I get a lot of cold calls to my mobile. So many that these days I don't answer the phone and don't call back unless I can be sure who is calling. Usually it's an 0161 or 0191 number. I don't know anybody with these dialling codes so I delete the calls. Today I got one that started 0141 and wondered if this was someone I knew. Not wanting to appear rude, I called back. And anyhow, I was sitting in the car waiting for somebody and it passed the time.
The person who answered said: Good morning, you're through to (buzz) from (buzz) and (buzz). I asked him to repeat that and he did. I was none the wiser but it was clearly some kind of cold call from a company. I asked him again what company he represented. He told me. Still none the wiser, I asked what the company did. He said something about 'trust.' I repeated my question: but what does your company actually do? Turns out they re-finance debt.
Debt? said I. I've been retired nearly 10 years and the first thing I did was to make sure I had no debt. First time ever in my life. Feel free to hate me, because you sound like a millennial and that means you're in the group of poor sods the Tories are trying to reduce to poverty with austerity, low wages, high rents, no hope of buying a house, minimum wage, short-term contracts and now they're taking the UK out of the Common Market so you can kiss your rights goodbye. Need I go on?
He was silent for a few seconds and then said: I hope you manage to stay debt-free.
O, I will, said I. And I hope you manage to remember the generation before yours didn't get ripped off the way you are - there is a better way to live - as long as you never vote Tory. Ever.
Thank you, he said.
At that point, the person I was waiting for turned up and we ended our conversation.
Thursday, 20 July 2017
Sunday, 16 July 2017
These blood-sucking public sector workers
Right enough, I always felt when I was a public sector worker that as a teacher I was overpaid. Like police officers, doctors, nurses and paramedics, fire staff, council staff. Of course, there were bits of the job we loved but the hours and the pay were not the reason we signed up.
I mean, I got paid for being a principal teacher in a secondary school. Spent my days trying to make sure the department was working smoothly, managing staff and resources - and taking my own personal work (preparation, marking) home to do Monday to Thursday evenings between 6 and 9. I had Friday night off to unwind and Saturday to do the essentials like the shopping and cleaning, and then wound myself up for the new week by working on Sunday from 12-6 and sometimes later. I did the school shows and the school trips abroad in my own time.
When I went to work in a local authority job, I worked on improvement with school managers, wrote and ran training sessions for school staff, arranged study visits to and from European partners, interviewed people for jobs, supervised staff, got working parties together to provide teaching material for pre-5 to Higher and arranged cooperation with colleagues in other councils to save council tax payers' money. The pattern I'd started in school just carried on. Except email was now available and the council IT department had arranged that people could get me any time, and my Sunday routine sometimes had me working from 11am till 11pm, depending on what was happening.
I remember our boss telling us on one occasion that he didn't think he was getting 'value for money' from us, although he was unable to tell us what it was he wanted us to do to prove we were doing a good job. A travel agent who had been unable to get hold of me for 3 days was annoyed to be told I was 'out in schools' and didn't like being interrupted when I was doing pre-inspection checks, and then went on to tell me how easy life was for people like me because we weren't 'in the front line.' (Tell that to colleagues who dealt daily with impossible parents - not to mention HMI). I'd just put thousands of pounds of business his way but he seemed to think working in the public sector was a skoosh. If only.
Now it's Phillip Hammond who thinks public sector workers are overpaid. Let's just make sure we all understand what's going on: The Tories resent the fact that public sector workers sometimes (not always) have permanent contracts, agreed terms and conditions and sometimes the backing of a trades union which will defend their rights. They also have pensions which they pay into all their working lives.
In other words, they're not part of the 'gig' economy in which workers have no status and few rights. The 'gig' economy suits the Tories just fine. When we are out of the EU, our rights as workers will be further eroded. The UK will join some of the poorest countries in the developed world as a place where we have no protection. Already, we see education is now out of the reach of many young people in England (and to an extent in Wales). Workers with a grievance, including women sacked or forced out of a job because they get pregnant, now have to find huge amounts of cash to take their case to an industrial tribunal. Many people have workplace pensions that won't give them any kind of decent life in retirement. People are now expected to work longer - the state pension age will shortly go up to 70. And pensioners face the prospect of having their financial situation - not all that great if you look at other countries' provision for the elderly - damaged further when the 'triple lock' is abandoned. The Tories are also rumoured to be trialling 'cash for GP appointments.' They are running down the NHS, starving it of cash, so that they can then tell us it doesn't work (though it did till the Tories took it over) and privatise it.
