Skip to main content

The continuing scandal of more people being forced to resort to using foodbanks


Tories seek to avert rift with Church of England over food bank report



One Conservative minister claimed the increased use of food banks is due to greater publicity about
A foodbank in the United Kingdom in the year 2014.




A church funded all-party report is published today,(8th December 2014), on the increased use of food banks in this country and warning that Britain is stalked by low pay, growing inequality, a harsh benefits section scheme and social breakdown. It is perhaps fitting that the report is published just two weeks before Christmas, highlighting the growing phenomena of food bank usage in the United Kingdom. The Tories have of course attempted to distance themselves from any blame associated with this scandal, with one minister claiming that the increased use of food banks is due to the greater publicity about their existence. The Department of Work and Pensions, remain adamant that the administration of the benefit system has little to do with people resorting to food banks, notwithstanding the fact that the report is highly critical of the way in which the benefits system is administered and the consequential delays in payment of benefits not only to those unemployed but also to those claiming additional benefits due to low pay.
Over recent months and years, I have been very critical of the circumstances which have led to over 1 million people today being reliant on food banks and food by charities. The number of people claiming additional support due to insufficient income is indicative of a society which has become reliant on low pay employment, zero hour contracts and a high incidence of part-time employment, all of which are used by the government as indications of a growing economy and increased levels of employment. Nothing could be further from the truth.
During this period, there have been voices raised by government ministers some organisations and elements of the press, suggesting that people are using food banks because either they are unable to budget their incomes properly, or because the food is free, or perhaps their priorities for household expenditure are somehow directed towards cigarettes, alcohol and plasma televisions. It is regrettable that this warped perspective has found its way into the minds of many people who would normally not entertain such bigoted views, but have been influenced by the leader items of the Express, Telegraph, Mail and other right wing media. Today's article in the Observer is no exception with one letter in the comments section, actually stating that, “The benefits system as I well know will support you if you budget sensibly these people are so ignorant the word budget is beyond their comprehension”. The way in which this attitude has contaminated large sections of public opinion, is both sinister and worrying. The government has was sometime been engaged in a conscious program of demonisation not only of food bank users but also of benefit claimants generally. The purpose of this program is to ensure that the concept of divide and rule is applied throughout society, where the employed are set against the unemployed, where the sick are set against the able-bodied and where differences between peoples are highlighted and emphasised in order to gain political advantage.
It may well be true that there are some users of food banks and food by charities who abuse the system albeit that with the requirements of referral by social services, probation services or other such government bodies, will make abuse of the system difficult. However, there is little doubt that the vast majority of the 1 million people who currently use food banks or other such charities, are reliant on these bodies through no fault of their own and do not deserve to be targets of bigoted and ill informed individuals spouting bile and other obscenities through the press as with comments columns of online newspapers.
There seems to be little prospect of the numbers rely on food banks will reduce any time soon, as we are promised a further period of years for cuts and austerity to be the norm in British society. It is predicted that the United Kingdom is reverting to a society not seen since the 1930s, without the Welfare State and without any form of social conscience. It is a scandal and an outrage that we as a nation, allow such circumstances to occur and to perpetuate. The blame lies with successive governments going back as far as the previous Labour administration, but exacerbated over the period of the current ConDem coalition during the last five years. It is a situation about which we should all feel a collective shame, for allowing this scandal to continue. Perhaps with a general election due in May of next year, there may be a change but from the evidence thus far, all political parties are promising a continuation of its territory. It is a scandal and it is unacceptable.
Perhaps today's report, may have some influence on the philosophy of this government but the evidence suggests that this is unlikely to be the case.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Enough of this hysterical nonsense

  http://style.uk.msn.com/royal-baby/how-will-the-royal-baby-look-as-he-grows-up Media generated hysteria.                           This is too much. For the last 36 hours (thought it seems more like 36 days) there has been wall to wall news coverage, media and television comment and reporting, with Sky News taking first prize for frenzied minute by minute reporting from the Palace, the hospital, from a village somewhere in England, from the studio and anywhere else that Burley, Botting and company could stick a microphone into some obscure "celebrity's" face and ask for yet another banal quote. All this galvanising the mass hysteria of some elements of the public, (who the media would have you believe is the reaction of "the whole world",) with their flag waving, dancing, singing and cheering over what is after all, no more than a woman having a baby. How will the royal baby look as he grows up? Now the latest absurdity, this time f

New Agenda on Sunday is out Sunday, Apr. 28, 2019

https://paper.li/f-1346065353#/ Good morning everyone. Last weeks scare regarding Megan and Harry being sent to live "somewhere in Africa" seems to have been dispelled, at least for the time being. It now seems that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will take up residence in California.  Unless  they are actually  doing  some proper work in "The Golden State", I hope that they are taken off the civil list so that we do not have to fund their life choice. The nauseating Daily Mail is at it again. A headline this week, which I will not even bother to reproduce here, screams out in disgusting and repulsive bias without any acknowledgement to the factual basis of their "story". Spewing out their usual smears and embellished distortions about Hamas, the IRA, Hezbollah and the rest, the Mail condemns itself with ample justification, for the closure of a "newspaper," which again abuses 10 fold, the privilege of "freedom of t

Northern Ireland and Brexit. The return of "The Troubles"

Northern Ireland: police attacked in another night of disturbances | Northern Ireland | The Guardian When the "Brexit" debate was still filling our newspapers and our television screens, readers may remember why I had changed my mind since voting to leave at the referendum vote. Apart from the economic arguments, which had become crystal clear after peeling away all the lies and misrepresentations trotted out by Bozo Boris and his "Get Brexit Done" conspirators, there was always the problem of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Would it be possible to have a border between the European Union and the United Kingdom where people, goods and services could pass freely between the two nations without customs restrictions, tariffs, duties and all the other formalities? Would it be possible to have one part of the United Kingdom treated differently from other parts of the United Kingdom, particularly when Scotland for example had voted overwhe