The Eve of the War

Nearly new year. The only celebration of the season worth a damn in my view. I'm not a religious person, but there are definite benefits to marking the end of one year and the beginning of another. I won't be doing that in any kind of social way. I can't afford to travel to somewhere and drink something. Besides the people I know will be with their families and kids. I have neither (not sure if that's a blessing or a curse) and I don't really drink (never really formed a relationship with alcohol; I rarely imbibe except the occasional cold bottled beer).

So where do we stand right now? I could mention IDS (hashtag Tory shitbag) and his rant in the Telegraph today, but instead I'll let Channel 4's factchecker debunk his hysteria instead. 

This has been my first year on the Work Programme - technically 9 months as I started in April, 13 months after signing on, which was itself 2 months after my ESA appeal ended. I never expected to win so I barely contested it. Maybe things would have been different otherwise, though given that ESA is time limited if you're in the WRAG (as I may soon be) I would have ended up on JSA anyway. Besides, regardless, I'd be on the Work Programme either way. ESA = Employment Support Allowance, expect it is nothing of the kind. It's a benefit for the sick denied to the sick. The government claims it wants to help people back into work, but then manages to sabotage it's own efforts while then branding claimants, who naturally fail the ATOS test, as scroungers. We can't win. It's spectacularly Orwellian. 

Perhaps 2013 will be the year this changes. 

I certainly think there will be changes next year, and not for the better. This will be the watershed for those of us resisting this government. Unfortunately as it stands the unions seem to again have abandoned the cause. I'm sensing a groundswell of real palpable anger now; a sense of total frustration. This will spill over, in my opinion. Perhaps when Universal Credit kicks in (or fails to), or maybe sooner, when the cuts really start to bite, or maybe when some new piece of Tory hate is announced. I won't be surprised if we see more rioting, perhaps even more serious rioting. There has to be an organised civil response to this vile government, but it has got to be effective. 

So what have we learned from the Work Programme? What have my two appointments taught me, in preparation for number three, on the 14th of January? It's clear the whole scheme is misrepresented; the government claims it gives competent caring organisations, with experience, a free hand to help people in whatever way is needed. I have even seen the provider's own adviser job description agree to this. However the truth is that free hand manifests as a rigid doctrine that demands conformity for their benefit: make us money and it's a success. Resist, for whatever reason, and you can expect a 'compliance doubt' to land a sanction in  your lap. 

There is no discussion with these people: they are not interested in listening to your story, they are not interested in your problems or issues despite that being their apparent job description. In fact if you have problems - maybe health related if you come from ESA - you will be treated as idling and making excuses. Do not expect help or support. Expect instead to do what they want, where and when they want. The Programme is not set up for the convenience of the claimant, it is set up for the provider. You will attend in their house at a time of their choosing; that they pay your expenses is not a boon, it's further expense to the taxpayer. The scheme does nothing for rural communities.

Expect your interests, skills and talents, to be traduced; these count for nothing. This is because of the soporific way advisers operate. Want to be a writer (or even to investigate any opportunity that may come from having some interest or even skill therein), forget it. That requires 'experience' and 'training' two things the Work Programme is systemically incapable of providing, except at a ridiculously basic level: 'CV training' or 'employability training'. That magic word: employability. It's a perfect example of the adviser mentality, inventing something out of thin air and then using it as a hoop to make claimants jump through. What does it mean? Is it simply code for 'be polite, don't drop your trousers in front of your boss, don't spit in the office, don't punch customers on the nose'? Common sense surely? 

Ok there are people that lack even basic skills some of us take for granted. That's fair enough, but lumping them in with everyone else will breed resentment from both ends.

So what do providers want? Well in my case, personal data and authority over that information it seems. Do they have a right to that? I hope not! With the introduction late in the year of the awful Universal Jobmatch system it seems more and more of our rights are being curtailed. We have less and less authority over our own decision making processes. Why am I not entitled to even see the people, let alone vet them, that the provider would pass my details to? Isn't that absurd? 

