.

This is why I state they are practising the ‘3 Wise Monkeys’ for they are “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil”.

They are not understanding what is occurring or what is occurring because of them and by them, until they do these atrocities will still happening. The pain suffering and even death of some claimants will still be resulting.

The DWP have to change, so that a supporting welfare system can emerge, for currently it is not supporting for everyone who needs to be supported.

What the DWP is doing should be a crime and those at the DWP and also the DWP would be guilty of committing criminal acts, as it is, currently, not so, then there needs to be accountability, where there is honesty, openness and transparency.

Bangkok blast – another meaningless atrocity of hatred and barbarity.


This is so true, however, I believe the main religion may go on for ever, depending how long ever is, for with the current climate of one upmanship in many areas of the World being, West, East, Middle East, Far East and any others the future as we know it may not last as long as we hope for. In that the relentless quest for power by a good few of the World’s leaders and some aspiring leaders could well mean that the future could be short lived. Then what will their quest for power bring them and their communities, but do they really care as the driven quest for their own power extinguishes all others.

Unfortunately all you state has little chance of happening, now or the long-term future, unless the populace achieve what is currently seeming impossible.

The last point ‘To prevent future atrocities you have to treat the cause of the disease not merely the symptoms!’ is particularly relevant, but all are as well, but if you could achieve all these others, they will not be able to continue until you concentrate on the disease as well as the symptoms.

Take radicalisation, why are the people who are radicalised open to this action, unfortunately there will not be a common theme.

They could not have the will to resist.

They could have problems which are leaving down and open to be corrupted

There will be others, but all need to be identified and then appropriate action to minimise these areas and ideally create situations where they cannot manifest.

Take the UK, people are marginalised either into ethnic communities and do not forget that a white community is just as good or bad as any other community. Just because it may be the majority, in not a reason to discount it. We need to accept that in many ways we are all equal, however, some are more equal than others and there could be a root of the problem. Again the area of power is brought to the fore for power comes in many guises wealth is one, position is another, and in many respects the creation of some communities could be another, perhaps the list could be endless.

Religion and politics are two main causes, but they are not there alone, for if they were not there others would be created.

It could be within the makeup of the Human Race to which we all belong. If we were all created in Gods own image, then there is then no hope, so could the evolution theory have a better way forward, as this would mean that change will come, but not in our lifetime, that is if there is to be another lifetime.

So we have to ask is there really time for change to come forth.

A very complicated subject, but is certainly there for scrutiny and research. But then could the scrutiny and research be slanted with the human frailties.

This could go on and on and then come full circle, Oh, what a complicated Society or Societies we are in.

Opher's World

tortured cover

Terrorism has become the scourge of our age.

Too many people have hearts full of hatred and arrogant righteousness.

Too many are indoctrinated into stupid beliefs.

Too many are exploited and manipulated into hatred, self-sacrifice and intolerance.

It is too easy to manufacture bombs and get hold of weapons.

Too many people seek power through perverse religion and politics.

There is far too much ignorance and superstition.

The world is far to unequal.

There are too many people, too little work and so little hope.

Too many live in overcrowded poverty and hopelessness.

The terrorists want to divide, spread fear and destabilise so that they can sneak into the vacuum and inflict their religious or political aims.

The men behind it are never killing themselves.

It is all about power, not beliefs or doctrine – power. The people who organise, radicalise and induce the hatred and barbarity want to be…

View original post 178 more words

Sign the petition: I am not a reporter, and I want to see Donald Trump’s tax returns


Despite promising to release his tax returns in a televised debate with Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump continues to show that he has no intent on keeping his promise.

At his first press conference since Election Day, he even went so far as to say that only reporters care about his tax returns and the American public doesn’t care.

“You know, the only one that cares about my tax returns are the reporters, OK? They’re the only who ask.”

Releasing a copy of one’s tax returns when running for president is a more than 40-year tradition that has been followed by every American major party nominee—until Trump.

Even though the election campaign is over, it isn’t too late for Trump to stop making excuses and own up to his promise.

It isn’t just reporters who want to see Donald Trump’s tax returns. Add your name.

 

Source: Sign the petition: I am not a reporter, and I want to see Donald Trump’s tax returns

Why UK Voted BREXIT


In this current climate security is a very major factor, however, no matter how good your security systems are the percentages for someone being able to conduct an attack will always be greater than the security forces being able to deter.

