This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

UKIP doesn't hate disabled people.

Poll

Would you vote for UKIP after reading this thread?

UKIP doesn't hate disabled people.There is just a zesty twist of prejudice.

Late last night I had a discussion with a UKIP supporter who started a thread asking a interesting question. "Why do the left-wing try to restrict the free speech of UKIP supporters". I made the following reply: It is because UKIP are anti-minority and want to privatise the NHS. The original poster went immediately on the defensive and for the rest of the night we where debating UKIP's stance on disabled people.

Unfortunately this thread was deleted by the original poster.
I think it had something to do with myself winning the argument and having a person suggest I was a A1 professional politician. Whatever the outcomes where I don't think they matter. Personal gratification only serves ego and ego will not stop peoples rights being eroded.

Due to this I want to highlight the concerns I raised:

1. In the following video below at 6 mins 40 seconds Nigel Farage says he would like to adopt a streamlining approach similar to a big business who would want to run the NHS. This is exactly what the Conservatives talked about prior to getting elected in the 2010 election. What followed was the mass privatisation of the NHS. Do not be fooled. Nigel Farage is a Right-Wing Small Government Libertarian. He wants to privatise the NHS.

[video="youtube;FB4Lpvta3DY"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB4Lpvta3DY[/video]

Also during the 17 min period Nigel Farage is questioned why he has a poor attendance & voting record during his time in the EU in relation to receiving a huge Salary. The speaker then says anyone in any other job would get the sack. Nigel replied It is because he had a plane crash and was recovering from an operation. He then went on to say he didn't need pain killers while recovering. Nigel is a pure hypocrite. He argues for huge welfare cuts for the sick and vulnerable but when it comes to himself he makes excuses why he should receive his salary while not working just like some kind of sick pay.

2. There have been considerable welfare cuts since 2010. UKIP supporters want to convince people that UKIP are different and pro-disability. However when inspecting their Basic Cash Benefit scheme they would see to it that the old Incapacity Benefit would be set to the same rate as Job Seekers Allowance. Incapacity Benefit now called ESA retains the original structure of incapacity benefit and can range between £100 & £213 a week
based on a single person. This is because ESA includes premiums for different types of disabled people in different types of situations.
If these changes go ahead single disabled people could lose up to 60% of their ESA income per week.
-------------------------------------------------------
Example.
Janet is a single disabled women with Chrons Disease. She can be fit one day then bed bound the next day in aggravating pain. She doesn't have a carer and has to hire one for 2 hours care a day.

She is in the ESA support group. She gets paid the following:

Personal Allowance £71.70
Additional Component £34.80
Enhanced Disability Premium £15.15
Serve Disability Premium £59.50

If Janet had a disabled partner living with her She would also get a carer premium which is paid at £33.

Here is the source I used:
http://www.nhs.uk/CarersDirect/moneyandlegal/otherbenefits/Pages/ESA-how-much.aspx

If the Basic Cash Benefit scheme replaced ESA Janet would lose 60% of her income.
-------------------------------------------------------
UKIP have been extremely quiet about their welfare policy for disabled people and actually pulled their 2010 manifesto off the web to hide their true intentions. However I have a copy of this manifesto and to prove my point the image below explains their welfare policy.

And just in case UKIP supporters deny they are going to send people with learning difficulties into congregate care I have copied their policy from their manifesto and included it below for the readers of this thread to view.

As someone who belongs to the disability community Your Able, Atos Miracles and DPAC I can tell you that the fear of UKIP for disabled people is very real. This is why I decided to get at least 10 articles on the behaviour against disabled people which UKIP seem to not care about showing.

These sources are from media sources, local newspapers and social media feeds.