This must be resisted at every level. It cannot be lawful that I have to concede control over personal data in order to maintain a claim on the only source of income I have. In the meantime the issues that the provider accuses me of using as a 'barrier' to work (or at least the opportunity to apply for jobs that don't exist or that aren't suitable) are explicitly and furiously ignored. 

That's where we stand right now. The Work Programme is still going; it's still limping along like a wounded animal, bleeding into the environment. It is, on every level, incompetent unhelpful and dictatorial. The staff are untrained and uncaring and the environment inappropriate and hopeless. That will be our future as well unless we fight for it. 

Goodnight Britain, and happy new year.

Season of Stupid part 2

I'm bored. Really bored. I wish the end of the year phase would hurry up and pass. Come to think of it, I wish Winter would hurry up and pass. Even though it's nice that it's not fucktastically freezing cold, everywhere is muddy and saturated and it's horrible. Also I'd know if my claim has been decided as well. I could do with learning to hibernate; store some nuts under a tree or something and live off that for 3 months.

According to the human side of the Post Office my special delivery was delivered, however their useless track and trace website doesn't seem to agree. I guess I have to accept I'm being told the truth because it would be too depressing and utterly outrageous for these people to lie to me. 

My god, but I've got £140 burning a hole in my pocket! I could spend that money sooooo quickly right now - and part of me thinks 'why fucking not, keep a little bit back, they wont' refuse your claim!'. But another part of me, perhaps more wisely, says 'don't be an idiot'! It would help if there were more things to do round here, but rural communities are really bearing the brunt of the Tory blight. There's just no support structures at all. In fact, aside from care work (which I really can't face doing) there's fuck all voluntary work other than sitting in a charity shop. I've done that before, don't want to do it again! 

There's never been much support round here. I think most people don't see there's a need as it's populated by affluent retirees and Tory voting landowners. That just makes it worse. It would be something if I could travel without having to pay £7 a time. The local rag advertised on it's front page this week the government's new initiative for free travel for the unemployed, for one month only. What a bizarre notion; probably by the time they've processed your application for the pass it'll be the middle of January at least. That's probably what they are counting on.

And the woman I spoke to on the phone at the Post Office assured me she'd email me confirmation. Hasn't done so. I guess she misheard my email address (it's not a complicated or bizarre one since the JC made me change it because it originally scared Tesco). They better have delivered it!

The Season of Stupid

Seasins Greeetings! On the 17th I managed to persuade my GP to write a sick note, due to the bullshit of the Work Programme and his agreeing that it was, indeed, bullshit.

The following day I rang the ESA new claims number only to be told that there is a glitch on their system preventing people that have already claimed in the past from doing so again. He posts out a form. I don't discover the reason for this until Thursday when I try my luck again. I'm 'assured' this error is peculiar to the process of applying via telephone, even though that is the preferred method.

On Wednesday I post off my JSA booklet with a signature to say I'm ending my claim. I send it recorded delivery. While doing my shopping early in town (early enough to avoid the seasonal chaos) I ask in the JC to see if they have a form to save waiting. I have to explain to them why they should give me a form and not be directed, by default, to the phones. They have no forms in stock.

As I said, I tried the ESA new claims number again.

On Saturday the form arrives and I begin to fill it in. 

Unbeknownst to me the post office try delivering my booklet on Christmas Eve. Noone is working so they can't get a signature and the booklet is taken back to the delivery office awaiting the recipient's collection.

I fill in the form and post it off this morning using Special Delivery, taking no chances even though it's freepost. I need this to a) arrive and b) arrive quickly! I've got £140 left, that has to see me through until a decision is made. Hopefully this won't take longer than a fortnight, though that money is certainly burning a hole in my pocket! I'd dearly love to dip in and treat myself, but I don't dare!

