Have a look at this. Here is a link to several provider action plans. Notice that Reed's compels the claimant to sign away his data protection rights. That cannot be right. There's no bloody way I'd sign this. Doesn't the provider guidelines for this scheme allow people the right to retain this? Isn't that a separate requirement? Is this even legal? If Reed are going to argue that it's mandatory to sign the plan (as I'm sure they do, even though it might not be), then can they legally include this as well?
On another note, Goonface Grayling (him again) has decided, in another act of tory hypocrisy, to offshore all the work done for the Universal Credit IT system to India and the like. Read about that here.
And if that's not bad enough, follow the link on this page to The Void to hear just how terrifying this is going to be. I doubt even David Icke could be able to construe something more Orwellian. I want this particular story to be spread as far and wide as possible. Unfortunately my posting rights at the Guardian are being more heavily moderated than I would like, but that's probably because I posted saying that Grayling should fuck off and die of cancer.
I hate that the Tories make me feel that angry, and that's why I said it. I don't really mean it because I'm better than them. But these monsters just bring it out in me. Divide and rule again.
Why does this quote come to mind Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
ReplyDeleteRev 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name
We are heading back to pure serfdom. The Sheriff of Nottingham has become king.
Delete