
I blame Thatcher. Dancer, musician, counsellor, practiser of stitchcraft. Anti-Tory Friend of the Earth #UBI #FBPE #FBPA #FBPPR @asoundfooting.bsky.social
Yorkshire
Joined August 2013
- Tweets14.2K
- Following7.9K
- Followers7.8K
- Likes54.4K
Pinned Tweet
If anyone wants to follow me over where the sky is blue please look for the same username and profile picture.
Catherine đ retweeted
That story about Google killing hundreds of thousands of trees in Finland for its data center project is such a perfect microcosm of what capitalism is doing to our world.
Recent mass media headlines are saying the tech giant "illegally" cut down "250,000" trees, but both claims paint an inaccurate picture of what actually happened. Google killed 400,000 trees (250,000 near a town called Muhos and another 150,000 near the village of Otanmäki), and unless the company's executives actually wind up going to prison for this, their actions cannot properly be described as "illegal".
I don't know who first coined the saying "If the penalty is a fine, then it's legal for rich people," but it certainly applies here. The Finnish Licensing and Supervision Authority has reportedly ordered Google to suspend all âmeasures that significantly change the environment," saying it will "consider enforcement proceedings and fines" if the megacorporation does not comply. Google's parent company Alphabet has a net worth of around four trillion dollars. Whatever paltry penalties Finland might impose for these ecocidal actions, it won't have any meaningful effect on Google.
Giant corporations do this shit all the time. They calculate that the fines incurred by their abusive actions will be dwarfed by the massive profits they generate, issue fake apologies as needed, and leave it to their armies of lawyers to minimize the damage. That's why the Sackler family is still worth billions despite all the fines Purdue Pharma was slapped with while creating the US opiate epidemic.
A 2017 Harvard study titled âThe Opioid Epidemic: Fixing a Broken Pharmaceutical Market" contains the following paragraph:
"Although civil claims and criminal charges were brought against Purdue and its executives, the resulting penalties paled in comparison to extended-release oxycodone profits. In May 2007, the company and its president, chief counsel, and former chief medical officer pled guilty to falsely marketing extended-release oxycodone as 'less addictive, less subject to abuse and diversion, and less likely to cause tolerance and withdrawal than other pain medications.' As part of the plea bargain, Purdue agreed to pay the federal government $600 million and 27 states $20 million. The three executives agreed to $34.5 million in fines but avoided jailtime. By contrast, Purdue has earned an estimated $31 billion in total revenues from extended-release oxycodone since its launch. Rather than deterring fraudulent marketing, the penalties simply became a cost of doing business."
A cost of doing business.
That's how things work under capitalism. The law primarily exists not to protect people or the environment, but to protect the interests of capital. If you destroyed a Google data center you'd probably be charged as a terrorist and spend decades in prison, but Google can destroy the natural world around you and get off with a finger wag and a symbolic fine. If you stole millions of dollars from your employer you'd go to prison for grand larceny, but if your employer steals millions from its employees you need to win a class action lawsuit to get back what they stole from you.
Proponents of capitalism often pretend they support minimal government intervention in civilian affairs, but their entire model is at all times propped up by state power using force to protect the haves from the have-nots at every level of our society. Corporations are free to destroy the environment, destroy your health, rob you, exploit you, and manipulate your government to their advantage, and if you ever take action to stand up to this world-devouring onslaught, the state will lock you in a cage.
In school we are taught that that the law exists to protect ordinary people from bad people, but that's not true at all. Under capitalism, the law exists to protect the very worst among us from everyone else. That's why we are seeing our planet being turned into dust and ashes for no reason other than shareholder profit.
It's an insane system, and it needs to end. These freaks are feeding our entire biosphere into the woodchipper.
Catherine đ retweeted
The thing about Google clearing a forest in Finland without permits is that they decided that whatever fine they might face is worth it. It doesnât cost them as much as not getting the land cleared.
Because like ALL things, if the punishment is a fine, it isnât really illegal for rich people.