1. Ex UKIP Candidate Geoffrey Clark calls for abortion of disabled people.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2012/12/mencap-slam-ukip-candidate-who-called-compulsory-abortion-disabled-people

2. Godfrey Bloom mocks disability at Oxford Union.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukips-godfrey-bloom-mocks-disability-at-oxford-union-asks-student-david-browne-are-you-richard-iii-9087751.html

3. UKIP members mock ADHD.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/17/ukip-adhd-psychobabble-message-boards_n_4609441.html

4. UKIP leader caught using disabled parking bay.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/UKIP-leader-Nigel-Farage-caught-parking-in-Ramsey-disabled-bay-20130501164323.htm

5. Ex UKIP candidate suspended for suggesting that organs of the criminally insane should be made available to law abiding citizens.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4218805.stm

6. UKIP bans disabled man as candidate.

http://metro.co.uk/2007/02/28/ukip-bans-disabled-man-as-candidate-134848/

7. UKIP member claims he mocks disability all the time on Twitter.

http://thebackbencher.co.uk/ukip-label-lee-rigbys-family-idiots/

8. Conservative MP is secret UKIP member and suggested that it would be better to kill children with severe emotional and behavioural difficulties than provide out of borough genuine care for them.

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/2096074.Conservatives_sack_councillor_for_joining_UKIP/

9. UKIP use BNP slogan "Love Britain, Vote UKIP".

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/02/28/ukip-bnp-slogan_n_4872664.html

10. UKIP candidate Dr Gasper says PinkNews.co.uk readers should be sectioned under the mental health act.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/04/30/ukip-candidate-dr-gasper-pinknews-readers-should-be-sectioned-under-mental-health-act/

(edited 10 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Oliiver

To be honest, pick on UKIP as much as you want, they're not the biggest threat to the UK. What about the Lib Dem who was blowing Wales up?

Reply 2

MASTER265

Mate you have taken the labour bull**** to personally, they find any reason to bash UKIP and the supporters are unlikely to be convinced other wise. Any one with a brain cell would not buy Into the rubbish they rant on a daily basis. Their campaign remains solely on portraying UKIP as a nazi based party who is racist , sexist and homophobic.

They can can not tackle UKIPs policies head on as they will be beaten every time

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 3

illegaltobepoor

Original post by MASTER265

All the evidence is on the thread. Make a informed argument back instead of claiming all my research is rubbish. I haven't linked any Labour MPs suggesting UKIP is this or that. I have made links directly to UKIP MPs, Candidates, Members, Supporters and Manifesto. Don't like my approach? Then stop your party spouting its rhetoric against disabled people.

Reply 4

MASTER265

Original post by illegaltobepoor

I completely agree with you

Great points

Original post by MASTER265

I completely agree with you

sorry about my lack of understanding. communication disability. i hate my dyslexia.

Reply 7

Mequa

Original post by illegaltobepoor

3. In Margaret Thatchers days most people have bad memories but one good thing she did was that she recognized the needs of disabled people.
Her Governments legacy was the creation of Disability Living Allowance and the abolishment of congregate care for disabled people. She wanted disabled people to be a part of society.

However UKIP want to abolish this and have radical reform on social inclusion for disabled people. They want to send people with learning difficulties back into congregate care away from society.

However much I dislike UKIP's Right-Libertarian policies, it is not factually incorrect that they planned to abolish Disability Living Allowance entirely. The pulled 2010 policy statement said they planned to continue to provide DLA, which is separate from other kinds of benefits. This is intended as a "top up" to cover disability-based living expenses. The current government is replacing it with Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

Since the last thread seems to have found itself into the TSR Recycle Bin, I enclose a link to the 2010 UKIP Policy Statement here (preserved on archive.org on the Wayback Machine). Page 6 has the information on their plans to keep DLA. Note that this 2010 policy is the last one they released to the public, and of course this doesn't guarantee they wouldn't do a U-turn should UKIP get into power, nor that they weren't bluffing.

It is true though that those in receipt of Employment and Support Allowance (formerly Incapacity Benefit) due to disability, would have their benefits slashed to the same rates as Jobseekers Allowance. It's likely this would cause severe problems to those in genuine need such as "Janet" as you described above, which is one reason I do not support such Right-Libertarian policies. It also seems to contradict the statement made on page 6 of the above, that "UKIP fully supports those who cannot work and have disabilities", since it is highly doubtful that benefits at JSA rates plus continued DLA would be sufficient to cover such disability needs.