With radicalisation being a major factor this means the likelihood of someone who is born in a particular country to succumb to radical propaganda is far greater than it was years ago. As previously it was believed that probable terrorists would infiltrate from other countries.

The UK decided not to have open borders, unlike many of the other countries within the EU, so the likelihood of persons coming in is reduced slightly, but not fully.

So it could be assumed to say the the security threats within the UK are slight less than in the rest of Europe. However, this also needs to reflect the capabilities of the persons on the borders checking who is coming in to the UK and who is going out, for it is not possible to fully check everyone.

If we believe the reports about GCHQ then they could be more robust that some of their European counterparts, but again this does depend on the extent of sharing intelligence, as good, if not excellent intelligence sharing is essential.

The public is reliant on what we are being told.

The best way to reduce terrorism is to be open about the causes and then mitigate the reasons why people are being radicalised, to just assume it is not the fault of the respective countries to some degree is not is a wrong path to take.

To look at the UK, many of the current Tory policies in force and also probably still to come are causing considerable resentment to large section of the UK population. But that is not to say everyone who feels resentment will turn to terrorism, but it should create an atmosphere for the Governments of today and those to come to question their policies and assess the resentments they are creating.

Much of this is down to trust and many within the UK do not trust any politicians of any party. For when it suits your MP will say they are following the will of the majority of their constituents, but then at the bequest of their party leaders they could then discount their constituents and follow their party line. So just whose MP are they their constituents or the party for in many respects they can not be both.

So all countries need to seriously look inward and be objective whether the paths they are choosing to go down have some serious bearing on persons being open to be radicalised for borders whether they are open or closed or the effectiveness of the security operations are but only two of the many reasons for radicalisation to occur.

More can always be done, do not rest on your laurels.

ukgovernmentwatch

Belgian policemen walk in a street during a police action in the Molenbeek-Saint-Jean district in Brussels,

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/salah-abdeslam-isis-suspicious-pizza-order-led-police-to-paris-attackers-hideout-at-molenbeek-flat-a6941111.html

Diamond-Jim
So Cameron says our security would be better in the EU. You have to be seriously demented to believe that after the c/ups reported here. Far more to the point the EU needs us more in this field thanks to GCHQ; an organisation that the Europeans cannot match and that is linked to the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the major players in western SigInt.

Intelligence is passed on to EU countries when and where it is specific and relevant, but not on a regular basis as it would be on the bad boys desks within 24 hours. Who needs enemies with friends like that

herman
So this guy is able to drive to Paris with a car full of guns drive unchallenged back to Brussels where he, the most wanted…

View original post 68 more words

Almost Half Leave Voters Think EU Ref Is Rigged: Poll…Leading Britain’s conversation radio.


As I have said before Cameron can not be trusted, but then there are few in politics that I believe can be. This will always be the case until there is true open and honest Government, which can only be achieved if there is a completely independent monitoring organisation of how the UK Government conducts itself and I can never see that occurring.

The general pubic and to some extent the Government are not aware of many of the activities of MI5 within the UK and MI6 outwith the UK. Some of these activites only become known, to some extent, many years in the future. The monitoring of Harold Wilson in the 1960s and 70s and Winston Churchil in the 1940s and 50s to name but two Prime Ministers. If they were not aware then these organisation could be up to anything.

New laws for more open and safe care in the NHS


New laws for more open and safe care from Department of Health

An extract ‘Two new important laws to help improve patient safety, transparency, and leadership in the NHS come into force today.

The first is the statutory Duty of Candour, which places a legal duty on hospital, community and mental health trusts to inform and apologise to patients if there has been a mistake in their care which has led to significant harm.  ……’

‘……..The second new law relates to ensuring strong and safe leadership in healthcare organisations. Under the new regulations, all NHS board members will be required to undergo a Fit and Proper Person’s Test before they are appointed.  ……’

For more information follow Fit and proper persons requirement and the duty of candour for NHS bodies*

It would appear that this is welcome news, which may be long over due, but will it make a difference. Only time will tell, for, no matter how much legislation is created, if the organisations do not abide by it, then will there be any difference. Will the monitoring by CQC (Care Quality Commission) be sufficient? Are the new laws robust enough? For as stated in the Duty of Candour ‘.. a mistake in their care which has led to significant harm.’ why not all mistakes, whether there is harm or not?

We do need to trust the NHS, which currently we may do or not. But if we did not have the NHS we would all be far worse for it not being there.

 

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0.