I check the royal mail website to see if my booklet has arrived and find out they tried to deliver it. I ring them up (a feat in itself) to find out what will happen now. To my horror I discover that, at this point, I no longer have any claim to the letter; it is now the responsibility of the recipient to collect it. I ask them why they didn't try delivering it today (and every day until it is successfully delivered). You might think that is a reasonable course of action - or to return to sender if that's not possible. Apparently that's not how they roll. 

Nope, they try and deliver it once, regardless of when or where, regardless of whether it might be to a place at a time that's reasonable to assume would be inauspicious (such as Christmas). If they can't get a signature, back to the office it goes and back there it stays. They make one single effort to deliver something that, by virtue of being sent recorded, might reasonably be assumed to be important. If that doesn't work, well, tough shit! Sucks to be me!

Now you might wonder why that's a big deal. My concern is twofold: firstly, I'm now stressing out like a motherfucker as to whether my esa package (including sick note) will be successfully delivered tomorrow, and secondly, what arrangements the DWP offices and their mail departments have to deal with these situations. That is, if they don't deal with collecting mail then I. Am. Fucked. 

Naturally the Post Office don't care; they'll say they've done their bit and then sit back and pat themselves on the back having charged me almost seven quid (I can't afford to fritter away) to have vitally important documents end up in their fucking dungeon! If that happens tomorrow...

Carded?

On Friday morning, hapless BBC radio phone in host John Darvall presided over a discussion about the proposed welfare cash card; an idea put forward by some hapless no mark Tory trying trying to ingratiate himself with his betters. The idea of course is total bunkum and cannot possibly work; sadly that's the hallmark of good Tory policy these days. 

Naturally the discussion was filled with curtain twithers and ignorance. The comments were filled with the twitching received nonsense about welfare paying people not to work etc. These views are proffered in an almost plagiarised fashion.

At least four times, during the hour long debate, Mr Darvall (who comes across as some kind of low rent Alan Partridge, sans Lexus) explicitly referred to porn as one of the things that a card user wouldn't be able to spend their money on. Porn? Seriously? Why is this mentioned? Who has told him to refer to porn in the same breath as other things like alcohol or fags? How many benefit claimants spend their welfare on pornography? 

The first caller gets things going in typical fashion commenting that 'we' (ie the poor old taxpayer) are subsidising 'their' (ie the scrounging morass of shirkers) alcohol and drug habits. No facts are presented regarding just how many benefit claimants, which would necessarily include pensioners, are users. So instead the listener is tacitly invited to assume that most if not all are users. If that were ever to be true then I'm sure the relevant industries would have objections to a cash card. Just like the pay day loan sharks would.

Sky TV is also mentioned - again. It is also not pointed out that people, those on welfare that do have a Sky account (never mind a dish, which one may have without an active account, like me) may have set theirs up prior to losing their job. Furthermore once such a person is sacked they aren't going to find Mr Murdoch willing to let them out of their contract and come and prepossess the dish and box. That's the nature of big business; happy to take your money in the good times, notsomuch in the bad. So instead we blame the claimant, on superficial evidence much like the closed curtains debacle.

All these ridiculous icons of a perceived 'good' life that, to quote the callers, 'working people have to pay for'. Well you don't have to pay for them anymore than the unemployed do; noone's forcing you to sign up to Murdoch's death machine anymore than they are making you drink and smoke. But people are programmed to believe these are the measures of success in life: owning a sky box, a plasma TV, an xbox, and being able to drink stagnant liver rotting water. So much so that seeing others have access to these things, without any explanation of how, is enough to drive people against each other.

Naturally these issues are not discussed. Instead people are invited to bray and babble, putting out statements of such airheaded ignorance it would embarrass a valley girl. The really sad part is nothing is challenged. These discussions, and this is not the first (as I've commented before) nor will it be the last, are so feeble that all they do is promote the status quo and become an echo chamber for media fed ignorance happily exploited by benefit claiming millionaires such as Gideon Osborne. But it's ok; the callers know these things 'for a fact'. One chump even says that, when he used to claim, he played the system! Er?