In addition, there would be compulsory unpaid work for those unable to get a job who wish to retain their benefits, essentially at much less than minimum wage, and tantamount to slavery.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 8

James222

Agree with your post except number 10

Reply 9

illegaltobepoor

Original post by Mequa

However much I dislike UKIP's Right-Libertarian policies, it is not factually incorrect that they planned to abolish Disability Living Allowance entirely. The pulled 2010 policy statement said they planned to continue to provide DLA, which is separate from other kinds of benefits. This is intended as a "top up" to cover disability-based living expenses. The current government is replacing it with Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

Since the last thread seems to have found itself into the TSR Recycle Bin, I enclose a link to the 2010 UKIP Policy Statement here (preserved on archive.org on the Wayback Machine). Page 6 has the information on their plans to keep DLA. Note that this 2010 policy is the last one they released to the public, and of course this doesn't guarantee they wouldn't do a U-turn should UKIP get into power, nor that they weren't bluffing.

It is true though that those in receipt of Employment and Support Allowance (formerly Incapacity Benefit) due to disability, would have their benefits slashed to the same rates as Jobseekers Allowance. It's likely this would cause severe problems to those in genuine need such as "Janet" as you described above, which is one reason I do not support such Right-Libertarian policies. It also seems to contradict the statement made on page 6 of the above, that "UKIP fully supports those who cannot work and have disabilities", since it is highly doubtful that benefits at JSA rates plus continued DLA would be sufficient to cover such disability needs.

In addition, there would be compulsory unpaid work for those unable to get a job who wish to retain their benefits, essentially at much less than minimum wage, and tantamount to slavery.

You are very right.

I should have worded it differently. What I was trying to say UKIP will abolish the policy that includes disabled people in society by sending people with learning disabilities into congregate care.

I also have that manifesto.

Just realised the paragraph I was looking for is included.

It is intolerable that a large number of people choose to abuse the benefits system.
Many people now see the benefits system, with its elaborate system of entitlements
and payments as an alternative to work. This gives rise to a parasitic underclass of
"scroungers", which represents both an unreasonable tax burden on the working
population and is a factor in many social pathologies such as crime, anti-social
behaviour and educational under achievement

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 10

illegaltobepoor

Original post by James222

Agree with your post except number 10

Yes I was getting tired fishing for UK blunders and was too busy watching DVDs.

Reply 11

Mequa

Original post by illegaltobepoor

The opening page of it (page 3 after the title and contents) virtually does already:

It is intolerable that a large number of people choose to abuse the benefits system.
Many people now see the benefits system, with its elaborate system of entitlements and payments as an alternative to work. This gives rise to a parasitic underclass of "scroungers"

Note that this greatly exaggerates the number of actual abusers or free-riders (citing an arbitrary "large number", generally greatly exaggerated by the political Right), and refers to many (suggesting the majority?) of recipients as "a parasitic underclass of scroungers". It's clear that any individuals involved aren't being viewed in a positive or neutral light, but with the use of moralistic damnation to justify harsh measures - including virtual slavery and slashing of needed benefits for some of the most vulnerable members of society.

The rhetoric seems rather reminiscent of Ayn Rand, who condemned welfare benefits recipients as "moochers", "looters" and "parasites" (incidentally before signing onto social security herself).

That manifesto also cites rags such as the Daily Star and the Daily Mail on the next page, "the problem".

I've seen supporters cite how that manifesto is "dated", being from 2010, however it's rather telling how it was not only pulled from the public after being criticised, but the fact is they've never released an updated version since. I smell weasels.

If the Conservatives are "the nasty party", I don't think UKIP are any nicer. They are even further right wing. (Only the likes of BNP seem worse in that regard.) Nigel Farage has also stated his opposition to gay marriage, suggesting more social conservatism than the Conservatives. It's rather bemusing how they've managed to win over many former Labour voters.

Reply 12

Welsh Bluebird

Original post by illegaltobepoor

Late last night I had a discussion with a UKIP supporter who started a thread asking a interesting question. "Why do the left-wing try to restrict the free speech of UKIP supporters". I made the following reply: It is because UKIP are anti-minority and want to privatise the NHS. The original poster went immediately on the defensive and for the rest of the night we where debating UKIP's stance on disabled people.

Unfortunately this thread was deleted by the original poster.
I think it had something to do with myself winning the argument and having a person suggest I was a A1 professional politician. Whatever the outcomes where I don't think they matter. Personal gratification only serves ego and ego will not stop peoples rights being eroded.

