Monthly Archives: January 2022

Another #DWP bid to deprive severely #disabled people of #benefits crushed by the courts

Therese Coffey: her Universal Credit rules discriminate against severely disabled people who she should be protecting. Rather than admit that it is wrong, she insists on wasting public money defending the indefensible in the courts.

Two severely disabled men have won a legal challenge after the Department of Work and Pensions’ (DWP) failed to provide enough in transitional payments to protect them and others as they moved to Universal Credit.

A High Court judge found that the DWP discriminated against the pair, known as TP and AR, by refusing to compensate them the full difference between the payments they received on legacy benefits and UC payments in an area where it had already been rolled out – around £180 per month.

The DWP gave evidence that a ruling like this will affect up to 50,000 people, it will cost up to £150 million and take six years to put right the underpayments.

The ruling is the fourth in favour of TP and AR, who began their legal campaign after they suffered a severe drop in income in 2016 and 2017 as a result of house moves to areas where UC was in operation. Previously they had each received Severe Disability Premium (SDP) and Enhanced Disability Premium (EDP).

Despite rulings in the High Court and Court of Appeal, the DWP refused to pay severely disabled people affected by the policy the full monthly loss they had suffered of around £180.

Instead it paid just £120 a month, compensating for the loss of SDP and not EDP.

The SDP Gateway was introduced in 2019 to prevent other severely disabled benefits claimants from being moved onto UC outside of a managed migration process until January 2021. Outside of that period, disabled people in receipt of both SDP and EDP who experience a so-called ‘trigger event’ (certain changes in circumstances), such as a move into a UC area, experienced a sudden severe loss of income. They are known as ‘SDP natural migrants’.

The judgment in this case represents the fourth time that the Court has given detailed consideration to claims under Article 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights alleging unlawful discrimination against severely disabled adults who ‘naturally’ migrated to Universal Credit.

Once again, the Court concluded that Therese Coffey, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was unable to show an objective and reasonable justification for the different treatment of people in TP and AR’s position.

The Court found that the Secretary of State’s arguments and evidence were largely the same as in the earlier cases and, in spite of the outcome and detailed findings in the previous cases, her evidence on key points was very limited, too generic or otherwise inadequate.

The Secretary of State claimed that something significant had changed, but the Court repeatedly emphasised that the essential differences in treatment remained the same and that neither legislative changes nor temporary Covid-related support changed the analysis.

The court held that the Universal Credit regulations unlawfully discriminate against TP and AR by failing to cover the loss of EDP when providing transitional payments.

UC therefore treated them less favourably, without reasonable justification, than legacy benefit claimants entitled to SDP who did not experience a ‘trigger event’ compelling them to claim UC, and legacy benefit claimants entitled to UC who experienced a ‘trigger event’ on or after January 16, 2019, and before January 27, 2021 (the period in which the Gateway was in place).

Mr Justice Holgate found:

  • The Covid-19 uplift received by UC claimants during the pandemic does not undo or make up for the disadvantage caused by the failure to cover the loss of EDP.
  • The inclusion of relief for EDP would not overpay those of the 71,000 claimants who receive SDP but not EDP. Overpayment could be avoided if legislation provided for six fixed rates of payment rather than three. “The suggestion that transitional payments in respect of EDP could not be deliverable has simply not been made out,” he said.
  • The risk that a ruling in favour of TP and AR would trigger ‘piggyback’ (similar, other) claims was not realistic.
  • The Secretary of State had not shown a reasonable relationship of proportionality between her aim of curtailing public expenditure, and the decision not to provide any element of transitional relief against the loss of EDP.

According to the DWP, in evidence it gave to the court when defending the judicial review claim, the ruling will affect up to 50,000 people and will involve sums of up to £150 million over a six-year period to put right.

The ruling is the fourth in favour of TP and AR, who began their legal campaign after they suffered a severe drop in income when they were moved on to UC in 2016 and 2017 as a result of house moves to areas where UC was in operation. Previously they had each received Severe Disability Premium (SDP) and Enhanced Disability Premium (EDP).

