Posts Tagged ‘Government’

A LIFE WITHOUT MUM

February 8, 2009

At 16, Clover Stroud’s idyllic childhood was shattered when a riding accident left her mother severely brain-damaged. Now, 15 years on, funding for her care is being withdrawn. Can that be right?

By Clover Stroud

The Guardian, Saturday 6 January 2007

In the late morning of November 25 1991, my mother was riding on a disused airfield in Gloucestershire when her horse slipped and fell on a strip of concrete. She was wearing a riding hat but her head took the full impact. She was admitted to intensive care in Bristol in a deep coma, and was operated on that afternoon. Her prognosis was very bleak. The neurologist operated on Mum a second and third time over the next two months. We wish he had not.

Her reawakening, four months later, was very slow: there was never a movie moment when she opened her eyes and normality returned. Mum never came back, and she never looked like herself again either. Flaps of her skull were cut away to relieve the pressure in her brain and she had a big scar running from one ear to the other over the top of her shaved head. One of her eyes was partly shut, and has never reopened. So as she awakened she stared at us – her five children and my father – from her one good eye, looking frightened, angry, alone, because she, like us, was trying to work out what had happened, who she had become.

I am the youngest of five children. Mum had my oldest sister when she was in her 20s, and me in her 40s, and what she loved was chaotic family life. She had three children, my siblings Emma, Sophy and Tom, before getting divorced and moving to Oxford. It was the late 60s, and she and her best friend, Felicity, swapped babysitting and hotpants, wore their hair long and straight and ate a lot of cheesecake. She met my father, 11 years her junior, when he was still a student. They got married before he finished his finals and then my sister Nell and I were born.

We moved to Wiltshire when I was seven. Mum had an innate ability to create a very strong home, but would never have stressed over matching sheets and pillowcases. She filled the house with messy bunches of wild flowers and a lot of people. Everyone fell for her, because she made every day into something magic without seeming to try. Of course there must have been arguments, because that is the stuffing of family life, but even in the generically stormy teenage years, I didn’t fight with her. If I am making my early life sound romantic, that is because it was. When I feel anger or despair about what has happened to her, I remember that I was very privileged to have had her as a mother for as long as I did.

I was 16 when the accident happened and in the first year of my A-levels. Nell was on her year off before university. Life changed absolutely in the space of one morning. I can’t remember much about the time immediately after the accident, about the weeks we spent beside her body in intensive care, but someone told me that shock and trauma can make you forget a lot of things. But when she did slowly wake up, she was totally changed and entirely mentally disabled.

We all talked about what would happen when she got better. Then we imagined we would be unlocked from this awful parallel world of brain-damage units and rehabilitation centres, incontinence pads and a dribbling, confused, damaged woman who in some strange, shadowy way resembled the woman she was, but in most ways did not.

Writing this, 15 years later and Mum’s condition unchanged – if anything much worse – it seems laughable, pathetically optimistic, that we estimated her full recovery might, at the very worst, take two years. Denial, I suppose, is what we were in. And survival mode, too. When you are looking at the reality of long-term, chronic brain damage, you will do anything you can to survive.

I am now 31 and I have two young children of my own. I look back on the time before her accident as an entirely different life. Part of this is the inevitable nostalgia of an adult reviewing childhood, but what happened to Mum did profoundly change my life and my sensibilities. It is not true that every cloud has a silver lining, because nothing good, nothing positive, has come from what happened to her. It is just a nightmare, for her, for us all, that goes on and on.

Five months after the initial operations, the NHS declared that Mum, doubly incontinent, confused, disfigured, deeply brain-damaged forever, could be sent home to be looked after by Nell and me. She was awake, so they saw her surgery as a success.

A year after the accident, my sister Emma took Mum to the surgeon who had operated on her, to show him the condition she had been left in. He refused to see her. If this was saving a life at any cost, then that cost was too high.

Mum came back to live at home with a nurse. We changed her nappies, and tried to pretend that life was OK, even though the house smelt of hospitals and pee and an unnamed damage that we still couldn’t really contemplate. I did my A-levels, and Nell went to university. None of us wanted to be at home, and then a sort of late teenage rebellion set in, because it was the early 1990s and the rave scene was huge. Dancing all night in a muddy field was the most effective way Nell and I found to block out the reality of the Gothic hospital that our home had become.

But after two years everyone conceded that Mum was too sick, too deranged and damaged to live at home. So my dad sold our house, bought himself a houseboat in London and spent the change on a small terraced house in Oxford, where Nell and I both had places at university. Mum, needing skilled, full-time nursing, was awarded full NHS funding, and moved into a rehabilitation centre.

Seven years ago, she moved again, to an EMI – elderly and mentally infirm – unit in Norfolk. All of us have visited her as much as we can over the past decade. After I finished university I got married very quickly and had two children, now three and six. I got divorced almost as rapidly, and now live in Oxford in the same house that my dad bought, which Mum partly owns.

Visiting Mum is difficult. She cannot speak, write or communicate. She is epileptic as a result of the accident and doubly incontinent. She is disfigured, her head swollen, and now both her eyes are half-closed. She had to have all her teeth removed last year, she dribbles a lot, her tongue lolls and she is on a largely pureed diet. When she eats, she chokes, her tongue out. She does not recognise me, except for a moaning sound of sadness that she sometimes makes when I come into her room. I find it quite hard to remember the person that she was, the sound of her voice, the things we laughed about. She used to love babies, but when I first arrived with my son, she sat on her hands and wouldn’t look at me or touch him. I don’t know who she is.

Mum would have hated the idea of what she has become and the life it has created. There is no doubt that death would have been preferable. It would have been dignified, and you couldn’t construct a more sad living present for a person than the one that Mum lives in. Eight years ago, when she was a little more mobile, she got hold of some medication and took an overdose. She went into a coma, again, and in hospital her stomach was pumped. For what? To perpetuate this living death? When she came round again, her brain damage seemed to be more profound, and she has deteriorated even more since then.

Knowing that she was getting the nursing she needed was the one consolation after her accident, but recently that has changed. Early last year, Wiltshire Primary Care Trust (PCT), part of the NHS that had granted Mum full funding 15 years ago due to the severity of her injuries, informed me that within 28 days they would cease her funding. They claimed she no longer fulfilled the Continuing Health Care criteria to qualify for funding. No social worker has been actively involved with Mum in the past decade, even through her suicide attempt, and later an allegation of abuse at the rehabilitation centre involving a police inquiry. So the first time in many years that a social worker or member of the PCT had come to see her was to assess her for the removal of her funding. When we appealed against this decision, she was visited again by a PCT nurse who didn’t meet her, as she had been rushed into hospital that night, but he looked through her notes, talked to one of her nurses and me, and then filled in a form in which he stated that her needs were no longer “intense, unpredictable or complex”, three of the key criteria to qualify her for ongoing funding. After that the PCT relinquished responsibility for her without any formal discharge of responsibility. She was just dumped, even though social services never accepted responsibility for Mum.