Catherine đ retweeted
Reformers thoughts on why we can't have all the oil from the North Sea, they must of slept through Thatchers government
Catherine đ retweeted
From what I'm reading, the government expected the review into mental health diagnoses to say that conditions like ADHD and autism were being overdiagnosed, particularly in young people and then use that as justification for making disability benefits cuts, particularly impacting younger people with mental health conditions.
However, the problem is the review didn't say that, and it also said that work in and of itself should not be seen as a viable solution for everyone. I mean I could have told them all this without the need for the review, but the central point is, they are stuffed because they haven't got the evidential justification that intensive employment support instead of benefits will be effective and not lead to harm to the individual concerned.
That being said, as I have mentioned many times before in the last few years, I'm not against the principle of disabled people and people with mental health conditions working, as long as the work they are doing is good for them and they are fully capable of doing it without any adverse disability -related impacts. My issue is, and always has been that simply assuming that a condition such as ADHD always has mild implications in terms of work capability is both wrong and immensely dangerous. Also, age should not be used as a determining factor in deciding the severity of the impact of a disability or health condition.
Catherine đ retweeted
Instead of thanking @ITV for exposing several more vile foul-mouthed racists and sexists among those elected as Reform UK councillors, Richard Tice, aware that ITV was about to broadcast its findings, attacked the broadcaster in advance, saying:
âYouâll find people say some stuff that I wouldnât say, agree with, or condone. Thatâs life. Itâs called the real world.â
Hereâs âsome stuffâ said by seven different Reform UK councillors, some of whom have since resigned from the party:
A councillor appointed deputy mayor, who has since resigned from Reform citing âpersonal reasonsâ and now sits as an Independent:
- On Asian homeowners in the area: The area was âinfestedâ with Asian families; âTheyâre parasites, absolute parasites... This is just what weâre infested withâ
- âWhen a house comes up for sale, white people need to be in there. You almost need to fucking out-Muslim the Muslims.â
- âIâd be saying no more than one percent of British population can be non-white⌠Youâd need a proper nuclear option, like literally drag them at their homes, stick them on planes and fuck them off to Pakistan. Which youâll never do in a month of Sundays.â
- On Muslims: âTheyâre in our judiciary, theyâre in our schools, theyâre in our healthcare, theyâre everywhere, and they are not working on our side, theyâre against us.â
- âIâve seen comments from some people in the Asian community⌠talking about things like âYeah, but we gave you curry.â I was like, âI didnât realise curry was an exchange that you could then rape all our kidsâ.â
- Remark about a female Reform candidate: âThatâs reminded me, I need to buy an orange in a sock.â
Another Reform councillor:
- On speculation a mosque might be built: âThereâs got to be a way of stopping that, like go and buy some pork chops. Weâll bury it in the ground.â
A councillor who has since resigned from Reform, citing âpersonal and health reasonsâ:
- On a female Reform candidate: âIf she was my daughter, it would still be bath night on a Thursday. Iâll wash you properly this time.â
- On another female Reform candidate: He âwould have been sniffing that seat as soon as she got up. If sheâd have given me a hug Iâd have fucking fingered her.â
- On a moderated online comment: âOnce one was mouthing off at me, some Asian lad, and I just put â it was struck off almost immediately â âIâll tell you one thing, Iâve never been put on my arse by a fucking paki.ââ
Another councillor who has since resigned from Reform (this one claimed to ITV that he was heavily medicated at the time due to a chronic pain condition):
- âWeâve been ethnically cleansed out of London⌠Because you never used to get any blacks over in Bromley, and now Bromley [has] massive Nigerian communities there.â
- On local children he claimed were committing vandalism: âLike all the ethnic fucking kids, theyâre not white, theyâre all fucking black, and theyâre like fucking animals. Itâs horrible to say it. Iâm not racist.â
- On King Charles: âApparently King Charles is a fucking Muslim. Someone from the inside saw a fucking prayer mat and all that in one of his fucking rooms. I think thatâs fucking traitorous. Cut the cuntâs head off, sorry.â
