Who else can say they have had Rihanna swinging over their head?

A case study about one blogger's learning journey

1.    What was your situation before you got interested in learning?

I was homeless for several years sleeping rough with friends. I managed to get a room in a B & B and received Housing Benefit from Camden Council as it was on their registered list. New owners took over and decided they could evict us and turn in into a backpacker’s hostel. We organised ourselves into an action group fought our case with the help of Shelter and other agencies. After several months of campaigning I was eventually offered a studio flat in Holborn by Camden Council Housing Dept. I think it was to get me off their back and our campaigning.  I would have lost my credibility if Camden Housing had said that I had been offered accommodation and had refused it.  Due to my situation I found it difficult to take up or continue any learning course.

2.    How did you first became interested in learning and what motivated you to take part?

I have always been interested in learning and was always encouraged in this by my parents especially my mother. I enjoy reading and learning I would read all sorts of books but I was never very responsible about doing my homework. When I was younger I did not take learning seriously.  I now feel learning and education as a way to empower oneself. I have learnt that the establishment or officials do not like it when you can put forward your case in an informed manner.

The Olympics 2012 and Corporate Greed

I am not against the Olympic or the Paralympic Games. What I am against is the way the large corporate companies take over my and your lives.

These large capitalist companies believe just because they pay a few bob (which no-one asked them to, it is their choice to do this) then they can go against people’s rights and freedom with the implicit help of the Government and the local authorities, because they paid for it.

Did you or I ask for the disruption so the so-called V.I.P.s of the Olympic Mafia could drive by in their free limousines, digesting their sumptuous breakfast at the tax payer’s expense, whilst you, I and others are suffering the Tory-led coalition austerity cuts, and whilst the people who fuelled this are feeding us the nonsense that we live in free and democratic country?

Why are you and I being told that the corporate takeover of the streets of London by the so-called “Olympic Family “is for the benefit of the people who live and work in London every day?

People who have paid vast sums of money to have a family day at the Olympic stadium will have their food and drink confiscated so they are coerced into buying food and drink at extortionate prices because the greedy corporate companies such as McDonald’s feel they have bought the rights and therefore bought you, your friends and family. 

If you refuse to give up your food and drink you will be refused entry, with the help of the police which are paid for by the tax payer and not by McDonald’s or any of the corporate fat cats.

You will be treated as a criminal for trying to bring your own food into an Olympic event.

McTaggart

Irony and the Paralympics

Does anyone recognise the name ATOS?

If not, then you have never had the courtesy of an invite by them on behalf of the Department of Work and Pensions, for a Benefits Assessment Medical Examination. I use the words "Medical Examination” loosely as the "medical" is conducted by a question and answer interview prompted by computerised questions. A fully qualified doctor very rarely does this interview. It could be conducted by a nurse, a medical secretary, or, who knows, by someone just walking by with nothing else to do?

The company, which is being paid over £100 million a year, for at least 5 years, for this privilege, is the health care arm of ATOS.

The company is charged with getting claimants off the higher rate of benefit and into a “fit for work/able to work” category. This includes terminally ill people, I prefer to use the word people rather than claimant, who have died a couple of months after being classified as “fit for work”.

Over 70% of people who appeal the ATOS decision to withdraw their Disability Benefit win their appeal.

The appeal is funded by the British Tax Payer and not by ATOS, who still receive their payment in full, and suffer no financial penalty for their wrong assessment of the person who has gone through months of the mental and financial suffering of being on a low benefit (when you appeal a decision you are put on a low benefit until your appeal is decided), and not knowing if their appeal will be successful.

Appeals can often take months to be heard due to the increase in people appealing, and backlog of appeals due to the cut back in staff and resources to deal with the appeals.

Here is a statement, the first part of which I find laughable, from the ATOS home page:

We support the Department’s efforts to drive disability equality. Disability assessments for benefit eligibility are transformed by Atos-delivered business process outsourcing services. We are handling 1.2 million referrals a year and six million face-to-face assessments across 142 locations. 

There are claims, which have never been denied by anyone when questioned over this, that ATOS and the medical assessors receive a bonus for every person that is declared “fit to work”.

The Irony is that ATOS has been selected as one of the main sponsors of the Paralympics.

It is reported that ATOS paid a paltry £63 million for this privilege, which in reality is being paid for by the British Tax Payer, to promote the company as a benefactor for people with a Disability (if I may use the word for the context of this blog).

ATOS Worldgrid: promotes itself as a unique player delivering innovative services to the new smart energy market.

ATOS Worldline: advertises itself as using core expertise in HI-Tech Transactional Services (HTTS), as a specialist in electronic payment services, eServices, for customers, citizens and communities and services for financial markets.

• Nowhere does it mention about removing people’s benefits and forcing them into poverty or mental stress or depression. 

• Nowhere does it mention about any support, financial or otherwise, for people, communities, or organisations dealing with any Mental or Physical Health situations. 

McTaggart