So what do we do? I can't say this often enough or vehemently enough: stop voting Tory! Stop being conned by the Tories' attempt to blame the poor, foreigners and public sector workers for everything that's wrong in the UK. Ignore their claims that the only way forward is austerity. That just plays into their desire to have a workforce desperate for work and living on the minimum wage, with no rights and no hope of improvement. Don't let the Tories continue this 'dumbing down' of society in which working people get no respect from anyone, are kept short of housing so as to force rents up (do any of the private renters vote Tory, I wonder?), and where homelessness is now an epidemic among young people in some parts of the UK. And only those who start with money can make money.
Have a good look at the Tory cabinet. Do these people represent us? Have they any understanding at all of what's it's like - for instance - to lose everything - absolutely everything - in the Grenfell Tower fire or to be living fearfully in a tower block with the same cladding or to be shuttled around from hotel to B&B - and end up on the streets?
Most of all, are these politicians competent to do the jobs they've been given? Take a look at them and get back to me.
I mean, I got paid for being a principal teacher in a secondary school. Spent my days trying to make sure the department was working smoothly, managing staff and resources - and taking my own personal work (preparation, marking) home to do Monday to Thursday evenings between 6 and 9. I had Friday night off to unwind and Saturday to do the essentials like the shopping and cleaning, and then wound myself up for the new week by working on Sunday from 12-6 and sometimes later. I did the school shows and the school trips abroad in my own time.
When I went to work in a local authority job, I worked on improvement with school managers, wrote and ran training sessions for school staff, arranged study visits to and from European partners, interviewed people for jobs, supervised staff, got working parties together to provide teaching material for pre-5 to Higher and arranged cooperation with colleagues in other councils to save council tax payers' money. The pattern I'd started in school just carried on. Except email was now available and the council IT department had arranged that people could get me any time, and my Sunday routine sometimes had me working from 11am till 11pm, depending on what was happening.
I remember our boss telling us on one occasion that he didn't think he was getting 'value for money' from us, although he was unable to tell us what it was he wanted us to do to prove we were doing a good job. A travel agent who had been unable to get hold of me for 3 days was annoyed to be told I was 'out in schools' and didn't like being interrupted when I was doing pre-inspection checks, and then went on to tell me how easy life was for people like me because we weren't 'in the front line.' (Tell that to colleagues who dealt daily with impossible parents - not to mention HMI). I'd just put thousands of pounds of business his way but he seemed to think working in the public sector was a skoosh. If only.
Now it's Phillip Hammond who thinks public sector workers are overpaid. Let's just make sure we all understand what's going on: The Tories resent the fact that public sector workers sometimes (not always) have permanent contracts, agreed terms and conditions and sometimes the backing of a trades union which will defend their rights. They also have pensions which they pay into all their working lives.
In other words, they're not part of the 'gig' economy in which workers have no status and few rights. The 'gig' economy suits the Tories just fine. When we are out of the EU, our rights as workers will be further eroded. The UK will join some of the poorest countries in the developed world as a place where we have no protection. Already, we see education is now out of the reach of many young people in England (and to an extent in Wales). Workers with a grievance, including women sacked or forced out of a job because they get pregnant, now have to find huge amounts of cash to take their case to an industrial tribunal. Many people have workplace pensions that won't give them any kind of decent life in retirement. People are now expected to work longer - the state pension age will shortly go up to 70. And pensioners face the prospect of having their financial situation - not all that great if you look at other countries' provision for the elderly - damaged further when the 'triple lock' is abandoned. The Tories are also rumoured to be trialling 'cash for GP appointments.' They are running down the NHS, starving it of cash, so that they can then tell us it doesn't work (though it did till the Tories took it over) and privatise it.