- On Channel migrants/illegal immigrants: âIâd get nicked for saying what I would do⌠Iâll take them out bruv, I donât care⌠the way I see it, youâve got to kill or youâre going to be killed⌠These fuckers have come to rape and pillage and fucking kill us. Thereâs no doubt about it.â
A Reform councillor and aspiring MP:
- âSo first of all, Iâd deport every other motherfucker in this country that doesnât deserve to be here and their children as well. First thing, youâre fucking gone, bang⌠And then Iâll pick up the pieces after that.â
- On legal migrants: âEven the legal ones, because thereâs nothing wrong with legal immigration as long as itâs done right, but there are certain people who have been granted permission to stay in this country who shouldnât [have]. 18-30 year old young lads, train them up in the army in insurgency tactics, so they can go street-by-street, house-by-house picking the cunts up.â (He also indicated he is âso, so far-right.â)
- âBut we are a far-right party, and our policies are to fucking kick these traitorous bastards out⌠how can you be a far-right fucking party when you got your fucking troops fucking mingling with the fucking enemy? They should be shot against the wall, thatâs what Iâd do.â
Another Reform councillor:
- âWeâre not fucking stupid enough to piss off the entire woke south or centrist south really of the country⌠You need to seem palatable to everyone to get them, to get [the majority].â
Another Reform councillor:
- âThe stuff that people feel uncomfortable with, donât even announce it, just do it⌠We just need to get fucking elected, thatâs all that really matters. We wonât necessarily say what we are doing, part of the point is to not [say].â
Reform UK released the video statement featuring Tice about an ITV Exposure undercover investigation into Reform UK two days before ITV published any of the recordings.
Reform clearly knew the investigation was coming and that it involved its councillors, though how much it knew of the precise content is unclear.
Most of Ticeâs four-minute statement attacks the investigationâs methods, which he called âprobable criminal activityâ.
It ends with a call for Reformâs MPs, councillors and members to refuse to speak to ITV âin any capacity whatsoeverâ until it apologises. Shortly before that, Tice turned to the recordings themselves:
âIf you record hundreds of conversations undercover over a 12-month period using dozens of people, youâll find people say some stuff that I wouldnât say, agree with, or condone. Thatâs life. Itâs called the real world. But itâs a reflection of peopleâs anger at whatâs gone on.â
As noted above, âsome stuffâ turned out to include elected Reform UK councillors calling Asian families âparasitesâ, describing black children as âanimalsâ, saying non-white residents should be dragged out of their homes, and calling for the King to be beheaded.
The phrase itâs called the real world sounds like a shrug, but rhetorically, its timing gave it a specific job. Viewers who heard Tice first were told the remarks were âlifeâ and âthe real worldâ before they could hear what had been said, and so before they could judge whether that description fitted.
This is what the social psychologist William McGuire called âinoculationâ: good research suggests an audience given a dismissal in advance is more likely to resist the evidence when it arrives.
The phrase itâs called the real world also accepts that something was said while refusing what follows from it.
Stan Cohenâs States of Denial separates literal denial (it didnât happen), interpretive denial (it means something else) and implicatory denial (it happened, but nothing need follow). Tice moves straight to the last two. No speaker is named, nothing is described beyond âstuffâ, and no consequence is offered.
That shrug only works as long as the content stays vague. Try saying this out loud: âA councillor called for the King to be beheaded. Itâs called the real world.â
And Reform has never shown the same indulgence to words aimed at its own people.
After Ann Widdecombeâs killing, Zia Yusuf told a press conference that past remarks by Labour politicians, including David Lammyâs call to âstand up to them before itâs too lateâ, were part of a narrative âso relentless it constitutes incitementâ. When the words are about Reform, they are incitement. When one Reform councillor calls for the King to be beheaded and another for migrants to be picked up âhouse-by-houseâ, they are âthe real worldâ.
The phrase âthatâs lifeâ also naturalises. It places the remarks alongside the weather, as something that simply happens. Roland Barthes argued that myth works by making what is chosen and historical look natural, and Theo van Leeuwen identifies naturalisation as a common way of legitimating conduct. Things that âjust happenâ have no authors, so the questions of who said what, and what should follow, quietly fall away.