Events became even more critical in late November, as we were told her nursing home was closing in early December. I found another home in Wiltshire, and stopped work, spending a month on the telephone with the PCT, pleading with them to reinstate her funding, pending the result of the appeal in January 2007, so that I could move her to a new home. Their refusal was categorical and felt deeply inhumane, as within days she would be homeless. I was advised they were acting unlawfully by ceasing responsibility for her while the appeal was in process, but I was also powerless in the face of the bureaucracy of the NHS. So they were acting unlawfully, but what could I do? Call the police?

When the PCT nurse told me that he would be going on leave for a week, and with her home closing within three days, I realised I would have to take dramatic, practical action. On December 1, I left my children with a friend in Oxford, and my sister Emma and I drove Mum to the offices of the PCT in Wiltshire, where I was prepared to leave her, because I did not have an option. The sight of Mum – damaged, frightened, vulnerable – forced them to concede, and Alison Knowles, Director of Performance Improvement and Commissioning, agreed that the PCT and social services should jointly pick up her funding until the result of the appeal in January.

The appeal about Mum’s funding is next week, and fighting her case has taken over my life. I have not worked since last November. I am a single parent supporting two children, and because I live in the house partly owned by Mum, I am facing losing my home. I know that this is a familiar story to a lot of people. Care for elderly or sick relatives cripples families already buckling under the emotional consequences of that sickness. Longevity is a family trait and Mum may well live for another 25 years. I don’t know how to shoulder such long-term financial responsibility, as her fees are more than £26,000 a year.

My story is not an isolated case. This is the way the NHS works today.

Care and the NHS

The 1946 NHS Act and 1948 National Assistance Act established two parallel systems of care: the NHS, which provides care free at the point of delivery, and local authority-funded social care, which is means-tested. Successive governments have exploited this division to cut costs and reduce NHS provision, redefining health care as social care. As long-stay NHS hospitals have been closed, funding has been moved from the NHS and local authorities to for-profit corporations.

Today the NHS in England has fewer than 190,000 available beds (most for acute hospital care); in 1948 there were 450,000 (which included long-stay beds). The mainly for-profit sector, meanwhile, has been subsidised to provide in excess of 360,000 long-stay beds. Today the NHS is responsible for fully funding fewer than 21,000 people with long-term care needs – most people in long-stay beds must pay until their assets are exhausted.

The 1990 NHS and Community Care Act was designed to reduce funding and restrict eligibility for NHS-funded care further through the formal assessments of need. In 1997, the incoming Labour government established a royal commission on long-term care, but rejected the core recommendation that personal care be free. Since then, the health ombudsman, health select committee and the Law Society have published reports drawing attention to the unfairnesses and confusion in government policy and the distress caused to thousands, yet nothing has been done. Now the courts have stepped in. The judgments highlight that government policy and procedures are being applied unlawfully, and that people whose primary need is for health care should receive fully funded care.

More than 4,000 complaints have been received by the health ombudsman – complaints can only be made once all avenues have been exhausted.

· Allyson Pollock – author of NHS plc: the Privatisation of Our Health Care (Verso)

Advertisements

Poisonous Banks Destroying World Economy

December 17, 2008

Banks immoral behaviour shrinks World supply of money and destroys economy

 

For our Global system of money to work we have depended entirely on all our banks to act responsibly, with honesty, morality and probity.Because the banking system realised it could get away with being increasingly dishonest, immoral, completely irresponsible and absolutely without the slightest hint of probity or decency, the currency system of the World has been destroyed by their fraud and breathtaking greed.   

We have a system whereby nearly all the money is manufactured by the banks issuing loans to their customers. These loans amount to about ninety five percent of all the money in circulation. Nearly all the money we therefore use is created by a bank making a loan to someone else.

A culture of rapacious, greedy dishonesty was created throughout every aspect of the banking system as the banks tried to lend ever increasing amounts of money with a complete disregard of their poisonous behaviour towards borrowers. They wanted to lend as much money as possible because the more they lent the richer the banks themselves could become at the expense of those borrowers.

So, all this had the effect of putting absolutely every business and individual person into more and more unsustainable debt. The currency system is actually called money as debt and a fractional reserve banking system whereby the banks can create unlimited amounts of money out of nothing. If there were no bank loans at all, there would less than ninety percent of money in circulation and no-one would be paying interest to the banks.

This system allows banks to exercise increasing amounts of control over every aspect of business and personal life. Everyone was at their mercy. All of us were really working for the banks – working hard at earning enough to pay the increasingly absurd levels of interest and penalties on all the banks loans.

Businesses were constantly persuaded to borrow more money to expand, individuals were persuaded to borrow impracticably large mortgages to buy homes and consumer goods they really didn’t need. We were all told how silly we were if we didn’t use credit cards to spend money we didn’t actually have.

The banks were in complete control of almost the entire supply of money everyone depended on to enable all trade and personal commerce to exist. All the money in use could be traced backed through debt after debt issued through the dishonest banking system.

The financial well being of every business and individual now depended completely on the banks and how they behaved, and how honest and moral they were.

When the levels of dishonesty exhibited by the banks became so blatant and unsustainable, it became so extreme it had the effect of making the banks themselves too frightened to lend to each other.

They knew better than anyone else how dishonest and fraudulent their system of loans and debt had become and how each bank would try and outsmart other banks by being even more devious with loans to each other.

So the banks stopped lending to each other because they knew they were ripping each other off with dodgy loans which were less and less likely to be paid back.

If the banks weren’t going to lend to each other it interrupted the circular movement of money from bank to borrower and from that borrower’s loan ending up in another bank which, in turn enabled the next bank to issue more loans of many, many times the amounts actually being deposited in the bank. And so on it went around in endless circles.

But once the banks interrupted the entire money supply by being too frightened to lend to each other, it also had the effect of rapidly shrinking the money supply. The behaviour of the banks is making money literally disappear from existence at exponential speed.

This is the reason people have less and less money to pay their debts or to actually buy anything they need. The World economy is being destroyed by all the banks because of their greed and fraud and their fear of lending to each other. They know how dishonest and unreliable other banks can be with lending money and fear their loans to each other may not be paid back because the system they created is so dishonestly fraudulent and unreliable.

Governments around the World thought by lending gigantic amounts of money to all the banks this problem of confidence in the money supply would go away. All the money Governments loaned to banks would enable them to commence lending to each other again and get the circulation of the whole supply of money moving again.