So the callers are in favour of a cashcard that, according to the idiot presenter (he really is), precludes people purchasing all sorts of things that are all on sale in the supermarkets serving as the only places cashcard users can shop. How would that work then? We'll gloss over that of course. The truth is that the supermarkets would have to retrain their staff and reprogramme their checkouts, especially the self service ones. How else would they be able to distinguish between a bottle of scotch and a bottle of milk, how would they stop me buying a dvd, or a newspaper, or some batteries, or a pack of exercise books, some biros, a cuddly toy? What happens if the card isn't accepted because of a malfunction? What happens to unspent money on the card? What happens if someone does have some spare cash because they were able to shop around - this is the kind of socialism the government likes, despite their apparent love for the free market. Socialism for the rich, with their inherited wealth, tax breaks, land subsidies etc, and free market capitalism, with all its fraught perils, for the poor.

Do we assume that money spent on social activities/entertainment is a luxury? Do these people want to ban library access to the unemployed as well? It's a recipe for social destruction. That doesn't stop some old bird comparing wartime rationing with a welfare cash card scheme: if it was ok during the blitz then it's ok now! Apparently no one complained back then (yeah right). Clean your rosy spectacles my dear!

Sadly the elephant in the room is trumpeting it's head off but none taking part can hear it: wages are terrible. People perceive benefits as more generous because they themselves work long hours for very little. Why aren't these people organising to do something about that? Why not take up solidarity with existing unions - including with people out of work since it affects all of us, working or otherwise? Can't be bothered; far easier to presume laziness on the part of others and ignore it in ourselves.

Darvall casually misrepresents Jobseekers Allowance by £50 (over 50%); "£120 a week or whatever it is". Lazy journalism, but about what I've come to expect from local radio. And he keeps referring to pornography!

One caller, naturally supportive of this nonsense, rationalises her thinking by way of saying her (ex) friend spends her welfare down the pub. Well of course. A typical, unexplained, baseless anecdote. If this story is true, and of course the details are not provided, then the friend in question is clearly an addict. The first thing such a person would do with a cash card is sell it. They are still forced to participate in a capitalist free market economy, only with thoughtless restrictions that do nothing to address the causes of her problem. All stick no carrot. 

Final comment comes from someone who, despite never having claimed, believes the system he has no experience of is too generous.

Ignorance.

...Into the Fire?

So now I have to make a claim for ESA! At the worst possible time of year to do so!

I rang on Tuesday: it's either that or pay the library a small fortune to print out the entire form (57 pages at 20p a pop). I don't own a printer. 

The gentleman starts to take my claim. You have to allow them to go through the process at their own pace because they have a very strict script that includes all sorts of legal stuff that you cannot interrupt. Ok, that's fair enough, some people will have complex answers and they need to understand what they are saying. Never mind the fact that ESA is explained as a benefit for those too sick to work which in practise it isn't (otherwise why would there be a Work Related Activity Group, which I'm trying to get into so the Government's own support systems can actually do their job).

Unfortunately there is a glitch. One that, when I tried ringing back today, is persistent: if you have made a prior ESA claim then it can fuck up the system. Details of that claim are retained which, somehow, get in the way of a subsequent claim. To be fair to the woman on the phone today she was apologetic about it (not her fault): they know it's bullshit but it isn't getting fixed anytime soon. It's a persistent known issue. 

This means they have to send out a claim form to fill in. This was done on Tuesday, but god knows when it will arrive. I wasn't sure it was actually posted since the guy I spoke to then put me on hold for 20 minutes to sort it out (he must have actually gone to the post department and put it in the envelope personally) and then I got cut off!