At least be honest mate. I got carded and therefore I closed the thread to avoid the argument causing me to get more cards. The thread later got binned. That was the right thing to do before the debate got out of hand and we both ended up banned. Although the insinuation that you think it stemmed from you winning the argument is hilarious given that there was nothing to be won or lost as you were trying to change my opinion and it won't happened.

The truth is, you likened congregation care to concentration camps. At this point I kept on at you to prove how they are like concentration camps. They're not. You even used a Wikipedia definition of concentration camps to try and prove your over the top and exaggerated point. It was a silly statement to make but I'm not going to get into the semantics of that.

The simple truth is, you tried using 2010 manifesto pledges against UKIP which has about as much value as Nick Clegg's pledge to abolish tuition fees in the run up to the next general election. The manifestos for each party haven't been released yet and I shall read them when they are.

Based on my findings I shall come to a decision as to who I am to vote for. As it currently stands I am voting UKIP but that of course could change based on manifesto pledges.

Im not going to get into a tirade and argument with you over it. You claimed you were going to smear UKIP and the Tories as part of a campaign on my visitor message wall. All I will say is, be careful with that because of laws in regards to defamation.

I am a specialist in financial markets and have links with dozens of media organisations.

I am in the process of developing a website to smear Conservatives and UKIP listing all the attacks on the working class.

I have more resources at my disposal and in politics its not how many people you know. Its how much money you have.

The truth is, you wont change my view with what I regard as over exaggerated scaremongering posts based on previous pledges and verbally twisted statements. I think you need to come to learn to accept that. Most UKIP voters are completely set in their ways as to who they will vote for and why.

There's the truth for you.

Reply 13

Welsh Bluebird

Original post by Mequa

I've seen supporters cite how that manifesto is "dated", being from 2010, however it's rather telling how it was not only pulled from the public after being criticised, but the fact is they've never released an updated version since. I smell weasels.

That's because they're releasing their next manifesto this year in the run up to the general election. I will read that and then come to a decision. Im certainly not going to base my decision on the rants of one poster. Every party has eccentric people and idiots who come out with tripe. Every party has politicians who have done bad things in the past. Just a quick browse and I've found this in relation to recent events.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2575505/Letter-paedophile-group-links-Harriet-Harman-Patricia-Hewitt-AFTER-said-marginalised.html

Its really not hard.

Reply 14

James222

Young people joining UKIP, dont remember how the EU issue destroyed the John Major govt and helped bring down thatcher.
They want to keep banging on about europe and dont learn lessons from thr past

Reply 15

illegaltobepoor

Original post by James222

Young people joining UKIP, dont remember how the EU issue destroyed the John Major govt and helped bring down thatcher.
They want to keep banging on about europe and dont learn lessons from thr past

I really do fear that decent people with be called communists/socialists in a negative way and then soon socialism will become some heretic word just like in the 1980s. Fact is we have had Socialism in our country ever since the NHS was born.

Reply 16

illegaltobepoor

As for readers of this forum all my arguments are made above. I am merely projecting the fears of the disabled citizens across our country. While they may seem extreme to non-disabled people I must insist that it is not able bodied people occupied with fear whenever they hear something about UKIP but it is disabled people who are stressed out and scared by such policies which will directly effect them.

Reply 17

Welsh Bluebird

Original post by illegaltobepoor

I have a disability and I am voting UKIP. Please don't claim you are speaking on behalf of all disabled people across the country. You're certainly not speaking on behalf of this one.

Reply 18

illegaltobepoor

Original post by Mickey O'Neil

I have a disability and I am voting UKIP. Please don't claim you are speaking on behalf of all disabled people across the country. You're certainly not speaking on behalf of this one.

I do not speak for you.

I only speak for the disablility communities where I am either a card carrying member or a long time participant. ATOS Miracles, DPAC & YourAble.

Reply 19

James222

Original post by illegaltobepoor

The NHS is pretty private now, in any case socialism outside the health sector (defence&police) is not in the interest of the economy and competitiveness.

The Unions in the 50s took to many liberties and the post war consensus had to he challenged and that led to thatcher