Despite rulings in the High Court and Court of Appeal, the DWP still refused to pay severely disabled people affected by the policy the full monthly loss of circa £180 they suffered and instead paid them just £120 a month, compensating for the loss of SDP and not EDP.

The SDP Gateway was introduced in 2019 to prevent other severely disabled benefits claimants from being moved onto UC outside of a managed migration process until January 2021. Outside of that period, disabled people in receipt of both SDP and EDP who experience a so-called ‘trigger event’ (certain changes in circumstances), such as a move into a UC area, experienced a sudden severe loss of income. They are known as ‘SDP natural migrants’.

The judgment in this case represents the fourth time that the Court has given detailed consideration to claims under Article 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights alleging unlawful discrimination against severely disabled adults who ‘naturally’ migrated to Universal Credit.

Once again, the Court concluded that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was unable to show an objective and reasonable justification for the differential treatment of those in TP and AR’s position. The Court found that to a large extent the Secretary of State’s arguments and evidence were the same as in the earlier cases.[1] In spite of the outcome and detailed findings in the previous cases, the Defendant’s evidence on key points was very limited, too generic or otherwise inadequate.[2] Notwithstanding the Secretary of State’s continued claims that something significant had changed, the Court repeatedly emphasised that the essential differences in treatment remained the same and that neither legislative changes nor temporary Covid-related support changed the analysis.[3]

The court held that Regulation 63 and Schedule 2 of the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014 unlawfully discriminate against TP and AR by failing to cover the loss of EDP when providing transitional payments. It thereby treated them less favourably, without reasonable justification, than (1) legacy benefit claimants entitled to SDP who did not experience a ‘trigger event’ compelling them to claim UC, and (2) legacy benefit claimants entitled to UC who experienced a ‘trigger event’ on or after 16 January 2019 and before 27 January 2021 (during the period in which the Gateway was in place).

Mr Justice Holgate found:

  • The Covid-19 uplift received by UC claimants during the pandemic does not undo or make up for the disadvantage caused by the failure to cover the loss of EDP.
  • The inclusion of relief for EDP would not overpay those of the 71,000 claimants who receive SDP but not EDP. Overpayment could be avoided if legislation provided for six fixed rates of payment rather than three. “The suggestion that transitional payments in respect of EDP could not be deliverable has simply not been made out,” he said.
  • The risk that a ruling in favour of TP and AR would trigger ‘piggyback’ (similar, other) claims was not realistic.
  • The Secretary of State had not shown a reasonable relationship of proportionality between her aim of curtailing public expenditure, and the decision not to provide any element of transitional relief against the loss of EDP.

“I am not satisfied … that the broad aims of promoting phased transition, curtailing public expenditure or administrative efficiency required the denial of transitional relief against the loss of EDP for SDP natural migrants,” he said.

“A fair balance has not been struck between the severity of the effects of the measure under challenge … and the contribution that that measure makes to the achievement of the [Secretary of State’s] aims.”

He said there was stronger evidence to conclude this “where there is no connection between the triggering event, the move to a home in a different local authority area, and any rational assessment of the disability needs of a severely disabled claimant.”

The judgment also found in favour of claimants AB and F, a disabled mother and child, saying that the discrimination they suffered “is manifestly without reasonable foundation”.

The DWP’s failure to provide transitional protection against the loss of the lower disabled child element of Child Tax Credit was found to constitute unlawful discrimination.

It treated AB and F less favourably than legacy benefit claimants entitled to SDP and the lower disabled child element of Child Tax Credit who have not experienced a trigger event compelling them to claim UC.

It also treated them less favourably than legacy benefit claimants who were entitled to SDP and the lower disabled child element of Child Tax Credit who experienced a trigger event whilst the SDP gateway was in place.

“I am relieved that the judge agrees that the DWP treated us differently than other severely disabled benefits claimants and that it was wrong to do so,” said TP.