The register matters too. âItâs called...â is how people explain the obvious to the naive. It casts anyone troubled by the recordings as an innocent who hasnât learned how the world works, and the speaker as the worldly adult. Itâs also hard to answer without sounding sanctimonious, which appears to confirm the point.
The surrounding sentences follow a familiar pattern. Gresham Sykes and David Matza described how people who break norms often accept those norms in principle while explaining why they donât apply in this particular case. âI wouldnât condoneâ accepts the norm. âBut itâs a reflection of peopleâs angerâ is what they called denial of responsibility, relocating the cause to immigration âimposed on Britain without consentâ.
Tice then says the comments âare for nothing compared to the security risksâ Reform faces. William Benoitâs image repair theory names the same moves as ways of reducing offensiveness: differentiation, minimisation, transcendence and attacking the accuser.
A âreal worldâ implies an unreal one, and Tice names it: the âWestminster bubbleâ, its âpolitically correct languageâ, and a âterrified establishmentâ.
Cas Mudde defines populism as dividing society into a pure people and a corrupt elite, and the phrase sorts the audience in exactly that way. In Teun van Dijkâs ideological square, Reformâs negative acts are played down as ordinary speech, while a negative quality (detachment from ordinary life) is attributed to its critics.
The âreal worldâ frame is already familiar to Reformâs audience. GB News runs a weekly programme presented by the Reform MP Lee Anderson called Lee Andersonâs Real World.
George Lakoff argued that frames gain their force through repetition, until they feel like âcommon senseâ rather than a (frequently ideological) position. By the time Tice reached for the phrase, his viewers had long been told whose world the ârealâ one is.
Ruth Wodak describes a discursive strategy she calls victim-perpetrator reversal, common among far-right and populist politicians seeking to evade accountability, in which the party facing scrutiny presents itself as the injured party. The âreal worldâ line is the turning point. Before it, Tice concedes something. After it, the statement turns to security threats, an establishment âassaultâ, lawyers and the boycott.
âReal worldâ rhetoric is common in politics. During #Partygate in 2022, the new Leader of the House, Mark Spencer, said the voters he met cared about energy bills and the #NHS, and urged people to âfocus on the real world hereâ. That version ranks priorities: the scandal matters less than other things.
The construction âitâs called the real worldâ goes further, claiming the conduct itself is normal. Eric Trump used the exact same phrase in 2019 to dismiss complaints that the Trump Organization had not paid contractors. He gave a justification (they âdidnât do a good jobâ), said âitâs called the real worldâ, then added that âpeople like to take cheap shots at usâ. The sequence of justification, normalisation and attack on critics is the one Tice follows.
The phrase is weakest when set against Reformâs own conduct. The party told ITV that investigations had commenced, and some of those recorded have since resigned from Reform.
In July 2024, Nigel Farage admitted Reform had âa few bad applesâ and said they would be âlong goneâ, adding: âYou have my 100% promise on that.â At the partyâs conference in Birmingham in September 2024, he told members: âWe donât want extremists, we donât want bigots.â Two years on, Reform has more than 2,300 councillors and an outright majority on 23 councils, and these recordings strongly suggest his promise has not been kept.
This also matters because councillors hold real power over peopleâs lives. They can sit on planning committees, including ones that decide on places of worship like the mosque one councillor was recorded discussing how to stop. They help decide housing, schools and local services for every resident, including the Muslim, Asian and black families described here as âparasitesâ and âanimalsâ. Any resident whose councillor has said these things has good reason to doubt they will be treated fairly. And the women spoken about in such degrading terms were their own partyâs candidates.
Councils are bound by the public sector equality duty, and councillors by codes of conduct that require them to treat people with respect. Residents can complain to their councilâs monitoring officer, or in Wales to the Public Services Ombudsman. But those codes generally apply only when councillors are acting in that role, and since the Localism Act 2011 the sanctions available in England have been limited, with suspension no longer among them. In practice, the main safeguard is the party that selects and vets them, which is exactly why Farageâs promise mattered.