While in town doing my shopping yesterday morning (ie when it's less busy - though still busy enough that if I stop moving my brain feels like I'm drowning in a sea of people, supermarket shelves, indoor lighting and jingle bells - there's something about indoor lighting that really gets to me), I wen to the JC. Maybe I could pick up a form directly. Of course not! Never mind that the desk clerk couldn't just go and look, they were 'out of stock'. He tried to fob me off by getting me to use the phone, which clearly I can't. I explained this and he went and looked. I don't really understand how the JC manages to not have any ESA forms, but they didn't. I guess I will just have to wait and hope it doesn't get lost in transit like the letter I posted to the Salvation Army on the 1st which is now technically MIA. I tried the CAB but they don't have forms either.

You'd think that transferring a claim from J to ESA would be actually relatively simple; especially in the case of someone that doesn't have a lot of personal information to track whose personal details are the same in each case (where applicable). Surely I could just post in the sicknote and everything's fine. But nothing is ever easy with this system - and that's before we get Universal Credit next year!

Out of the Frying Pan?

Well I did it. I managed to convince my GP to sign me off. I explained just how the Work Programme were not interested in helping me, despite the vaunted covenant of the scheme, unless I was on the 'right' benefit. In the end he wrote a 3 month note. Now all I have to do is find some way to apply for ESA during the busiest time of year for the postal service (you can't apply online, so much for the IT systems).

To be fair, I have been quite critical of my GP, but today I think he finally started realising just how out of whack, out of touch and fucking ridiculous the welfare system is. In fact he was sounding quite emphatic about it and wanted to write to the local MP (a tory, sadly) to tell him just how ridiculous, as a GP, it is to have to operate this way. I'm not sure about that and wanted to wait until the claim is processed at least - one thing at a time.

I think part of it is having other patients with similar tales of woe. Certainly that's what he hinted at; I've no idea who else locally is having to deal with this insane system. Let's hope they don't have to deal with the likes of these privateers on the Work Programme!

Hopefully the claim will be processed in time for my appointment on the 14th of January with the Work Programme. I'm told there's a 2-3 weeks turnaround time, I should just about be ok financially, but of course there's no guarantee. So while I'm glad that I can sign off (and my JSA payment should go out tomorrow as it needs to clear in time for the Christmas holidays), I can't help wondering if it's a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire. I'd like to believe that the Work Programme might be more helpful on ESA, but that kind of schizoid about face doesn't exactly put these people in a good light.

Sadly, in other news the Tories have launched a new offencive in their great crusade against scroungers. This is a link to a questionnaire on a Tory website asking if people think more money should go to either: 'hard working families' or 'people who won't work'. Not people that can't, or don't (because of conditions out of their control, such as recession), but people who 'won't; lazy scroungers in other words. Like me! It's all under the guise of 'fairness'. This is just the Tories starting to realise the wind is shifting; they are now trying to play divide and rule even more to shore up support for the changes incoming next year: is it fair that you, having just been made redundant from your job in the public sector (boo hiss!) should take a hit when these other people won't work? Bollocks! 

Ironically one of the good things about unemployment is how it teaches you to see through all the urban myths and the bullshit propagated by the status quo. It broadens the mind. It's an education in its own right!

Madness!

On the 1st I wrote a letter of complaint to the Salvation Army regarding my adviser who has behaved, in my opinion, quite poorly. I feel him to be an ignorant bully. That letter has yet to arrive so this morning I had no option but to ring up and discuss this personally. Yet another insight into a world gone mad.

I get through to the line manager concerned. I try to explain how the adviser has ignored my medical information which, initially, she confirms they have, as passed on by the DWP. I say initially because when I later said that back to her she decided to hedge her bets. 

Instead of initially discussing the guy's behaviour she points out that I'm on JSA, that's what her system (correctly) tells her. This means that there's nothing they can do because people on JSA have to be treated a certain way. They have to do jobsearch, apply for jobs and basically do everything the Jobseeker Agreement sets out. I know this. I explain that's what I've been doing and that I show the JC this each time I sign on. But the Work Programme needs you to do this as well. So not only do you have to do what the JC want you to do, you have to do what the WP wants. 