“The past six years have been immensely stressful as I have struggled to get by on a lower income. I just hope that the DWP will put all of this right as soon as possible so that those of us who have been badly affected by this unfair policy can get on with our lives.”

AR added: “It should never have been the case that disabled people entitled to the severe and enhanced disability premiums were suddenly deprived of the equivalent sum when they found themselves transferred onto Universal Credit.

“The policy has caused me and others serious hardship and I am glad that the court has seen the sense in our argument. Hopefully we will be ‘fourth time lucky’ and finally have reached the end of the road fighting this unfair policy.”

Their solicitor, Tessa Gregory, said she could not understand why the DWP was still dragging the affair out in the courts.

“Following the three previous findings of unlawful discrimination, the DWP should have ensured our clients were not losing out on severe and enhanced disability payments.

“Instead, after each judgment the DWP has made further attempts to short-change this group of highly vulnerable claimants who faced a cliff edge loss of income when none of their disability needs has changed.

“Our clients hope that this judgment marks the end of the road and that the DWP will stop wasting money on legal fees and get on with protecting the vulnerable.”

Source: Severely disabled benefits claimants TP and AR win legal challenge over loss of income caused by move on to Universal Credit | Leigh Day

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

#Partygate: Fabricant’s #blackmail retort tars the Tories as abusers – and criminals

Michael Fabricant: in this image he appears to be clamping his mouth shut – to avoid putting his foot in it?

What a spectacular blunder from a former Tory whip.

Michael Fabricant tried to dismiss MPs’ claims that the Conservative Party’s whips were blackmailing them out of submitting letters of “no confidence” in Boris Johnson’s leadership due to the “Partygate” scandal.

Tory Parliamentarians said whips had threatened to defund their constituencies or worse, and responded by themselves threatening to release texts and a recording of a “heated” exchange of words with chief whip Mark Spencer.

Fabricant tweeted in response to the initial blackmail claim by fellow Tory William Wragg: “If I reported every time I had been threatened by a Whip or if a Whip reported every time I had threatened them, the police wouldn’t have any time to conduct any other police work! What nonsense from WW.”

It seems he had not considered the significance of what he was saying. So members of the public pointed it out to him – en masse.

They reminded him that commonplace behaviour can be unacceptable:

They asserted that he was saying blackmail – a crime, remember – is common practice in the Conservative Party:

And they raised the point that threatening work colleagues is also unacceptable:

So that’s the Boris Johnson Conservative Party, according to one of its members: an abusive work environment that is so riddled with crime that if all the offences its members committed were reported to the police, our law enforcers would never have time to deal with anything else.

Source: Tory MP’s attempt to slam ‘blackmail’ allegations spectacularly backfires

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Don’t forget the Tory hypocrites have passed their #voterID law to disenfranchise millions

Yes, UK, you have a fascist government: check out the last item on the list – “fraudulent elections”.

So much for the Tories not wanting a “papers please” society!

After making a huge fuss about Covid passports, because they don’t want UK citizens to have to prove their identity or be deprived of their rights, earlier this week Conservative MPs overwhelmingly passed a Bill to demand that UK citizens must prove their identity in a specific way before being allowed to vote.

There is no justification for this law. The claim is that it will prevent impersonation of other voters at the ballot box, as though there has been an epidemic of this electoral crime.

But there was only one case of election fraud by “personation” in 2019. One.

The Bill was supported by 327 Conservative MPs – that’s 326 more people than committed the crime it’s supposed to protect against.

We must therefore conclude that Boris Johnson’s government is lying again – and ask what real reason the Tories could have for imposing this unnecessary restriction on the UK’s electorate.

The answer is simple: it will ensure that between one million and 3.5 million people will not be able to vote at elections.

And it’s not a random two million people, either. This is a targeted attack:

That’s right – this will affect poor people, the kind who are unlikely to vote for the Party of the Rich.

It’s a blatant move to rig elections.

Of course, the hypocrisy is clear:

And the effect will be recordable because only general elections and elections in England will be affected by the new law.