The language of violence matters too. âStick them on planesâ, âhouse-by-houseâ, âcut the cuntâs head offâ, âthey should be shot against the wallâ: coming from people who hold elected office, words like these donât stay in the pub. They tell people who are already angry that their anger is shared by those with authority.
Tice spent much of the Reform video on the threats facing Reform politicians, and threats against politicians should indeed be taken seriously. The same logic applies when the violent language comes from Reformâs own representatives and is aimed at their neighbours.
Some of those recorded also said plainly that they meant to hide what they think until they had power. That sounds less like anger than strategy.
And what woulkd Tice, a privately educated multi-millionaire property developer who splits his time between Skegness and Dubai, where his fiancĂŠe Isabel Oakeshott lives, and who has herself described young people too sick to work as âparasitesâ, know about the âreal worldâ anyway?
In one sense Tice is right: this is the real world of some of Reformâs elected councillors. What his phrase is designed to stop people asking is whether voters knew about it when they elected them.
The phrase admits, then excuses, and then counter-attacks, and it did all three before the public could hear what had been said.
The Councillor quotes above are as reported by ITV Exposure. You can watch the full documentary, Undercover: A Year in Reform, on Sunday 18 October at 10:20pm on ITV1 and @ITVX.
itv.com/news/2026-10-14/insiâŚ
Catherine đ retweeted
Quelle surprise a super-rich exodus recent story is shown to be complete bollocks
This billionaire said to have quit Britain over fears of a potential Labour wealth tax actually moved to Monaco in 2014 when the Conservatives were in power.
Next.
theguardian.com/news/2026/ocâŚ
Catherine đ retweeted
CEO-to-worker pay ratio in 1965: 20-1
CEO-to-worker pay ratio in 1990: 75-1
CEO-to-worker pay ratio today: 325-to-1
Trickle-down economics was always a sham.
Nothing has ever trickled down.
Catherine đ retweeted
Two pictures:
1. Nigel Farage pointing and laughing as the pound crashed after Britain voted to leave the EU.
2. Crispin Odeyâs ÂŁ220m profit after investing ÂŁ873k in Vote Leave campaign groups.
If you still think Brexit was a good idea then you are a fucking moron.
Catherine đ retweeted
While listening to council meetings in Montreal, local mayor Sue Montgomery decided to knit in red when men spoke and in green when women spoke, when similar numbers of both attended.
Day 1 results.... #WomensArt
Catherine đ retweeted
If it were possible, I would swap my life for yours quite easily. We would start with a two week trial period. Just to check you were comfortable with somebody having to lift you on and off the toilet and perform associated cleaning duties every time you needed a pooh. Also, be warned that you'll only be able to use a one typing finger, or two on an extremely good day, but don't worry because you can easily learn the joys of speech recognition software. It definitely never fucks up on a monumental scale.
Now, what else is that you need to know? Oh yes, among other things, say goodbye to leaving the house whenever you like, you'll find that you will only be able to go anywhere if there is somebody available to take you and look after your whilst you are there.
Still think I have a good life, "courtesy of the taxpayer"
Catherine đ retweeted
Tech plutocrats are the high-budget expression of the âeveryone is twelve nowâ theory. You wanna go to Mars? Of course you do, youâre twelve. You think you can merge your consciousness with machinery and unlock the key to immortality? Hell yeah my twelve year-old homie. Youâre gonna invent an Artificial Superintelligence God who will solve all our problems? Bless your twelve year-old heart.
Their visions for the future of humanity are never particularly wise or intelligent. Itâs just a bunch of drugged-up rich guys using their vast fortunes to chart a course for our species that would sound totally awesome to the average preadolescent boy.
You ever hear Jeff Bezosâ vision for our future? He brings it up once in a while. He wants to ship most of humanity offworld and have us all living in these giant spinning space tubes called OâNeill cylinders while only a few lucky individuals get to remain on humanityâs home planet. Itâs true, look it up.