So what do we do? I can't say this often enough or vehemently enough: stop voting Tory! Stop being conned by the Tories' attempt to blame the poor, foreigners and public sector workers for everything that's wrong in the UK. Ignore their claims that the only way forward is austerity. That just plays into their desire to have a workforce desperate for work and living on the minimum wage, with no rights and no hope of improvement. Don't let the Tories continue this 'dumbing down' of society in which working people get no respect from anyone, are kept short of housing so as to force rents up (do any of the private renters vote Tory, I wonder?), and where homelessness is now an epidemic among young people in some parts of the UK. And only those who start with money can make money.
Have a good look at the Tory cabinet. Do these people represent us? Have they any understanding at all of what's it's like - for instance - to lose everything - absolutely everything - in the Grenfell Tower fire or to be living fearfully in a tower block with the same cladding or to be shuttled around from hotel to B&B - and end up on the streets?
Most of all, are these politicians competent to do the jobs they've been given? Take a look at them and get back to me.
Monday, 10 July 2017
The n word
Let's just check. The n word came to the UK from the USA, as many things do. The word has such awful racist connotations that it can't even be said or written in the USA.
But how many people have actually heard the n word used as an insult here in the UK? I haven't.
In my youth, I heard the n word regularly, in a series of expressions, none of which had racist overtones at the time: nigger brown was a colour, Ten Little Niggers was a book by Agatha Christie before the title was diplomatically changed, and then there was the nigger in the woodpile, the expression this MP is said to have used as a racist insult:
I've listened to what she said and I don't think she used the expression as a racist insult. I think her manner of speaking is many things: old-fashioned, not very fluent, but racist? No.
So what we have here is false indignation by the press and TV who, having tried very hard to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn because of all his politically-incorrect activities - and failed - have now turned their attention to Theresa May's very rocky government and are now using any weapon to further
destabilise it.
Don't get me wrong. I regard the Tories as the enemy of everything that matters to me and I don't want them in power for a minute longer than necessary. But I want them out of government by legitimate means. Not deposed by the UK media. The media, unelected, subject to corruption (as we know from the phone-tapping scandal among other things), and controlled by a small number of billionaires with little commitment to life in the UK. Let's not be fooled here.
But how many people have actually heard the n word used as an insult here in the UK? I haven't.
In my youth, I heard the n word regularly, in a series of expressions, none of which had racist overtones at the time: nigger brown was a colour, Ten Little Niggers was a book by Agatha Christie before the title was diplomatically changed, and then there was the nigger in the woodpile, the expression this MP is said to have used as a racist insult:
I've listened to what she said and I don't think she used the expression as a racist insult. I think her manner of speaking is many things: old-fashioned, not very fluent, but racist? No.
So what we have here is false indignation by the press and TV who, having tried very hard to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn because of all his politically-incorrect activities - and failed - have now turned their attention to Theresa May's very rocky government and are now using any weapon to further
destabilise it.
Don't get me wrong. I regard the Tories as the enemy of everything that matters to me and I don't want them in power for a minute longer than necessary. But I want them out of government by legitimate means. Not deposed by the UK media. The media, unelected, subject to corruption (as we know from the phone-tapping scandal among other things), and controlled by a small number of billionaires with little commitment to life in the UK. Let's not be fooled here.
Friday, 7 July 2017
'Government' Money?
I don't care if the Conservative Party puts up a statue to Margaret Thatcher. I was sickened by the influence she had as PM but she's been gone a long time now. Under her government, life in the UK became much worse. Her government was cruel and narrow-minded and if you want to know where the 'nanny state' originated, you need look no further: the Tories started interfering in life our bedrooms and classrooms 30 years ago and successive governments haven't stopped since. Any attempt to portray Theresa May as a worthy successor to Thatcher has been well and truly blown out of the water since the general election.
I doubt if I would cross the road to see either of these people but I do care very much who pays for the planned statue. I get annoyed when I hear people talking about funding things with 'government' money. The government has no money. The people with the money are us - you and me. We pay for government and just about every service we have through income tax, vat, stamp duty, airport duty, duty on petrol and alcohol, etc. Given the state of the UK right now, a statue of a former Tory PM is not top of my list of essential spending. How about yours?
The billion pound bribe paid to the DUP is a different matter. I keep wondering if removing that kind of cash out of the national budget to keep a political party in power is even legal. It's certainly not ethical. Did anyone ask if we thought it was okay? Has anyone in government explained where the money is to come from? Whose budget is to be robbed? Health? Education? Social security? Or has Theresa May in fact got a magic money tree in the Treasury that she can shake from time to time? Is Philip Hammond burrowing away with his Letraset printing the money?