Government were wrong. They were wrong because lending to the banks didn’t make the banks any more honest or improve their morality or common sense in any way at all. So the banks just pocketed any money they could get hold of, held on to it like grim death, carried on paying themselves ridiculous ‘bonuses’ and still refused to lend to each other.

The fact this also meant they had less and less money to lend to anyone else too, didn’t seem to bother them. They didn’t seem to be able to work out their collective behaviour was rapidly destroying the whole World economy and even themselves as they started to go bust one by one.

If something doesn’t change pretty damn quick they will probably all go bust in the end. But they are too pathetic to see that, as they whimper on about how it isn’t their fault at all. It must be someone else’s fault, they say. Meanwhile things will continue to get much, much worse.

They are liars !

Every single single business, and individual wishes to continue to work hard to earn themselves money. Businesses do not wish to sack employees and cease to exist, employees don’t want to sit around jobless and having their lives being destroyed by unemployment. It is being forced upon them by the banks.

We all depend on being in possession of money to trade and prosper as a business, and in turn pay employees’ wages so they can buy things they need from the businesses that are prospering.

Money is simply a token of trust we can use to give to some one else in exchange for goods or services of actual real value we need from them. They can then use that token of money we give them to buy what they need from others.

The banks have manipulated the money system with sheer greed until it has been taken to the brink of complete destruction by their deviousness.

The banks are the only custodians of the money system. No one else at all has control of it. No Government, business or individual has control of the system of money. It is entirely in the hands of the banks. They have abused it, misused it for their own profit and have shown a callous disregard of the damage they do to everybody they deal with. Their behaviour has been, and still is quite simply disgusting.

The banks cannot be trusted. They created the Worldwide financial recession single handedly with no assistance from any one else. They are currently destroying the money supply everywhere with lightning speed. Their self seeking manipulation of the World’s money supply is destroying everyone’s ability to trade, or have a job, or pay back their debts. The entire money system is collapsing exclusively because of the irresponsible, fraudulent behaviour of the banks.

They are utterly callous in turning tens of thousands of people out of their homes, leaving houses empty, vandalised and pointless useless. They are equally callous as they take away the jobs of millions of people by destroying businesses with toxic loans and making it impossible for trade and commerce anywhere to function normally any more .

With this vicious control of money the banks have, allowing them to say who has a business and trades or who has a job and who doesn’t, who starves or who has a home or who is thrown out of their home onto the street by bank bailiffs, to have their entire lives destroyed by being made homeless, is a grotesque condemnation of modern times.

LEGALISED THEFT ON EPIC SCALE BY BANKS

November 23, 2008

 

 

 

Manufacturing money and forcing people to borrow

 

Just a little thought I have to get off my chest. It keeps nagging away at me.

 

You’ll be noticing how house prices have been sinking like a stone recently as the banks hold onto all the money and refuse to lend it out to anyone – particularly for mortgages as well as businesses and even each other ?

 

Well then, you might also remember how everyone used to complain how house prices were becoming ever more ridiculously expensive as they climbed up from two or three times an annual salary to many, many times an annual salary.

 

The ordinary little flat I bought in Bristol in 1971 for three times my annual salary as a junior newspaper reporter was selling for fifteen times the current annual salary of exactly the same kind of job just over a year ago. The same thing happened all over the property market.

 

Why do you suppose there was this vast change in value ? Think about it carefully for a moment. In 1971 I had to work for just three years for my entire annual earnings to buy a home. A year ago, doing the same job, I would have to work for fifteen years for my complete annual earnings to buy the same home. As we all know, this grotesque distortion in house values caused lots and lots of problems as it progressively destabilised the whole housing market for all of us.

 

Now, within just a few weeks of the banks creating this Worldwide financial crisis, property prices in the UK and other parts of the World are plummeting as the supply of money everywhere withers and shrinks to almost nothing as the banks simply stop lending to anyone.

 

This is an extreme state of affairs. It is caused only by banks very suddenly refusing to lend any money because they are fearful the unstable economic circumstances they actually created will mean they won’t get their loans paid back because all the borrowers are busy going bust as a recession roars in from just over the visible horizon. This is the opposite of the banks previously conjuring up too much new money into existence and ramming it down people’s unwilling throats.

 

Thank you very much all you ‘Masters of the Universe’. Obviously you lot weren’t really as clever as you liked everyone else to think. Perhaps after all, you were just really  greedy, rapacious conmen, disguising your dishonesty in a complete fiction of incomprehensible jargon and meaningless garbage which even  most of you lot couldn’t understand – never mind the ordinary members of the public.

 

Now we are paying the price as people lose their jobs and their homes as thousands and thousands of people are catapulted by the banks into extreme poverty.

 

So what then, was the reason for all this distortion as house prices rose remorselessly to unrealistic, dizzying heights ?

 

Everyone complained about it but no one seemed to know why it was happening. People tried to think of why it might be happening. They blamed it on a ‘housing shortage’, on ‘too many immigrants coming into the country’, on ‘families disintegrating and more people living on their own as society broke apart at the seams in an orgy of self destruction’, and so on.

 

But the real reason was quite simply that banks were creating too much money and they had to lend it somewhere. They discovered one of the best and most profitable  places to force loans down nearly everybody’s throat was by means of increasingly large mortgages as people were forced to compete with each to offer higher and higher prices for houses just because banks wanted to lend larger and larger sums of money – so they could make more money for themselves ! They quite simply ran out of places to lend money and dreamed up a whole new bottomless pit of possibility for more lending.

 

This meant that when anyone bought a house, they could only do it by making sure they offered more money than anyone else. The banks were always happy to keep on increasing the size of mortgages because they knew they had a complete stranglehold on each borrower.

 

It was one of the safest and most profitable ways of lending huge amounts of money over a long period of time. Much better, the banks thought, than all this tedious hard work of lending money to businesses over short periods of time. Businesses  were much more risky and often went bust; then there was no one to pay loans back to the bank. 

 

Individual householders were easier to pursue and were permanently chained to the banks until they either paid off their loans or died. A much better wheeze, thought the banks.

 

So, there we have it. Banks can create unlimited amounts of money if they can find somewhere to lend it. This is fine if the lending is sensibly organised and not rapacious and dishonest, or dangerously stupid because it wrecks economies and destroys people’s lives.

 

But the banks didn’t think of that. They were too immersed in their own greed to care less about what they were doing. As long as they could get away with it anything goes; that was fine by them.

 

Never mind the damage done to so many other people – or even whole nations. The whole country of Iceland has been made bankrupt and flung into instant poverty and even starvation by the nasty behaviour of the banks ! But the banks are OK, so that’s alright then ?