This is the best these freaks can come up with. Transhumanism. Space colonization. Virtual reality. ASI. Immortality. These are all visions which revolve around escape. Escaping from the human condition. Escaping from our planet. Escaping from reality. Running, running, running away in a mad scramble to get anywhere but here.
These arenât positive visions for the future, theyâre signs of deep psychological immaturity. Theyâre the symptoms of an inability to be with what is. Whenever you hear these guys bloviating about transcending our humanity or colonizing space theyâre just telling you theyâve got a lot of unresolved early childhood trauma which led them to construct an entire personality around avoidance and restlessness.
They donât know how to be at peace. Not with themselves, and not with the world. These are very emotionally primitive individuals. They are not wise. They are not kind. They are not happy. They are not even particularly smart. They just have a particular kind of cleverness which has enabled them to succeed as parasitic middle men siphoning wealth off of other peopleâs labor in the specific type of dystopia we happen to live in.
And yet these are the men weâre allowing to rule our world. These are the people to whom we have handed the steering wheel of human destiny. A bunch of emotionally stunted manchilds who are drowning in a nonstop internal deluge of shame and inadequacy and unresolved mommy issues.
These are the men who have become our kings, because capitalism elevates whoever is wounded enough to do whatever it takes to claw their way to the top.
You trust these guys to shepherd us into a healthy world? They can't even be here now, at peace in their own skins.
This isnât going to cut it. We canât led these infantile narcissists lead humanity into the future. Weâve got to create a better system for ourselves.
Catherine đ retweeted
#GovWelfareChallenge
Before ANY politician votes on welfare policy, they should live on it. Three months. The rate that fits their circumstances. No exceptions. No expenses. No subsidised meals. No second home allowance.
This isn't a party issue. Labour. Conservative. Reform. Lib Dem. ALL of you talk about welfare. NONE of you have lived on it.
The challenge:
Three months on Universal Credit. Whichever rate applies:
Single under 25: ÂŁ316.98/month
Single 25+: ÂŁ400.14/month
Couple under 25: ÂŁ497.55/month
Couple 25+: ÂŁ628.10/month
Note: those are the APRIL 2026 rates. They DROPPED from 2025. The safety net shrank while rent, energy, and food all rose.
The rules:
No MP salary. No expenses. No Commons subsidised meals. No travel budget. No second home. Just UC and whatever the housing element covers which won't be your full rent because LHA hasn't matched market rents since 2020.
You attend the Jobcentre every two weeks. A work coach tells you to apply for 35 jobs a week. You evidence every application in a journal. You miss an appointment because the bus didn't come you get sanctioned.
You pay your bills from the UC rate:
Electric: -ÂŁ150
Council tax shortfall: -ÂŁ30
Water: -ÂŁ15
Insurance: -ÂŁ20
Internet: -ÂŁ20
Phone: -ÂŁ15
Remaining: ÂŁ88.58/month on the single over-25 rate. ÂŁ20.46/week. ÂŁ2.92/day.
For food. Clothes. Transport. Toiletries. Everything.
The weekly shop:
ÂŁ50 at Iceland for a family. I costed it this week. Every product linked. Every price verified.
Family of four result: one chicken dinner per week. 100g per person. Four out of seven dinners are lentils. 16 bananas between four people. No other fruit.
Single person result: marginally better. But ÂŁ2.92/day is a Tesco meal deal. For the ENTIRE day. Breakfast. Lunch. Dinner.
The commute:
DWP considers 90 minutes each way "reasonable." Three hours a day. Plus 8 hours working or job searching. Eleven hours out of the house. The travel costs come from the ÂŁ2.92/day. A single bus fare can be ÂŁ2.50. One journey. One way. And the day's food budget is gone.
Week by week:
Week 1: the electricity bill arrives. It takes more than a third of your income. You learn what "prepayment meter" means when it cuts off at 11pm because the credit ran out.