Are the Tories accountable for how that money is spent in Northern Ireland? Arlene Foster has a very poor record in that regard. How much did the DUP lose over 'Cash for Ash'? £400 million? It was £490 million, to be exact.
We are so far from transparency in government in the UK that I wonder how politicians have the nerve to complain about how other organisations like the EU, the United Nations or NATO spend their funding. As for the endless complaints by politicians and the press about how foreign aid from the UK to countries round the world is spent, I'll bet few of them can tell us any of the good projects that foreign aid pays for (clean water, education, providing basic health care such as vaccination). It's as if the whole world is getting rich on the back of the UK government, whereas the reality is that the UK pays 0.7% of its gross domestic product in foreign aid, the very minimum recommended by international summits - and we only reached that target in 2013.
I've been reading today about people despairing at referendums and wanting no more of them. I look at it differently: I've visited places in Europe where there are rarely national votes taken on anything but where a population of 5 million would be seen as unmanageable, so power and budgets are devolved to much smaller communities. There seem to be fewer local politicians with the power that our elected representatives have and they have to give an account of how every pound of their devolved budget is spent.
I'd like to try accountability. But then, I'd like to try a lot of things: turning Westminster into a museum and housing our elected representatives in a modern building somewhere outside Manchester, where there are enough seats in the chamber for everyone and the equivalent of a travelodge beside it for accommodation. I'd like our representatives to pay for their own meals out of their wages and to have a cap put on their other expenses. I'd also like them to endure the same pay freeze as other public sector workers. And our representatives should have one job: if they take our money, they can give us 100% of their attention.
I doubt if I would cross the road to see either of these people but I do care very much who pays for the planned statue. I get annoyed when I hear people talking about funding things with 'government' money. The government has no money. The people with the money are us - you and me. We pay for government and just about every service we have through income tax, vat, stamp duty, airport duty, duty on petrol and alcohol, etc. Given the state of the UK right now, a statue of a former Tory PM is not top of my list of essential spending. How about yours?
The billion pound bribe paid to the DUP is a different matter. I keep wondering if removing that kind of cash out of the national budget to keep a political party in power is even legal. It's certainly not ethical. Did anyone ask if we thought it was okay? Has anyone in government explained where the money is to come from? Whose budget is to be robbed? Health? Education? Social security? Or has Theresa May in fact got a magic money tree in the Treasury that she can shake from time to time? Is Philip Hammond burrowing away with his Letraset printing the money?
Are the Tories accountable for how that money is spent in Northern Ireland? Arlene Foster has a very poor record in that regard. How much did the DUP lose over 'Cash for Ash'? £400 million? It was £490 million, to be exact.
We are so far from transparency in government in the UK that I wonder how politicians have the nerve to complain about how other organisations like the EU, the United Nations or NATO spend their funding. As for the endless complaints by politicians and the press about how foreign aid from the UK to countries round the world is spent, I'll bet few of them can tell us any of the good projects that foreign aid pays for (clean water, education, providing basic health care such as vaccination). It's as if the whole world is getting rich on the back of the UK government, whereas the reality is that the UK pays 0.7% of its gross domestic product in foreign aid, the very minimum recommended by international summits - and we only reached that target in 2013.
I've been reading today about people despairing at referendums and wanting no more of them. I look at it differently: I've visited places in Europe where there are rarely national votes taken on anything but where a population of 5 million would be seen as unmanageable, so power and budgets are devolved to much smaller communities. There seem to be fewer local politicians with the power that our elected representatives have and they have to give an account of how every pound of their devolved budget is spent.
I'd like to try accountability. But then, I'd like to try a lot of things: turning Westminster into a museum and housing our elected representatives in a modern building somewhere outside Manchester, where there are enough seats in the chamber for everyone and the equivalent of a travelodge beside it for accommodation. I'd like our representatives to pay for their own meals out of their wages and to have a cap put on their other expenses. I'd also like them to endure the same pay freeze as other public sector workers. And our representatives should have one job: if they take our money, they can give us 100% of their attention.
Tuesday, 4 July 2017
Anyone for tennis?