 

The ‘Masters of the Universe’ will just keep their heads down low for a bit until the recession blows over, then they will start again; effectively engaging once more in a form of legalised theft on an absolutely epic scale.

 

 

If bankers have the legal means of simply conjuring new money into existence, which they do, then there ought to be sensible law to control them and stop the gargantuan amounts of grasping dishonesty we have seen displayed by these dishonest little worms in Modern Times.

 

Now over to you Prime Minister !

THE GREAT BANKING SCAM

November 20, 2008

Makes us all impoverished and enslaved to the banks

 

How’s this for a little gem of information then ?

“I’m afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that banks can and  do create money. And they who control the credit of a nation direct the policy of governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people.”

 

Reginald Mckenna, past chairman of the Board of the Midlands Bank of England came up with this nasty little truth some long time before today’s credit crunch; and boy oh boy.  Just how right he was.

 

Because the banks can destroy money even faster than they create it in the first place – and that is exactly what they have just done over the entire World economy in just a few weeks recently.

 

That is why people are being made homeless and losing their jobs all over the World; why the whole fabric of society in Iceland is disintegrating and it’s citizens queuing in doleful lines for food handouts to stop previously middle class professional  families starving; people everywhere losing their savings and why we’re all going to have a lousy Christmas this year even if we don’t lose our job; because the entire World economy is going bust. This is because the sheer incompetence and greed of banks has paralysed the supply of money and is rapidly shrinking the total amount available for all of us to spend. 

 

Without the ability of all us to spend, businesses  go bust on an epic scale, putting more and more people out of work. This further reduces the amount of money which people would normally be spending at an ever faster and faster rate. A spiral of wanton destruction destroying millions of lives just because the banks are both incompetent and breathtakingly greedy.

 

They are so dishonest they cannot even trust each other. That is why they don’t want to lend to each other and why they now cannot find enough money to lend to businesses or anyone else. 

 

The financial system relies entirely on banks lending to each other and if they don’t, there is no financial system and there is no money at all. With no money business and trade simply cannot function, so ultimately no one  will have a job if the process is taken to its logical conclusion.

 

So, at a stroke, they are completely destroying the World economy as they close down ever increasing numbers of businesses and turn out hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of people, out of their homes and onto the streets.

 

Quite simply, the banks have destroyed everyone’s trust in money  and set about the process of destroying money itself and the only means of World trade.

 

Decades of building up wealth have vanished in an instant because greasy, immoral, devious thugs have somehow wormed their way into the banking system to wreak havoc with it as they made continuous increments towards ever increasing risks and constantly pushing at the boundaries of honesty and probity. 

 

That famous phrase ‘The Big Bang’ seems to spring effortlessly to mind. This was the phrase  used to describe the ’deregulation’ of banks. For ‘deregulation’ read ‘ be as dishonest as you can get away with’. It certainly turned out to be quite a bang, didn’t it ? The whole World economy is now going up in smoke.

 

There is no honesty or probity in banking anymore; just raw, savage, heartless greed. Banks are liars and thieves. There is no honour amongst liars and thieves. That is why the banks know they cannot trust each other and so it is why they are now so reluctant to lend to each other.

 

As about 95% of all the money in circulation is apparently created by banks during their process of taking deposits and then making loans, this means they are just as capable of destroying 95% of all the money in circulation if they continue to be as greedy and stupid as they have been in the recent past.

 

This is how the great banking scam works.

 

There is something called a fractional reserve ratio. It is a neat little conjuring trick, conjured out of thin air by the bankers getting together in a huddle with the government in the past to persuade it to pass a law saying banks could lend many times the amount of money actually deposited as savings.

 

A fractional reserve ratio of 9:1 allows  banks to create and lend £100 000 from a deposit of only £1 111.12p – an actual multiple of nearly one hundred times the original sum as the money is lent and re-lent at a diminishing amount of nine times the deposit sum each time; gradually diminishing to ever smaller sums before aggregating at about one hundred times the original sum. At 6% interest this provides the bank with £6 000 annual interest income which is roughly six times the original deposit of £1 111.12.

 

At 18:1 it would be twice the amount or £12 000 income for the bank from just £1 111.12p deposited.

 

The need for deposits from savers is entirely dispensed with when the bank or mortgage company charges a loan ‘arrangement’ fee. This fee simply allows the bank to conjure up the complete amount of your loan or mortgage from thin air without the tedious business of the bank having to be in possession of a single penny in the form of a deposit in the  first place. Effectively, by paying your ‘arrangement fee’ up front, you are simply creating your own loan or mortgage out of absolutely nothing !

 

It seems rather a pity we have to bother with doing it via the bank instead of just creating how ever much money we want to spend ourselves. It really wouldn’t be any different – except there wouldn’t be a nasty, grasping bank to repossess your property if you failed to make the repayments on time !

 

How’s that for a financial conjuring trick then ?

 

Some banks and mortgage companies have recently been rumoured to use fractional reserve ratios of up to 40:1. This would mean that for every £1 111.12p in cash they get their hands on, they can lend £400  000 , earning £24 000  a year in interest at 6%. 

 

But of course the interest rate is often a great deal more. In the case of credit cards it might be 30%, for instance. Hmm. That would make an annual income of £120 000 for the bank from just one single deposit of £1111.12p then. Nice little earner, isn’t it ? 

 

You could say it is just a teeny, weeny bit excessive. 

 

Just for the avoidance of any doubt  whatsoever, that translates into immoral and dishonest, which in turn really translates into a form of theft. You might call it conversion really; whereby the bank dishonestly converts honest savings from customers into entirely dishonest and misrepresented and risky loans which have now put the entire World economy at risk and threaten all with imminent recession and poverty.

 

So, when you pay your mortgage company £1 111.12 as a mortgage ‘arrangement’ fee, they might lend you just £200 000 and then have another £200 000 left over to lend someone else – or possibly pay themselves a large bonus instead, what ho ! Good little wheeze, don’t you  think ?

 

How else do you think all those meaninglessly huge sums of money sprung into existence from nothing – along with all those gigantically huge banker’s bonuses running into billions of pounds ?. 

 

Why, the bankers simply  realised they could conjure up as much money as they liked and spend it how they liked because they had complete control over it and virtually no one else understood how the whole thing worked.

 

Now we are all paying for their dishonesty and misrepresentation as our lives disintegrate around us. It’s about time our Government rounded all the bankers up and shot the lot of them. They are worthless fraudsters.

 

I came across this interesting observation by the Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank, Atlanta, Georgia, USA,  Robert H. Hemphill  in a film called ‘Money as debt’.  