Week 2: the fridge contains lentils, value bread, and long-life milk. You haven't eaten fresh meat in nine days. The microwave costs 3.7p per meal. The oven costs 46p. You use the microwave. Every meal.
Week 3: you stopped going out. A coffee costs ÂŁ2.50. That's nearly a day's food budget. Your friends stopped asking because you always say no. The walls are very familiar now.
Week 4: the Jobcentre threatens a sanction. You missed the appointment. The bus was cancelled. The next one was in four hours. You walked. It took 90 minutes. You arrived late. "Late is a fail" says the work coach. The sanction docks your UC by 40% for a month.
Month 2: you've applied for 280 jobs. Three interviews. No offers. The Jobcentre asks why you haven't found work. You show them Indeed. 1,964 no-experience jobs for 9 million people in London. The work coach notes "insufficient effort" on your file.
Month 3: someone on X calls you "workshy."
The challenge is for:
@KemiBadenoch you said "if you can work, you should." Live on what you'd leave them with. Then say it again.
@HelenWhately eighteen posts about welfare. Zero days on it. Three months would give you the policy document you haven't published.
@griffitha you announced ÂŁ47 billion in savings without a financial analyst. Three months on ÂŁ2.92/day IS your financial analysis.
@JoePJRobertson you said "workshy." Three months on UC. Then use that word to my face.
@patmcfaddenmp you RUN the DWP. You administer the system. Live inside it. See what your work coaches see. Feel what your claimants feel. Then tell Parliament how it's going.
@JohnHealey_MP you set the rates. You approved the cut from 2025 to 2026. Live on the number you signed off. For three months. With the energy bill you didn't shield them from.
@EdDavey you talk about fairness. Prove it. Three months. Same rules. No Lib Dem exceptions.
This isn't about humiliation. It's about UNDERSTANDING. Every policy decision about welfare is made by people who've never experienced it.
Every cut is calculated by people who've never counted the pennies for the electric meter.
Every sanction is designed by people who've never missed a bus they couldn't afford.
Three months. Any rate. Any circumstances. Just LIVE ON IT. Then vote.
#GovWelfareChallenge
builduk.club 35+ charters. Written by someone who knows what ÂŁ2.92/day actually buys. Because he's lived closer to it than anyone in Parliament ever will.
@UKLabour @TheGreenParty @reformparty_uk @RestoreBritain @Conservatives @LibDems
Catherine đ retweeted
After 18 years of full time work and reaching a senior level position, I had to go on benefits for a period due to serious burnout from ADHD and bipolar disorder.
If I didn't get those benefits, I would have lost everything and could have ended up homeless.
I am sick to the teeth of people treating benefits like everyone is a scrounger. It's a literal lifeline.
The GPD % spend of benefits in 2026 is exactly the same as as it was in 2009.
The politicians are lying to us. There is no crisis.
It's the tax avoiders where the big money is to be found, but that would likely include the politicians friends and family, so they leave that well alone.
Catherine đ retweeted
Andrew Neil on #bbcqt: "The big problem we face is 6.7 million adults of working age who aren't working and are living on out-of-work benefits. 6.7 million. No country can prosper with that number of people able to work who are not working."
The first half is broadly right. DWP figures show 6.7 million people in Great Britain claimed some combination of out-of-work benefits in March 2026. However, the second half is misinformation because it misdescribes that statistic.
DWP's out-of-work benefits category deliberately includes people the state has assessed as unable to work, or does not currently expect to work.
DWP's own breakdown shows that 4.6 million of the 6.7 million, around 68%, have no work requirements at all.
DWP explains that this is generally because they are too sick to work or are the main carer for a very young child. That group includes 2.8 million Universal Credit claimants on the health route and 390,000 on Employment and Support Allowance and older incapacity benefits.
Only 2.2 million, about a third, are expected to take any steps towards work, and 590,000 of those are themselves on the health route.
Treating the whole 6.7 million as available labour turns a count of claimants into a count of idle workers, which the data simply does not support.