I thought I'd watch Pointless. Oh no, I can't: the national broadcaster has got Wimbledon on both its main channels for - what? - the next two weeks. Why is that?
Every bloody year it's the same. All winter we get football or rugby. Turn your back on the telly after the 10 o'clock news and there's a good chance they're showing football, with overpaid numpties spouting forth endlessly about teams run by foreign managers and stuffed full of foreign players, so we can't even claim football as the working-class British boys' way to wealth and fame any more. Channel 4 regularly takes off Countdown so we can all watch the racing.
But the summer is the worst: wall to wall tennis, cricket, the Tour de France, formula 1, golf. And if it's a really bad year there will also be more football from the world cup or the endless boredom of the Olympics, relieved only by the excitement of the 100metres if Usain Bolt is competing.
But you like sport, I hear you say. Good for you. I don't. I quite like that Wimbledon gets the weans out in the street with racquets and a ball kidding on they can play for a few weeks, but I am driven demented by grown-ups who imagine watching tennis somehow makes them experts on the game - or that they miraculously get fitter and healthier by vegging out on the settee, drinking beer and eating crisps. At least, people who go and watch the golf at the course get exercise from walking about after the golfers.
Luckily, I have other things to watch on my telly: a backlog of series that I've been saving just for the summer. And I've got a decent supply of books. And an online course on the Great Extinctions in earth's history - week 3 of 5 just completed and I'm on the look-out for another course to do already. And movies coming from Lovefilm or downloadable from the iplayer or Netflix.
And given the state of the summer weather, it looks like I'll need all of these to survive till September.
Every bloody year it's the same. All winter we get football or rugby. Turn your back on the telly after the 10 o'clock news and there's a good chance they're showing football, with overpaid numpties spouting forth endlessly about teams run by foreign managers and stuffed full of foreign players, so we can't even claim football as the working-class British boys' way to wealth and fame any more. Channel 4 regularly takes off Countdown so we can all watch the racing.
But the summer is the worst: wall to wall tennis, cricket, the Tour de France, formula 1, golf. And if it's a really bad year there will also be more football from the world cup or the endless boredom of the Olympics, relieved only by the excitement of the 100metres if Usain Bolt is competing.
But you like sport, I hear you say. Good for you. I don't. I quite like that Wimbledon gets the weans out in the street with racquets and a ball kidding on they can play for a few weeks, but I am driven demented by grown-ups who imagine watching tennis somehow makes them experts on the game - or that they miraculously get fitter and healthier by vegging out on the settee, drinking beer and eating crisps. At least, people who go and watch the golf at the course get exercise from walking about after the golfers.
Luckily, I have other things to watch on my telly: a backlog of series that I've been saving just for the summer. And I've got a decent supply of books. And an online course on the Great Extinctions in earth's history - week 3 of 5 just completed and I'm on the look-out for another course to do already. And movies coming from Lovefilm or downloadable from the iplayer or Netflix.
And given the state of the summer weather, it looks like I'll need all of these to survive till September.
Sunday, 2 July 2017
A light bulb moment
Does anybody else think we're getting ripped off something rotten over light bulbs?
There I was, having (another) fairly peaceful night of insomnia and the light went out. That's the third bulb to go in the same lamp in a couple of months: halogen, E27, warm white, 19W, 219 lumen - whatever that means. From B&Q. They're not cheap, these bulbs. They're supposed to be 'dimmable.' So why don't they last? I'll have to buy more soon because that was my last one, but what do I buy? And where?
I had a quick look at websites and they offer bulbs that are 5W. What does that mean when you switch them on? Can I read by that?
In the past, I had 2 kinds of light bulb: 60W and 100W.
Now every light is different. In the kitchen and bathroom I've got wee globe things, but they're different from the ones in the hall and my bedroom and they in turn are different from the ones in the livingroom. Some are LED and are halogen. Sometimes I have to buy bulbs I used to put into overhead projectors at school, and that need me to get my brother (the family electrics expert) to come and change, holding the dinky wee things covered in a paper hankie.
Let me tell you this: I didn't retire to do this kind of sh*t*! If you have an answer to this problem, post it on Facebook - please!