 

“Individual debts paid off leave individuals with more money. All debts paid off leaves society with no money at all. So there it is, we’re totally dependent on continually renewed bank credit for there to be any money in existence. No loans, no money.

 

“This is what happened in the great depression as the money supply shrank drastically as the supply of loans  dried up.

 

“This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every pound we have in circulation, cash or credit.

 

“If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not we starve.

 

“We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible. But there it is”.

 

 

 

 

(more…)

THE WEASILY TWINS

July 1, 2008

Or how Blair and Brown destroy Britain

 

 

A tetchy day today. The nine year old Ninja Wrecker decided to get up early. He told me later in the day it was because the motorbike  the next door neighbour mistakes for his own masculinity was standing around idling with it’s throaty roar at the crack of dawn.

A common occurrence as the inadequate idiot with the bike likes the whole neighbourhood to notice how masculine he must be making such a pathetically irritating noise. Sometimes the bike is grumbling on and off at intervals all day. What a moron !

The nine year old Ninja  turned the central heating on (it’s mid-summer) and the ancient piping is so noisy it hisses and grumbles  loudly until you wake up in exasperation. So I did. It was really annoying as I had only gone to bed at 2.30 a.m. owing to my desperate need to blot my brain out by watching mindless television.

It’s virtually the only escape I ever get from the Ninja, watching TV in the middle of the night while the little blighter is in bed and isn’t constantly wittering at me. More effective than Prozac, my mind gradually sinks into a semi-conscious state where I am entirely unsure of what I am actually watching. It could be anything really.

Then the Postwoman knocks on the door with a recorded delivery letter. It’s always irritating to be summoned to open the front door in your dressing gown, announcing to all the neighbours how decadent you are being in your dressing gown so late in the morning with the boy lurking behind you in his pyjamas. “what an idle pair of slobs’, they will be thinking self righteously.

 

Then, to really irritate me, the Postwoman spent ages and ages fumbling with letters while I just stood there like an embarrassed lemon. Eventually she plucked one from a bundle and thrust it angrily into my face, holding it strangely between her thumb and forefinger at the very edge of one corner, saying  sharply ‘Is this you ?’, as she wobbled it backwards and forwards, making it impossible to read.

 

Without my glasses I couldn’t see anything except a blur. So I reached out to take  the envelope from her so I could hold it still enough to read. Then  I would be able to see the address.

That’s when this politically correct twit really wound me up by snatching the envelope back from me as I tried to take it and a brief tussle ensued. Fortunately, I won the tussle and was able to read my name on the envelope. Slightly embarrassed at the fight over the envelope I muttered weakly that I was as blind as a bat and couldn’t see a thing without my glasses. – a statement of the obvious.

After I had signed for it, and she had gone, it dawned on me the reason for her possessiveness over the envelope was the indoctrination every government employee gets about dealing with any member of the public.

All public employees these days seem to be brainwashed by their masters  – the Government – to become naturally aggressive and inhuman. It never used to be like that.

 

They are all trained to believe everyone they deal with is completely dishonest, almost certainly inclined towards criminality at every opportunity, and with latent violence lurking it must always be potentially dangerous dealing with anyone. Just like all Government emplyees are really !

 

I suppose that is the natural result when you have an evil, self serving, corrupt Government that sets about systematically taking away everyone’s freedom and milks them dry right left and centre with fraudulent scams to steal as much money as possible. 

 

After all, as the Government knows it is grasping, dictatorial, controlling, and just plain dishonest in every way as it goes about blatantly stealing our freedom and our money, I suppose it must assume the rest of us are as criminally dishonest and nasty as they are.

 

Therefore the Postwoman is trained to assume that householders might snatch letters not belonging to them, presumably so they can disappear inside their houses to frantically rip them open in search of valuables. 

A fairly crackpot assumption on the part of the Postwoman and the people who no doubt specially train Postmen and women to hang on the letters like grim death as a cunning population of householders take every opportunity of snatching them from all the Postmen.

 

But that’s how they behave, so they assume everyone else behaves as badly as they do. After all they are all agents of the Government, and that’s how the whole Government behaves; totally dishonestly !

This atmosphere of paranoid distrust you now find absolutely everywhere is spread throughout every part of our society as a result of the poisonous Government we have had for the last decade.

 

It has employed a huge army of civil service bureaucrats to carry out a manifestly crazy and dishonest campaign of systematic persecution on the entire population of the country.

 

It is positively Orwellian. What this Government has done to this  Country is breathtakingly nasty.

Why have we allowed it to happen ? We used to pride ourselves in our civilised way of life. We were the envy of the World for our integrity and gentle ways. 

Now we have seen that we too can be prey to the evils of dictatorship and corruption along the lines of Hitler, Mussolini, Mugabe etc. Blair and Brown and their cronies have just been less extreme and a little more weasily.

But in the end they are all exactly the same.

BUREAUCRACY OF OPPRESSION

June 19, 2008

 

Social Services Abuse Children – frequently ! No, Perhaps most of the time !

 

A local family I have known for some time told told me an amazing story recently. It’s about the sheer nastiness of Social Services and the bureaucracy of oppression this Labour Government inflicts on us all.

The story is one of those awful tales of Social Services tearing children away from their families without the slightest moral justification whatsoever.

This family are at the bottom of the social heap. The fifty year old husband used to be in the army. Now he is a full time carer to his wife who suddenly descended without warning into mental illness – schizophrenia – a few years ago.

It could have been because of the awful traumas the family experienced. With a son and daughter with learning disability under the age of ten, the family discovered their third child, a son without any medical problems until then, acquired bone cancer and ended up having one leg amputated at the very top of the thigh.

The family remained close and supportive of each other with the husband loyally caring for a wife constantly causing problems making life really difficult for everyone with her muddled and mentally ill mind.

I have heard a mental health nurse working in the NHS say to another husband looking after a schizophrenic partner “Why bother staying with her. It’s a waste of time looking after them. It doesn’t do any good in the end and it just destroys your own life eventually, so why bother ?”

It made me really angry to hear that. It seemed typical of so many of the lazy, self centred bureaucratic employees in the NHS, only concerned with getting paid and with no intention of ever bothering to do their jobs properly. Instead, hiding their incompetent lazyness behind a blizzard of rules and bureaucratic justifications.

The daughter went to a special school for people with learning disabilities and emerged a reasonably competent young woman, perfectly able to look after herself in her small single person flat supplied to her by the local council. The learning disabilities had been quite minor really.

Then she became pregnant. So far, unremarkable. Everyone is getting on with their lives normally and nothing particularly unusual is happening .