The official labour market figures tell a very different story. The ONS puts unemployment, meaning people actively looking for and available for work, at 1.78 million for May to July 2026. The Learning and Work Institute estimates that 3.9 million people are out of work but say they want a job, and that there are 5.5 of them for every vacancy.
There is a serious debate to be had about rising sickness claims and appropriate support. It is not helped by presenting people the state itself has judged unable to work, or not required to, as if they were simply choosing not to.
Nobody challenged Neil. Nobody corrected the misinformation. Neil got a round of applause. Someone could have told Fiona Bruce the facts in less than a minute. This is just one example which helps explain why many people understandably treat @bbcquestiontime as a joke.
Sources: DWP Benefit Combinations, March 2026; ONS/House of Commons Library, September 2026; Learning and Work Institute, September 2026.
Catherine đ retweeted
What the fuck is happening in this country, idiots monitoring a lifeboat and spreading false rumours and intimidating the crews
Catherine đ retweeted
The BBC has been showcasing the views of oil tycoon Jim Ratcliffe in every news show for the last 24 hours, noting that he's "one of Britain's richest men".
Shouldn't this be "one of Monaco's richest men"?
How about similar airtime for (say) one of Britain's poorest women?
This âŹď¸
đ¨ Ratcliffeâs constant running down of Britain is actually a promotion of a political project.
A class of mobile billionaires wants to transform Britain into a vast offshore platform: low taxes on wealth, weakened regulation, diminished public services, cheapened labour and national assets permanently open to global capital.
They want a strong state to protect private property, enforce contracts and subsidise business, but a weak one when citizens need healthcare, housing, benefits or security.
In effect, they want Britain run as a tax haven.
The billionaires can move their money, factories and tax residence across borders. Everyone who cannot move is left financing the country they hollowed out.
They get the tax haven and we get serfdom.
Catherine đ retweeted
Councillor Matt Blair (FB post):
âApparently Iâm a âtraitorâ now. This came as something of a surprise.
Fun fact: some people join the Armed Forces because they believe in protecting their country and its values.
I used to get paid to skirmish with the Taliban in Afghanistan. These days I apparently betray my country by challenging far-right conspiracy rhetoric on Facebook (for considerably less pay, I might add)
Courage. Discipline. Respect for Others. Integrity. Loyalty. Selfless Commitment. #CDRILS.
Those values didnât stop mattering when I took the uniform off.
And thatâs the thing about the flag. The flag itself isnât the important bit. Itâs what it represents. You can wrap yourself in one, stick one on every lamppost and shout about patriotism until youâre blue in the face. The harder bit is actually living by the values you claim it represents.
In the British Army, we expect high standards from our leadership. If the people at the top were filling their pockets, sipping champagne and slurping oysters while everyone else was out doing the hard graft, I can assure you the lads and lasses wouldnât respond by blaming the bloke next to them.
Thatâs the bit I donât understand about this version of patriotism. When things get hard, the anger always seems to travel downwards.
Being angry about the state of the country is perfectly legitimate, understandable frankly. But strength isnât finding someone with less power than you to blame for it.
Look up. Expect better from the people with power. That feels considerably more patriotic to me.â đŹđ§
Catherine đ retweeted
Would you leave the banks of one of the ancient rivers of London looking like a rubbish dump?
@EnvAgency would.
When they sent investigation teams down to the Aldersbrook earlier this year to threaten local volunteers with two years in jail for restoring the river without permission, they didnât even bother to look at the the piles of junk and hazardous materials (including oil and fuel) on the abandoned allotment plots next to the river. Even worse, when I asked them to remove the rubbish and restore the brook themselves (given local volunteers arenât allowed to do it) they refused. So their plan is, apparently, to leave the river to die and to prosecute anyone who dares to try & restore the river.
However, local river guardians are not waiting for permission to do what the authorities have failed to do. In the absence of the EA, the local authority or the landowner doing anything about the waste on the banks of the Aldersbrook, weâre going to start cleaning it, ready for the full restoration of this section of the brook later in the winter.

