See, This Site and others have been warning you about the fact that your Conservative government’s political position is full-on fascist, for years; fraudulent elections constitute the 14th of the 14 signs of fascism.

And even now, Tory “useful idiots” will scream at you that it’s all a lie, they’re not rigging elections and there’s a real need to save you from a nonexistent threat.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

#Partygate: Downing Street won’t investigate MP #blackmail claims – but does it matter?

Laughing at us: Boris Johnson grinned inanely and bobbed about on his bench while MPs attacked his contempt for the rules and denials of guilt at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday (January 19).

The prime minister’s office has said there will be no investigation of claims that Tory whips have blackmailed MPs to keep them from launching a leadership challenge against Boris Johnson.

But does it matter? It’s being claimed that the Sue Gray inquiry into parties at Downing Street has seen an email warning Johnson’s Principal Private Secretary, Martin Reynolds, against holding a lockdown-breaching party in May 2020.

The official who sent the email, who has so far gone unnamed, appears to have told ITV’s Robert Peston that he “probably” also personally warned Johnson against it “but I honestly can’t remember”.

This would corroborate a claim by Johnson’s former top advisor, Dominic Cummings, who said he had also personally warned the prime minister against the party.

That should be enough to sink Johnson, because it would indicate that he deliberately lied to Parliament when he said he attended it in the belief that it was a “work event”.

Still, the accusations are continuing to land. Today it is being claimed that, after Downing Street said it had seen no evidence to support an investigation into blackmail claims, a group of Tory MPs known insultingly as the “Pork Pie Plotters” (because one of them represents Melton Mowbray) are considering releasing evidence that they have faced such threats.

Apparently this includes text messages and a secretly-recorded, “heated”, exchange of words with Conservative Chief Whip Mark Spencer.

Whether this alleged information becomes public knowledge or not, it is being reported that Downing Street is extremely nervous about what Cabinet Office civil servant Sue Gray’s inquiry will reveal.

It’s being said that officials are now doubtful that it will clear Johnson – and it could be published as early as Monday.

This would make sense if she has seen the alleged email to Martin Reynolds, as it is understood that it would make the case against Johnson airtight.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

#Labour is dead; who’s joining #PAL instead?

Rachel Reeves: it has been suggested that she would be more at home in the actual Conservative Party than Labour – but now Keir Starmer has turned the Red party into Tepid Tories it seems she has become comfortable again.

Rachel Reeves really put her foot in it on the morning media round today (Thursday, January 20, 2022).

Challenged over the fact that her political party – Keir Starmer’s Tepid Tories (formerly Labour) – has room for a right-wing Conservative, but not for a socialist like Jeremy Corbyn, she not only admitted that she was glad that Starmer had changed Labour into a pale reflection of the Conservatives, but also spluttered that Mr Corbyn should apologise for the fabricated anti-Semitism “crisis” that was foisted on him for political reasons by right-wing organisations outside the party and was then seized by right-wingers within Labour itself.

She lied, saying Mr Corbyn needed to apologise for his response to the “EHCR” [sic – she meant EHRC (Equality and Human Rights Commission)] report because it had said Labour was “institutionally anti-Semitic”; the EHRC report said no such thing. Here are the facts:

And she lied again, saying that Mr Corbyn damaged relations between the Labour Party and “the Jewish community”. Firstly, there is no single group that identifies as “the Jewish community” or represents all Jews in the UK (although there are some who falsely claim they do); and secondly, Mr Corbyn did nothing to upset any Jews at all – some people on the political right saw an opportunity to bring down a socialist by lying about him and opportunists like Ms Reeves joined them.

Hear it for yourself because here’s the clip:

If that wasn’t bad enough, Reeves seems to have gone on a destructive rampage against Labour’s left-wingers and through her own party’s current policies to ensure that a Labour Party with either her or Starmer as its MPs would never be acceptable to left-wing voters:

She said that the loss of 200,000 members was a “good thing” because it removed anti-Semites from the party, and “people who never shared our values”. She did not say what those values were but let’s take a moment to remind ourselves that this is a person who gave a glowing endorsement to Nancy Astor, who was an infamous anti-Semite, Nazi idealogue and supporter of Adolf Hitler.