There I was, having (another) fairly peaceful night of insomnia and the light went out. That's the third bulb to go in the same lamp in a couple of months: halogen, E27, warm white, 19W, 219 lumen - whatever that means. From B&Q. They're not cheap, these bulbs. They're supposed to be 'dimmable.' So why don't they last? I'll have to buy more soon because that was my last one, but what do I buy? And where?
I had a quick look at websites and they offer bulbs that are 5W. What does that mean when you switch them on? Can I read by that?
In the past, I had 2 kinds of light bulb: 60W and 100W.
Now every light is different. In the kitchen and bathroom I've got wee globe things, but they're different from the ones in the hall and my bedroom and they in turn are different from the ones in the livingroom. Some are LED and are halogen. Sometimes I have to buy bulbs I used to put into overhead projectors at school, and that need me to get my brother (the family electrics expert) to come and change, holding the dinky wee things covered in a paper hankie.
Let me tell you this: I didn't retire to do this kind of sh*t*! If you have an answer to this problem, post it on Facebook - please!
Saturday, 1 July 2017
The D word
The D word I mean is disability.
No, don't go! Have a wee listen to this podcast from the BBC. It's called Ouch and it's about disabled people. I hope they change the name soon, but the podcast is good. It's about Jared O'Mara, the MP for Sheffield Hallam, who has cerebral palsy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/disability-40462699/the-only-mp-who-wears-a-t-shirt-in-parliament
If you heard an announcement on the news recently that MPs no longer have to wear ties and wondered why, it's Jared: he raised the issue with John Bercow and got full cooperation. He can't do up shirt buttons - or put on a tie, I imagine - so the dress rules of the House of Commons have been changed.
He's still left with other problems: the door he should use to get into Portcullis House needs two hands to open it, so he's having to come in the back door. There are going to be other problems but he has the support of the Speaker and of David Blunkett, also a Sheffield MP, who has been there before him.
Jared, of course, is trying to lead a normal life, so he hasn't got a big sign over his head that reads: Cerebral Palsy! Disabled! In the podcast, he mentions two things I find interesting:
Disability law expects employers to be 'anticipatory,' that is, to work out what will be needed for disabled people to play a full role in working life. And yet, the House of Commons, which passed the law in England, had nothing in place for a disabled MP: no one on the admin staff nominated as the point of contact for him on arrival; no procedures in place to make his induction easier; and no information in place to help staff in the House to work with him.
That brings me on to: education. It looks as if the mental health programmes put in place on TV and in the press over the last couple of years have got people used to the idea that many of us will experience a mental health problem in our lives and that men especially need to be more forthcoming about their mental health issues.
Do we have the same sensitisation programmes in place to deal with disability? Blindness and Down's are easy to recognise but do we know how to recognise autism, cerebral palsy, deafness? And if we recognise all of these, do we have a basic understanding of what to do and how to help? Notice I'm not suggesting schools should do this: the mental health campaign only took off when we stopped telling schools they had to do it and we - the grown-ups - started doing it ourselves.
As a volunteer, I've seen so many disabled people in nice accommodation with security systems in place, but stuck at the top of a block of flats with no lift, so effectively trapped indoors. Or even in blocks of flats with a lift, trapped by the weight of the fire doors which they can't open. The whole of the UK is alive with visiting 'carers': they're out there every day from early morning to bedtime; they rush around from client to client, underpaid and overworked; and some of what they do, I'm convinced, could be better done by the disabled clients themselves if they had the right kind of accommodation, inhouse cleaners, food preparers, and transport.
I heard a report on C4 news last night about housing: either we frontload the cost of housing by subsidising council house building (a one-off) or we endload it by giving private landlords a whopping subsidy (a continuing drain on the economy). The UK at present does the second version and it's costing us a mint. Property owners are doing fine though.
Support for disabled people is much the same: we can invest in suitable housing and make all buildings, pavements and facilities disability-friendly (a one-off), or we can spend money on carers because at present disabled people can't go out on their own or manage their homes or cook (a constant spend).
It used to be called joined-up thinking in the public services. But I gather there's no money in that: entrepreneurs these days like to hoover up the results of chaos in the public services.