She mentioned Universal Jobmatch and agreed when I quickly pointed out it wasn't mandatory, but it seems that only counts as far as the JC is concerned. So because you have to jobsearch while on the Work Programme I'd have to register with UJ - the mandatory requirement is only from the JC side of things. The WP can compel you to do so as well, it seems. It sounds almost as if they are expecting JSA claimants to do everything twice: once to satisfy the JC requirement to sign on, and then a second time according to how the provider wants it done. I hope that's not true.

But I'm trying to explain the adviser's behaviour, and predictably she's not really interested in taking what I say on board without making excuses: "i'm sure that's not what he meant", etc. She decides that I must be on the wrong benefit. Now that's not entirely untrue, but I explain that my GP doesn't want to write a sick note and wants you, the WP, to help me find the right kind of work and give me the right kind of support, regardless of whether or not I claim ESA. Here's the problem: that, according to her, isn't possible. It is either JSA or ESA. This means that anyone found capable of work by the WCA will end up on the Woprk Programme on JSA, so regardless if you're on dialysis with no liver, or in a wheelchair, you will be put thorugh the programme as if you were absolutely physically fine.

The really sick part of this is that they have further and different options for people that are on ESA. These will not be available unless you are claiming ESA, regardless of how ill you actually are! This is insanity! She asked me what I was interested in so I told her I was interested in writing - something the adviser was quick to do no more than rubbish. She quickly responded saying she knew of 3 writing courses. I asked her why the adviser couldn't offer me these options (whether these courses amount to anything is another matter however) and support me thus - because I'm on JSA! This bespoke (their words, by the way) service is nothing of the sort; there is no flexibility at all. It's hobson's choice and all dependent on what benefit you receive.

She pointed out they are not medically trained and I pointed out that, even if I were to claim ESA (nevermind that getting a sick note will be a herculean task of persuasion, but passing the WCA will be the impossible), I'd still be with them. She said they can refer me to different agencies that specialise in support. 

On the plus side my appointment for next week has been changed to a meeting with her in the middle of January. I was adamant I would not see the adviser again - for all the good that will do. In the meantime I have another appointment with my GP next week and I will have to move heaven and earth to persuade him that the only option for support requires him sign me off. This is patently ridiculous. I don't really fancy my chances, but according to the Work Programme itself, I have to claim ESA - a benefit that the government doesn't want anyone to have. 

This whole ridiculous scheme seems to take with the one hand what it gives with the other. No wonder it's failed so badly.

Odd Man Out

Today was signing day. As usual I'm anxious. I'm always anxious. But no more so than dole day. There are three people before me, and vulture faced Sue is on deck. I'm anticipating the worst: that she'll be my adviser. I don't like Sue; the rest are more or less ok, as advisers go, but Sue has an attitude. She's cynical, suspicious and really quite derisory. She talks down to people, and loudly. You could apply for 1000 jobs - and have the evidence - and she'll criticise you for not applying for 1001.

Each of the three people before me are asked whether they've signed with the Universal Jobmatch. Oh dear, I think, I see what's coming. Similarly they are also asked the token 'how's it going with the WP' (a pointless question since if things aren't going well they won't be interested). In each case these people, and by extension the majority of claimants signing on there, I assume, have no problem. In the case of Universal Jobfarce, they seem quite amiable about it all; quite ok with conceding their personal data. 

It's my turn and I'm asked if I've registered. I decide not to divulge more than is necessary: I simply say that I haven't. I'm then told, as I was last time, that the site is great and wonderful: you can store your CV, you can get alerts notifying you about vacancies (?), etc, etc. It's just sales talk from people who really don't seem clued up on the reality of all this, especially the security issues. They don't seem at all bothered that once you put this sort of stuff online there's no going back. Once your data is out there...it'll stay out there. God knows where it could end up. 

There's no compulsion, at this point, so I don't choose to declare my intention not to sign. I have no stomach for an argument. This is the same person (not Sue, thank fuck) that believed I had to engage with the WP and that, if I didn't contact them, I might face a sanction. This sort of ambivalent information malaise, this lack of clarity on the part of the adviser, is troubling in my opinion. They hold the power at the point of signing, but they seem really rather cavalier in regard to the facts. However if I am compelled to register, even implicitly, I will certainly point out that it is, at the time of writing, not mandatory. 

So that would make me the odd man out. By standing up in a field of otherwise compliant peers, I get to stick my head over the parapet. This is really bothering me. We all know what that means: you get marked as the troublemaker. Here's the guy that won't play ball, he wont' help himself - he can't be bothered. That's what the prevailing attitude will be; not whether or not his objections and views have any validity. Not whether or not there should be solidarity in this.

I'm not asked, thankfully, how it's going on the WP, but she does ask me if I have an appointment, going back to her concern about engagement. Here again is another example of adviser disinterest: I told the adviser I saw last time that my appointment is on the 17th (provisionally - my complaint will change that, I'm sure, if it ever gets delivered) and she input it into the system. These people just don't listen: she looks at my jobsearch and notices where I had siad that I'd, weekly, looked on the websites of various shops, including Argos (they have recruitment sites, why not look at them?). She then decides that Argos are currently looking for staff. This raises two problems: firstly, why is she ignoring what's written on the jobsearch, and secondly why ignore the fact that my mental health makes working in busy retail environments, such as Christmas in Argos, extremely difficult. I don't argue the point, but again it's adviser disinterest. Why ask me to fill in a jobsearch if you're going to tell me that I'm wrong in this fashion when I point out that I didn't see anything when I looked at their recruitment page. She probably thinks that such pages are not worth visiting, but that's bollocks.

It's just a process now. I'm not getting any help from these people. She books my next appointment, makes some noise about being due a tea break (I offer a suitably feeble sympathetic smile), and that's it. No real input from me - I'm never asked, for example, what might be an appropriate time to come in. It's meant to be the same time each fortnight, but they are poorly organised and apparently their systems don't work that way, despite the local bus service overhauling it's timetable making certain times invalid where previously where were ok. I'm not listened to, there's no interest, and no help. Business as usual; just another day at the office.

Delivering Hope?

Perhaps it's sheer bitterness that causes me to post this. Today's post includes the Christmas appeal for charity from none other than the Salvation Army. It's not sent to me personally, just the household, that would be too much otherwise. The campaign is entitled 'Delivering hope for the UK's most vulnerable'. 

I find this extraordinary: is this the state of our society? On one hand they can talk about how much it will cost, with your/my help, to give kids a few treats for Christmas, or to house a homeless person temporarily in one of their shelters, or to give a bit of companionship to an old person. Yet on the other hand their Employment Plus department, which, according to them, is fully a part of the Salvation Army, is quite able and willing to issue 'compliance doubts' leading to the kind of poverty they claim to campaign against!?! Is this reality?

"At tghe Salvation Army, we believe that no one deserves to be cold, alone or neglected, especially at Christmas. So, we are committed to reaching out to people who need us..."

I feel sick. There probably are some genuinely compassionate people that work for the Salvation Army who want nothing more than to help. But this is an organisation that runs the government's Work Programme which is failing the unemployed and makes use of poverty as a weapon of compliance. How can they square these two aspects?

The letter accompanying the campaign info/donation form is signed by a person (no need to mention names) who has the 'rank' of Lieutenant-Colonel! Again the militarisation!

On the 1st I wrote a letter of complaint stating that I will not see my adviser again. I made it clear they are to communicate only to me and that, if I hear nothing from them, I will assume my next appointment, with said adviser, is cancelled (fat chance). Unfortunately despite being sent recorded delivery there seems to be no evidence of it's arrival, if it has arrived. It really wouldn't help me if the letter doesn't arrive, but that's out of my hands. I'm not really looking forward to the ensuing 'discussion' this will provoke, but I am damned sure that they will be 'delivering' me from that adviser.