She admitted that Keir Starmer’s Tepid Tories were in financial difficulty but lied yet again, saying this was Jeremy Corbyn’s fault. In fact, when Mr Corbyn handed over the party leadership to Starmer, Labour had £13.5 million in the bank. Starmer, and his general secretary David Evans, squandered the lot.

Some of these claims were made on the Today show; some in the Financial Times. None of them were corrected by either Today presenter Mishal Husain or any of the newspaper’s editorial staff. On the BBC’s side, this is surprising, because only last week the corporation apologised for not challenging claims of anti-Semitism against Jeremy Corbyn in another interview:

We may await an apology and correction – although I expect we shall be waiting a long time.

Fortunately, those of us who want a better life for more people than just the fabled “one per cent” don’t have to put up with Reeves’s nonsense any longer: there is an alternative:

It seems likely that at least six other groups are likely to announce their own involvement in PAL.

Of course, there will be no publicity from the BBC, Financial Times, or any of the other mainstream media. They’ve spent decades neutering Labour; they won’t want to let some other working-class Lefty upstarts rock the boat, now they think they’ve put us all back in our place.

If it’s a genuine alternative, it will grow in spite of them – and This Writer is looking forward to helping that happen.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tory #SteveBaker reckons #BorisJohnson is facing #checkmate over #Partygate

Steve Baker.

Boris Johnson’s position must be precarious indeed if arch-Brexiter Steve Baker is saying he’s had his day.

Baker, interviewed by the BBC’s Nick Robinson, admitted that Johnson wasn’t elected for his grasp of “tedious rules”, but… well, see/hear it for yourself:

It’s possible that this MP’s words are motivated by his own issues with Johnson’s Covid-19 strategy.

But Johnson is (prematurely, perhaps) scrapping health protection measures (Baker would call them restrictions) related to the Omicron wave of Covid-19. As a staunch opponent of Covid-related protections that hinder the economy, Baker might be expected to get behind his prime minister in support, and not to stab him in the back.

But the crux of the matter is Johnson’s persistent breaking of his own Covid-19 rules. Perhaps this has offended Baker’s sense of fair play (if a Tory can be said to have such a thing): the rest of us have been having to abide by rules that Baker didn’t think were necessary, yet Johnson seemed clearly to have decided to ignore them, even before he read them out to us.

It’s likely that this is the reason Baker denounced Johnson’s behaviour as “appalling”, saying the public were right to be “furious” and suggesting that the prime minister is facing “checkmate”.

The word from Downing Street is still to wait until Sue Gray reports on her inquiry. But she’s a Johnson employee, of course.

And with accusations that Johnson’s allies are blackmailing Tory MPs to withhold “no confidence” letters, will we really have to wait that long until he’s ousted?

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Why isn’t #BorisJohnson facing a #leadershipchallenge? Apparently this: BLACKMAIL

Boris Johnson: does this look like the kind of person who would use coercion to get his own way?

Nobody should be surprised by this, considering Boris Johnson’s record of dishonesty.

It means this article is now very different from what it was going to be. After learning that MPs had reportedly decided to wait for Sue Gray’s report before deciding whether to submit letters of “no confidence” in Johnson, I was going to excoriate them for being mice when they need to be lions.

“Where is the leadership the electorate has expected from the Conservatives?” is what I was going to ask. “It isn’t coming from Boris Johnson and it seems nobody else in the government or among Tory backbenchers is willing to grasp the nettle.”

Well now we have a reason:

The idea that whips blackmail MPs is not new – they’ve been doing it for decades. There’s a scene in the 1990s BBC drama House of Cards in which a “Mr Stoat” is blackmailed into voting for the government because he was caught by police soliciting a prostitute on the street; the whips “disappear” the accusation and Stoat scuttles off to do as he’s told.