Meanwhile I'm away to get a stick to use on those days when my energy is rock-bottom and my walking is kind of shaky. I know I'm not mobile enough to cope with crowds any more, as I found out at Glasgow University last week. I know how to behave in crowds but I can't cope with people who suddenly change direction and walk in front of me or elbow me as if I'm not there (thanks for that, people). I can't manoeuvre the way I need to in a crowd and I get kinda panicky when people jostle me. I'm grateful to my lovely family, without whom I would not have been able to manage the steps inside the university or at the Lorne Hotel or The Sisters restaurant.
But my concerns are as nothing compared to most disabled people's. I just wish I could see an end to the persecution (strong word - but I've thought it over and it's right) and exclusion of the disabled.
No, don't go! Have a wee listen to this podcast from the BBC. It's called Ouch and it's about disabled people. I hope they change the name soon, but the podcast is good. It's about Jared O'Mara, the MP for Sheffield Hallam, who has cerebral palsy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/disability-40462699/the-only-mp-who-wears-a-t-shirt-in-parliament
If you heard an announcement on the news recently that MPs no longer have to wear ties and wondered why, it's Jared: he raised the issue with John Bercow and got full cooperation. He can't do up shirt buttons - or put on a tie, I imagine - so the dress rules of the House of Commons have been changed.
He's still left with other problems: the door he should use to get into Portcullis House needs two hands to open it, so he's having to come in the back door. There are going to be other problems but he has the support of the Speaker and of David Blunkett, also a Sheffield MP, who has been there before him.
Jared, of course, is trying to lead a normal life, so he hasn't got a big sign over his head that reads: Cerebral Palsy! Disabled! In the podcast, he mentions two things I find interesting:
Disability law expects employers to be 'anticipatory,' that is, to work out what will be needed for disabled people to play a full role in working life. And yet, the House of Commons, which passed the law in England, had nothing in place for a disabled MP: no one on the admin staff nominated as the point of contact for him on arrival; no procedures in place to make his induction easier; and no information in place to help staff in the House to work with him.
That brings me on to: education. It looks as if the mental health programmes put in place on TV and in the press over the last couple of years have got people used to the idea that many of us will experience a mental health problem in our lives and that men especially need to be more forthcoming about their mental health issues.
Do we have the same sensitisation programmes in place to deal with disability? Blindness and Down's are easy to recognise but do we know how to recognise autism, cerebral palsy, deafness? And if we recognise all of these, do we have a basic understanding of what to do and how to help? Notice I'm not suggesting schools should do this: the mental health campaign only took off when we stopped telling schools they had to do it and we - the grown-ups - started doing it ourselves.
As a volunteer, I've seen so many disabled people in nice accommodation with security systems in place, but stuck at the top of a block of flats with no lift, so effectively trapped indoors. Or even in blocks of flats with a lift, trapped by the weight of the fire doors which they can't open. The whole of the UK is alive with visiting 'carers': they're out there every day from early morning to bedtime; they rush around from client to client, underpaid and overworked; and some of what they do, I'm convinced, could be better done by the disabled clients themselves if they had the right kind of accommodation, inhouse cleaners, food preparers, and transport.
I heard a report on C4 news last night about housing: either we frontload the cost of housing by subsidising council house building (a one-off) or we endload it by giving private landlords a whopping subsidy (a continuing drain on the economy). The UK at present does the second version and it's costing us a mint. Property owners are doing fine though.
Support for disabled people is much the same: we can invest in suitable housing and make all buildings, pavements and facilities disability-friendly (a one-off), or we can spend money on carers because at present disabled people can't go out on their own or manage their homes or cook (a constant spend).
It used to be called joined-up thinking in the public services. But I gather there's no money in that: entrepreneurs these days like to hoover up the results of chaos in the public services.
Meanwhile I'm away to get a stick to use on those days when my energy is rock-bottom and my walking is kind of shaky. I know I'm not mobile enough to cope with crowds any more, as I found out at Glasgow University last week. I know how to behave in crowds but I can't cope with people who suddenly change direction and walk in front of me or elbow me as if I'm not there (thanks for that, people). I can't manoeuvre the way I need to in a crowd and I get kinda panicky when people jostle me. I'm grateful to my lovely family, without whom I would not have been able to manage the steps inside the university or at the Lorne Hotel or The Sisters restaurant.
But my concerns are as nothing compared to most disabled people's. I just wish I could see an end to the persecution (strong word - but I've thought it over and it's right) and exclusion of the disabled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)