Then, let’s call the young girl Julie, instead of her real name, in case some bureaucratic moron working for the government tries to imprison someone for talking about this matter; because it is, apparently, against the law to openly talk about these things and people are often sent to prison for doing so.

Most people won’t know about that and you don’t really hear about the people imprisoned for protesting against the appalling and vicious incompetence of Social Services and the Family Courts.

The reason being, the Government gags everyone with oppressive laws forbidding any exposure of the dreadful activities Social Services and the Family Courts get up to.

Of course these laws completely protect Social Services from being exposed for the destructive, useless, idle and incompetent idiots they often are. The law also conveniently protects the complacent and pompous little Judges sitting in the family courts, happily collecting their large pay packets, secure in the knowledge they are answerable to no one.

I once heard of a family court Judge who billowed in thoroughly late for the Friday afternoon hearing that was supposed to have started at 2 p.m. It was nearly three O’clock when she finally arrived in the court. She must have had a really good lunch.

Apologising brusquely for being late, she announced she hoped everyone in the court would get a move on and conclude the case before four p.m. as she really had to get off on the dot of four O’clock to do her weekend shopping. She couldn’t possibly stay a minute longer that four p.m., she said.

As a direct result of what she had menacing told the roomful of subservient and groveling lawyers, ritually awed by the sheer majesty of the almost unlimited power the Judge held over everyone in the court, a two year old child was deliberately and intentionally placed in great danger by Social Services.

The poor father who had brought the case to ask the court to uphold the law and return his two year old son the court had previously ordered be looked after by him because the Mother was dangerously mad with schizophrenia, was forced to agree to Social Services being given an instant care order so the case could be finished quickly. Then the fat little Judge could cheerfully go off and do her weekend shopping without a care in the World.

Never mind the child had been illegally abducted by the insane and dangerously psychotic Mother and the Judge herself had told the Social Services she was unhappy with the obvious dangers of expecting this Mother to look after the child when clearly she was seriously mentally ill.

But, no, Social Services insisted they thought it would be too ‘disruptive’ to return the child to his Father, even though everyone in the court agreed the Father was an excellent and competent parent, always having been the principal carer anyway. The Judge specifically told Social Services she was unhappy with the idea of the Mother looking after the child as she was clearly a danger and the Father wasn’t. But, no, Social Services must have their way.

So, the Judge said she would reluctantly agree to the Social Services recommendation that the child stay with the dangerous Mother on condition Social Services visited the Mother every day to make sure she was actually looking after the child and not neglecting it. The very real risk of the child’s death at the hands of a psychotic mentally ill schizophrenic was ignored.

Eventually, as it turned out, Social Services were forced to admit the Mother was dangerously psychotic and completely incapable of looking after the child, so they put the child into a foster home rather than return him to his Father.

In the foster home the child was thoroughly abused by the foster parents. When the child left the foster home he had twenty eight identical little round bruises all over his ribcage where he had been poked hard with the end of a walking stick wielded by the foster parents.

This was to keep the two year old child from coming too close to them.

They didn’t like the idea of the child approaching them to seek the affection it craved, having been arbitrarily ripped from both his Father and Mother by the wickedness of utterly incompetent Social Services people so obsessed with political correctness that they would do everything in their power to prevent a Father looking after his own child.

Social Services even went so far as to threaten the Father in that case with taking his son away and forcibly adopting him if the Father ‘didn’t cooperate’ with them, whatever that meant.


So, back to ‘Julie’s ‘ story. Twenty year old heavily pregnant ‘Julie’ sensibly applies to the Council for slightly larger accommodation – a two bedroomed flat instead of the laughingly described ‘studio flat’ she currently occupies. Actually it is just a glorified bedsitter really, but that’s the property market for you. All exaggeration and hype.

Immediately, the bureaucrats of the ever watchful Big Brother State Surveillance, Interference and Oppression Machine swing into action.

Because Julie has had to fill out endless forms describing her entire life history just to get her Council Accommodation in the first place, the nosy officials noted she once had ‘learning disabilities’.

Straightaway the busybody and prurient Council Housing Official handling an application for larger accommodation notified Social Services that a young girl in Council accommodation was about to give birth and as she was recorded as once having ‘learning disabilities’, perhaps Social Services might want to use this as an excuse to interfere in her life, possibly even destroy it.

You bet they do.

Social Services set about causing the maximum amount of destruction and heartache they can contrive. Standard procedure really. All in a day’s work. They are used to doing this sort of thing all the time.

Within a short time after the child is born, Social Services have grasped control of it through the complacent family courts, and they can now do what they want with the child.

That often means ripping the child away from the Mother and family and putting the baby up for adoption to meet the insane ‘adoption targets’ set by an Orwellian government obsessed with controlling every aspect of everybody’s life with ‘targets’.

‘Targets’ for everything. ‘Targeted Services’, meaning things like non-existent health treatment for vast swathes of the population because services are not ‘targeted’ in their direction. Rather all the money seems more ‘targeted’ in the directions of the government bureaucrat’s pockets and fat index linked pensions.

So, particularly bad luck on all of you lot who want dental treatment. Unfortunately all the NHS dental treatment seems to have been ‘targeted’ somewhere else, because you are certainly unlikely to get any of it. You will be forced to pay for your own dental treatment yourself. Just one example of the clever dexterity of our Government’s ‘targeting’ culture.

Soon the baby is placed in a foster home by Social Services, but the young Mother is still ‘allowed’ to look after her own baby as she too, is forced into the same foster home at the age of twenty years old.

Social Services are not satisfied with torturing the Mother by telling her they have decided to bring a case before the Family Court for the forcible adoption of the child.

So, for no other reason that some knowing official employed by Social Services has decided they know best and can decide on who can have the privilege of keeping the child they have given birth to and who can be arbitrarily deprived of keeping their own child, Social Services also use the Family Court to forbid the Mother and child to visit the Grandparents, or for the Grandparents to offer their daughter any help in looking after their own Grand-daughter.

Apparently all this is based on the grounds Grandmother has been mentally ill, although she is doing absolutely fine now as her husband and children are helping her so much and looking after her.

Social Services also hint darkly to the Family Court that as the Grandparents have an untidily gaudy front garden with lots of flower pots full of flowers, this somehow constitutes a serious hazard to the well being of the baby should she visit the house.

This is the sort of thing Social Services think they ought to protect the child from and even make sure it is adopted to take it away from such a dangerous environment where it might be over-exposed to the dangers of too many plant pots in the front garden. Tsk Tsk.

So the Court bans the child from visiting the Grandparents house, having given weighty consideration to the question of too many flower pots in the garden and other things of such similar great importance.

So there we have it. Another good day’s work done by Social Services. I expect they managed to keep their expenditure of public money to a modest hundred thousand pounds or so to interfere in private family life and tear a child away from it’s parents entirely unnecessarily

Never mind the hordes of dismally deprived children who really need the intervention of Social Services to prevent things like their parents starving or beating them to death. Cases like that are much too much of a bother for Social Services to deal with. There is always an excuse for not dealing with them.

Rather just let those children get on with it and suffer the most awful privations, because the laws of obsessive State secrecy will protect Social Services and the Family courts from the public ever finding out about the true extent their breathtakingly corrupt incompetences.

It’s all just a gravy train really, a nice secure position being paid for by the taxpayer, and there is no real accountability at all. ‘Who Cares. We don’t. We’re just Social Services. We couldn’t care less about anyone except ourselves thank you very much.’

To hell with the children.

:

MILKING THE MOTORIST SPEEDING CAMERA SCAMS

June 6, 2008

Like many others, I have a problem with speeding tickets , my first ever in forty years of driving !

Of course it was a camera – and a con trick to gather money.

The road was a minor A road completely empty except for me. It was 9.30 p.m. ish on a dark winter night and it was raining cats and dogs, relentlessly.

 Because of atrocious weather conditions  and a very bendy road it was impossible for me to drive particularly fast. Driving at all in those conditions took all my concentration. If I had driven fast, I would simply have skidded off the road. I also had my nine year old son in the car.

 Suddenly, going around a sharp bend I saw a 30 mph sign. It was obscured from being seen at any maximum sort of distance by virtue of being partially around a bend.

 The very second I saw the 30 mph sign I braked as hard as the wet, greasy skid encouraging road surface allowed.

 While my foot was still firmly on the brake holding the car on the edge of a slight skid  – around a corner – in a semi emergency stop sort of way, the camera flashed.

 It was so close to the 30MPH sign it was impossible to slow any faster from what had been a reasonable speed prior to the sign.

 The record showed me doing 38 mph.

 The case has yet to go to court where I wish to fight it.

 I am even considering refusing to pay any fine etc if found guilty and would be prepared to go to prison.

 If everyone was prepared to do this, refuse to pay and willing go to prison, the law would change pretty damn quick, I should think.

 I now always make a point of never paying for parking, and just throw all the tickets away, as I have had some breathtaking experiences of being robbed blind with parking tickets. I even lost a newish car illegally taken by bailiffs.

 Two recent tickets have instantly expanded to over a thousand pounds each because I didn’t pay them. The utterly disproportionate way in which an already extortionate penalty charge of £40 instantly escalates to this sort of figure is a national scandal.  

 

WHY do we all put up with it ?

 

This Totalitarian Government under Gordon Brown is simply a thief.

Motorists are being deliberately milked of gigantic amounts of money to prop up an incompetent, repressive  and failing Government of inadequate control freaks.

 How did they ever get into power ?

Any advice would be very welcome. And might I suggest giving consideration to organising a national campaign against extorting money through the excuse of ludicrously high parking fees.

 If everyone just threw their parking tickets away and refused to pay for parking, the whole rotten system would grind to a full stop.

 Just to point out a little truth that few people seem be aware of. Most council parking parking fees add up the cost of a parking space being more than enough each month to pay for a substantial mortgage.

 Yes, that’s right. Each parking space milks the motorist of a monthly sum sufficient to pay a large mortgage. Some spaces wrack up to being worth thousands of pounds per month to the council in extortion money.

 When criminals specialise in extortion it is a crime. How come it isn’t a crime when councils and the government do it ?

 Can someone tell me ?

 

http://ticketappeal.co.uk/

Can You Believe It ?

June 4, 2008

My boy – the nine year old Ninja Wrecker – came home from school today and told me there is a new rule at his school that all the kids in year six are forbidden to play with any kids younger than them – that is to say all the other kids at the school in years 5,4 and 3. 

My son is in year 6. All the other kids are also not allowed to play with kids in the previous year groups as them. So year 5 kids cannot play with 4 and year 4 cannot play with year 3. Is this mad, or is it just me that has gone mad suddenly ?

Can you believe it ?

Has our Government become completely insane under that idiot Gordon Brown ? Talk about being control freaks. This takes the biscuit !

It is another example of that vast army of nerdy little pea brained, narrow minded, politically correct morons that Gordon Brown spends our taxes employing to interfere in every part of our lives.

Every State employee, no matter how junior,  has learned that under Gordon Brown, there is no rule of law. All the government bureaucratic minions have been made to think they can make up any rule or infringement of liberty they like as they go along.

It is a pity this useless State school doesn’t spend more time doing what it is supposed to do and give our kids a good education instead of imposing endless petty, pointless and moronic rules.

This same school wrote me a terse letter recently telling me I was obliged to ask their permission to allow my son to cycle the half a mile from our house to the school. I was told I had to fill in a form asking for permission. 

Ah, yes, a form. How can modern Britain function without us all spending our entire lives filling in forms at the expense of actually doing anything useful ?

Is this an infringement of civil liberties, or is it my imagination ?

I was unaware I had to seek anyone’s permission for either my Son or I to cycle where we pleased on the public roads.

Will the school soon be issuing edicts telling me to fill in another  form asking for their permission for my son to, play in the local park ?

This reminds me something worse has already happened. The school reported me to social services some time ago because I happened to tell a teacher that I allowed my son out to play by himself, that is without any adult supervision. I’d forgotten about that. 

I’ll tell you about it another time.

Child Abuse

June 4, 2008

As a single parent it has become abundantly clear to me the whole idea of both parents having full time jobs and still somehow managing to bring up their children is a complete joke.

 

I have brought up two children who are now adults. We were a two parent family and there was always one of us at home and not working. Now I have been bringing up my nine year old boy alone as a single parent since he was three.

 

What a different experience.

 

It is a full time job; and if I was to have a nine to five job, even locally, around the corner from my house, no matter how I arranged things, it is clear my boy would suffer immense emotional neglect as well as a considerably impoverished way of life.

 

I am finding it seriously difficult just trying to find enough time to work at home from my computer. There just never seems to be enough time to either get on with a decent amount of work,  or to spend adequate time with my boy.

 

How on earth does this ignorant bunch of morons who comprise our government think any single parent is going to be able to bring up children and somehow magically fit in a full time job as well ?

 

Of course,  it is possible to have that full time job and farm out the children to some dipsy child minder. But even if the child minding situation is as brilliant as it can ever get, it will still impose enormous problems on the child and parent.

 

It is hardly surprising the whole country is complaining about the dysfunctional youth of today; a vast and increasing proportion of who are becoming addicted to drugs, alcohol and crime.

 

It is the inevitable consequence of  the Government structuring an economy which forces both parents out to work, effectively ensuring virtually the entire nation simply abandons all it’s children.

 

 

The culture of fecklessness and disinterest in getting a good job and getting on in life is encouraged and nurtured by  children been left with childminders for most of their childhood while their exhausted parents go out to full time jobs, only to come home to a mountain of domestic chores for which there is not enough time to deal with.

 

The nation’s children are simply being abandoned – left to their own devices while their parents slog it out on the treadmill of Gordon Brown’s poisonous economy. 

Taxed to the hilt, working for half the year for absolutely no pay whatever to feed the insatiable coffers of Gordon Brown’s greedily officious  taxman. 

 

And where does all this money go ? Why, to an army of nasty little bureaucrats employed in ever increasing numbers by the government to interfere in every part of our lives and spy on every citizen so they can be controlled in the minutest way.

 

You can’t even leave your dustbin lid slightly raised without the Government spies noting it down in minute  detail and prosecuting you to brand you with a ‘criminal’ record. I mean, what a surreal joke to describe someone whose dustbin lid is slightly ajar as a ‘criminal‘ ! What kind of obscene Orwellian  nightmare has this Government brought to this country?

Social Workers Removing Children from Innocent Parents

May 28, 2008

This is a little gem of information I just found.

Social Services do seem to be a bit of a problem up and down the country. 

Fassit ( Families and Social Services Information Team) are finding that social workers are removing hundreds of children from innocent parents each year through sheer incompetence and organisational failure.

 

What could best be described as blatant discrepancies occur between the evidence presented at Court by expert witnesses (social services; health; education etc) and the actual events or material facts of the case.

We do not condone any action by any individual that threatens the safety, wellbeing or emotional development of a child, this includes actions taken by Social Services Departments, Local Education Authorities, Child and Adolescent Health Services and Local Authorities.

 

Fassit was founded in 2005. A non-governmental voluntary organisation independent of Local Authority Social Services Departments. Fassit provides a website containing information and advice for families with children experiencing frustration in working with Social Services in Child protection Proceedings.

 

Initially a organisation looking to change views over the legitimacy and ethics of ‘forced adoption’ the organisation has grown to encompass support for individuals at any point in the investigative processes operated by Childrens Social Services.

 

Fassit are trying to protect all children where massive legal resources and support can be better used on keeping children at home with their families and not completely wasted on unnecessary court proceedings. [Children in care cost the taxpayer an average of £2,500 per child, per week-more than four times what it would cost to send a child to Eton.]  

 

Where our views diverge from the prevailing political and statutory services view is in the belief that many of the problems we, as a society, face today are avoidable if social care agencies were given proper funding and were scrutinised more and held accountable for their methods and actions.

 

The health and welfare of families, children and young people is not something that can be made ‘cost effective’ – the benefits of intervention are most often long term and the savings, in the long run, are less crime and more productive individuals with health pro-social skills.

 

Fassit’s belief is that the role of Social Services as providers of social care is incompatible with the duties they discharge as investigators of alleged or likely abuse. There is no separation of powers, indeed many social services departments have dispensed with specialist child protection teams in favour of multi-tasking roles for individual social workers. Families are increasingly being faced not with allegations of abuse but of the potential to abuse, how such potential is quantified remains a complete mystery.

 

From its early days Fassit has campaigned against ‘forced adoption’ where there is no recourse, in law, to return children home after an adoption order is granted if the grounds for the adoption are found not to have existed. Such situations do occur and on a more regular basis than social services would want the general public to know.

 

If social care agencies continue along the road of being seen as indifferent, unapproachable and ‘out of control’ then you can be assured that families will withdraw form any attempt to seek help with their problems.

 

 

Daily Mail – 23 February 2008

My baby had cancer but social workers falsely accused me of child abuse and took all three of my children
Read Article…

 

Daily Mail – 31 January 2008
The baby snatchers: Judge orders social workers to hand back newborn child taken from hospital

Read Article…

 

Western Mail – January 17 2008

Vulnerable children cry for help

Read Article…

The Nasty Incompetence of Social Services

May 28, 2008

 

Hearing the dreadful news yesterday of two children murdered by their schizophrenic mother because of the nasty incompetence of Social Services reminds me that I too have been the victim of social services. 

My nine year old son’s Mother became mentally ill and was treated abominably by social services, as was our son.  

Mum is now too ill to be with my son and I ( almost certainly because of what social services did to her), so that is why I am a single father.

Social services did everything possible to wreck our family – and they succeeded too. They were also dishonest and utterly incompetent. They blatantly lied and made every effort to prevent me from having my son.

 

They told me they were considering having my son adopted rather than let me have him and openly used this as a threat to me, using the words ‘if I didn’t co-operate with them’.

 At no stage was I ever accused of being a ‘bad’ or incompetent parent. In fact the Family Court specifically praised me, and even social services from time to time gracelessly said I was a ‘good’ father because they were forced to.  

It is a an extraordinary tale. I am prevented from writing about it because of the law relating to Family Courts.

 

This  has made me even more determined to write about what I legally can in relation to Social Services.

 

Watch this space.

 

Meanwhile, have a read of this Daily Mail article about how awful social services are.

Social Services Abusing Children

THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT IS A THIEF

May 27, 2008

 

Talking about bailiffs, I have just had a visit from one of these idiots trying to recover a parking fine.

 

This is the first time he has called about this parking fine, originally for the standard £40. The note he left says his fee for calling just this once is £595.34p.

 

I happen to know the fee is a complete fiction and a blatant attempt at fraudulently extorting money from me, and entirely illegal. 

 

The last time I actually saw a bailiff I told him to p**s  off because I wasn’t going to tell him who I was – whether I was actually his intended target or not. 

 

I snarled at him he was a parasite. He seemed to come over all hurt and aggrieved, almost tearful, and said ‘You don’t have to get personal. I’m only doing my job.’ 

I replied no decent human being would doing that job; ie going around extorting money from perfectly ordinary law abiding people this  authoritarian Labour  Government brands as criminals for simply using their cars.

 

Then reason I know the fee is illegal is because I  have learnt about it at the CONSUMER ACTION GROUP forums – very useful. Do have a look. There is bound to be something it can help everyone with.

 

 

As a currently unemployed full time single parent my only income is about £100 per week of state benefits. Parking fines of £40 for completely ludicrous circumstances, rapidly escalating by hundreds of pounds is a monstrous act of extortion by the government. It is time we all did something about it.

 

What about everyone simply refusing to pay any parking fines at all. That would sort the thieves out because there would just be absolutely nothing they could do about it except change the law.

 

This government is rapidly making Britain into a totalitarian state – just like those wacky dictatorships like Burma etc.