Of course, if Tory whips are using knowledge of criminal behaviour to keep their MPs in line, they’re unlikely to go to the police. But in that case, why would the electorate want criminals to be MPs?

The claim here is that MPs are being threatened with the loss of funding for their constituencies. If that is true, there is nothing to stop them from popping down to their local cop shop in Westminster and laying information against Johnson and his thugs.

The big question now is whether anybody will do it.

Remember: these people are mice; they’re not lions.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Was this the moment #BorisJohnson’s career ended? For many, it couldn’t come soon enough

Laughing at us: Boris Johnson grinned inanely and bobbed about on his bench while MPs attacked his contempt for the rules and denials of guilt.

What an apocalyptic performance.

Prime Minister’s Questions could hardly have gone worse for Boris Johnson. It is hard to tell which moment was more damaging for him.

Was it this, in which senior Tory MP – and himself a former leadership contender – David Davis quoted (among others) Oliver Cromwell?

I was one of many to comment on it…

Alternatively, was the tipping-point this moment, in which Johnson himself laughed at criticisms of his rule-breaking?

I had something to say about this as well:

And now we’re all waiting to see if Graham Brady, chairman of the Tory backbench 1922 Committee, will come out and say he’s received enough ‘no confidence’ letters to trigger a leadership challenge against Johnson.

After today’s performance it seems that, for many of us – Tories and Opposition alike – that moment can’t come soon enough.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

#Covid19 #planB rules will be lifted in England on January 27

Jabber Johnson: he says people still need to be vaccinated as the Omicron variant is “not a mild disease for everyone”.

Boris Johnson has announced that health protection regulations that he brought in to minimise the effect of the Omicron variant of Covid-19 will be ended on Thursday, January 27.

For clarity, this means:

  • The end of mandatory Covid passes in England, with businesses allowed to use them if they choose
  • Mandatory face masks will end, including in classrooms for secondary students and on public transport – meaning people will not be criminalised for choosing not to wear them
  • The end to work from home guidance
  • Restrictions on care homes will be eased, with detail to be released
  • However, there will still be a legal requirement to self-isolate if you test positive for Covid

As Johnson made his announcement, a Scottish MP asked: “Is the PM scrapping the rules because he doesn’t understand them?” in a harsh – but fair – comment on the prime minister’s latest “Partygate” excuse.

Johnson said his government got the tough decisions right – but did he?

He failed to identify the seriousness of Omicron when it was first reported. He didn’t close the UK’s borders; he practically invited Omicron into the country.

He failed to impose new health protection measures in time to prevent more than a million people from catching the new strain of Covid-19.

He failed to equip the NHS to take the added strain created by the two failures listed above, meaning doctors and nurses were pushed to their limit and beyond. The future of healthcare in the UK is looking bleak because these professionals will be reassessing their decision to work here.

And there is no guarantee that a Johnson government will not make the same mistakes again, if another variant of Covid-19 washes up on the UK’s shores.

Every decision Johnson has made about Covid-19 has been determined by whether a Tory, or a Tory donor, can make money from it.

This announcement merely highlights more reasons Johnson must be removed from office.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

#Tory 2019er Christian Wakeford defects to the Labour Party. What does this say about LABOUR?

Christian Wakeford: he was expected to sit behind Keir Starmer in Prime Minister’s Questions after defecting to Labour.

One of the Conservative Party’s 2019 intake to Parliament has defected to the Labour Party in response to Boris Johnson’s “Partygate” shambles:

And Labour has welcomed him:

This is a literal example of Boris Johnson’s support walking away from him.

But what does this say about Keir Starmer’s Labour Party, that a “solid Tory” who has supported Johnson’s hard-right, arguably fascist, policies for more than two years can switch sides to it?

To This Writer, it seems clear that my own accusation that Starmer has turned Labour into “Tepid Tories” is accurate.

There’s no real difference between them and Starmer’s determination to turn Labour blue is depriving the UK’s electorate of any choice.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook