Independant review into drug abuse and other maladies in getting back to work

Independentreview into the impact on employment outcomes of drug or alcohol addiction

, and obesity: call for evidence

4

Introduction

The government has commissioned Professor Dame Carol Black 

to undertake an independent review into how best to support

 benefit claimants with potentially treatable conditions, such as

 obesity or addictions to drugs and alcohol, back into work.

The review will consider the evidence and provide the government with a thorough analysis of the options available to support more people suffering from long-term 

treatable conditions back into work.

This call for evidence will be one of several methods used to 

gather information. Evidence submitted will be used to inform a 

final independent report for the government.

Independent review: terms of reference

The purpose of the review is to consider how best to support those 

suffering from long-term yet treatable conditions back into work or to 

remain in work.

The review will primarily consider individuals with the following long-term 

yet treatable conditions: obesity, alcohol addiction and drug addiction. It

will consider the holistic needs of these individuals including the effects of 

multiple health conditions and other barriers to work.

The review aims to:

• Establish the role which such treatable conditions play in causing 

worklessness and estimate the associated cost to the Exchequer and the

economy

• Understand the characteristics (including overlapping conditions and 

other disadvantages) of individuals and the pathways they take through 

the healthcare and welfare systems and the roles played by providers and 

employers in these pathways

• Consider also the group(s) most at risk of becoming workless through 

treatable conditions in future and the support available to them, including

incentives on employers

I am not a subscriber but do not mind showing British Injustice at work

I am so, so sorry for having to bring this issue up again, but I have no choice.
As you know, at the end of last month deputy leader Jayda Fransen and I were dragged into the High Court in a blatant attempt to stop us leading our protest in Luton.
This was an outrageous abuse of police powers and demonstrated just how desperate the authorities are to stop Britain First.
Thankfully, the judge didn't entertain the police request to bar us from Luton.
Unfortunately, because of the way these things work, he did grant several other clauses of the injunction on a temporary basis.
He did this mainly because the legal paperwork was served on Jayda and I at a very late stage, only several days before the protest was due to take place.

Thanks to this deliberate tactic employed by the police, which was designed to prevent us from having time to launch an appeal if the judge banned us from Luton, our legal team had no time whatsoever to mount a full defence of all the clauses in the injunction.
Because of this, the judge decided against clause "A" which would have prohibited us from entering Luton, but granted all the other clauses.
The hearing was adjourned and now we face a full hearing in the High Court to argue against the clauses the judge granted on a temporary basis.
The clauses that were granted temporarily are as follows (we have underlined crucial parts):

b) Entering any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England and Wales without prior written invitation;

c) Publishing, distributing or displaying, or causing to be published, distributed or displayed, any words or images, whether electronically or otherwise, which having regard to all the circumstances are likely to stir up religious and/or racial hatred;

d) Using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour thereby causing harassment alarm or distress to any person;

e) That a power of arrest be attached to these conditions.

As you can see, these conditions are pretty draconian and will cripple mine and Jayda's ability to run Britain First.
If we are not allowed to "publish, distribute or display" any words or images, how can we continue as leader and deputy leader?
If we post up an image that is critical of Islam, we will be breaking clause "C" and we will be arrested and flung in prison, so extreme are the consequences of breaking a High Court injunction.
If I am giving a speech in a town centre and a Muslim tells the police he feels "offended" by my words, I will be guilty of breaking clause "D" and will be arrested and imprisoned.
If this injunction is granted properly at the forthcoming full hearing, then breaking any of its terms will mean "Contempt of High Court" which is a serious crime and a guaranteed prison sentence for both Jayda and I.
Our legal representatives have delivered the final bill for their services at the High Court on the 26th of June and it stands in at £5,300.
As you can see, defending yourself in the High Court is very expensive and this is one of the reasons the police (using taxpayers' money of course) are doing this to us.
But let's be honest: we beat them last time and we can do it again if we all pull together, close ranks and contribute to our legal fighting fund.

Our solicitors tell us that the full hearing for this injunction is "imminent" and we must prepare ourselves.
The good news is, if we beat the police again in the High Court, it will deter other arms of the State from persecuting us legally.
https://www.britainfirst.org/donate/
The bad news is that, should we lose, we face disaster and will most probably end up paying the entire (or part) legal costs that the police have run up, such is the way the court system works ("the loser pays").
This is a defining moment for Britain First.
If we lose Steve, the consequences are extreme.
If we win, we secure our existence and we give the establishment an almighty kick up the backside.
Britain First will not be pushed around, mistreated or forced into a corner!
We are a fighting movement with backbone and courage to face all enemies.
That is what makes us so different to the "Old Gang" parties that are wrecking our beautiful country.
We must raise another £5,000 to fight our case in the High Court or we will go into it undefended and face catastrophe.
https://www.britainfirst.org/donate/
I am not prepared to let that happen and neither is Jayda.
Last time showed that if we raise the funds to pay a QC barrister we can win!

I am gutted to be sending this email once again appealing for more donations but, what choice have I got?
I can't ignore the situation any longer and as leader of the movement I must make difficult decisions and this is one of them.
This injunction will not go away - that's wishful thinking.
At any time now I will get a phone call from our solicitors and they will say that the full hearing has been called and we need approximately £5,000 to fight it.
I must admit, Jayda and I are worried sick about this happening and balk every time the phone rings.
I have checked our records for you on this appeal and here's what I found:

Target: £5,000
Raised so far: £2,022
Patriot Name:
Suggested action: Chip in £10

Please remember, if we lose this case then it will create a "precedent" that binds all future court decisions of a similar nature.
So not only will this affect Britain First, but also every group or individual in the country that wants to protest or take part in politics.
Once again, freedom and democracy are on the line.
https://www.britainfirst.org/donate/
Britain First and this impending legal battle is the new "front line" where the fate of our nation will be decided.
It has monumental consequences for our entire democracy.
Let's fight to win Steve!
We need literally every single member, activist, commanding officer and supporter to chip in with an urgent donation once again.
I know many of you receiving this dug very deep last time to fund our legal defence and for that I am eternally grateful.
I hate to ask again so soon but this is as critical and perilous as it gets.
Jayda and I have already emptied our pockets and donated considerable amounts to our legal fighting fund and we need true commitment and dedication at this time of true danger to our movement.

All one needs to know about Labour

A Touch of Twitterartistry?  Owen Jones at 15 still a twat at nearly 16.  Labour, unlike its supporters, began as adults and matured into rabid children

Guido Fawkes ‏@GuidoFawkes 2h2 hours ago

So you DID support the IRA when they were bombing UK and stopped supporting them when they stopped bombing UK? @OwenJones84 @gm_stone

75 retweets 71 favorites

Owen JonesVerified account ‏@OwenJones84

@GuidoFawkes I was *15 years old*. I was completely wrong about that and many other things. I was a child. This is contemptible.

NHS free for ALL foreigners

In the Winter 2014 edition of The Salisbury Review, Myles Harris has a gentle go at the attitude surrounding the NHS and the non collection of payments The observations are well founded and the assumptions accurate. So here I add a pennyworth and damn all the liberal Pinkoes who keep raiding the purses of the old and prudent.

As there are NO intelligent statistics to base any accurate sums on, so let us assume that of the 6 million recent immigrants, only 10% have made use of the unique service. One has to take it as read because they are immigrants, unlike the indigenous people, they have contributed precisely nothing to the financial support of the Wonderfully Flawed Institute!

From the moment they walk, drive or get carried into A&E, they are creating a fiscal deficit. How can that be, I can hear you ask? Quite simply because to have a hospital in place someone has had to build it and employ all those who work there. That is to say not only you and I, but our fathers and our forefathers have generated the situation for this to happen. It has not all come out of the Genie's Lamp as successive Labour Governments want you to believe. To maintain any part of established infrastructure then needs the excesses of commerce and industry to keep and progress the services provided. For one fact is certain. Services will get more expenses the older they become, not any cheaper as the Lunatic Left would have us believe.

Stop putting money in, then the institution starts to rot.

Not collecting fees from foreigners is a sure way of accelerating the already decline of an overburdened and creaking dinosaur.

I have deliberately not tried to confuse the reader by adding to the proposition I offered on usage by misleading accountancy on how much health care costs.  A friend of mine has just returned from South Africa where he had to pay for a lot of medical treatment on top of that covered by his medical insurances. Those who want to take from the old and frail who are British, to keep an uncosted endless pit of a system, should get out into the real World.  Or do what the Champagne Socialist are not prepared to do and Fund the NHS themselves! 

Pay more Tax, Socialist...

Hypcrisy normally smacks you in the face, unless you are a Champagne Socialist or one of the idiots who think they are "genuine"!
Here Douglas Carswell Offers to Help Owen Jones Pay More Tax! You can smell his reply all around the Country.

Gordon Marsden MP Blackpool South, supporting Welfare Reform

 Having watched most of the Commons Debate on Welfare Reform, it gives me great pleasure in naming the Progressives who cannot understand that it was their Fiscal Incompetence that led us into Economic Meltdown.  Here are those (in the Labour opposition) who voted against their own leader and against Honest Hard Working tax payers, to secure future votes from their more relaxed parasitical supporters!


Diane Abbott
Debbie Abrahams
David Anderson
Richard Burgon
Dawn Butler
Ann Clwyd
Jeremy Corbyn
Geraint Davies
Peter Dowd
Paul Flynn
Mary Glindon
Roger Godsiff
Helen Goodman
Margaret Greenwood
Louise Haigh
Carolyn Harris
Sue Hayman
Imran Hussain
Gerald Jones
Helen Jones
Sir Gerald Kaufman
Sadiq Khan
David Lammy
Ian Lavery
Clive Lewis
Rebecca Long Bailey
Andy McDonald
John McDonnell
Liz McInnes
Rob Marris
Rachael Maskell
Michael Meacher
Ian Mearns
Madeleine Moon
Grahame Morris
Kate Osamor
Teresa Pearce
Marie Rimmer
Paula Sherriff
Tulip Siddiq
Dennis Skinner
Cat Smith
Jo Stevens
Graham Stringer
David Winnick
Iain Wright
Daniel Zeichner
Kelvin Hopkins (Teller)

How to insult a "progressive"

I didn't know what Pregressive meant.  I thought it was ignorant twatts.

South African Government attitude to Faith.

DAAR HET JY DIT NOU!!!!    Or; or there you have it! 

This was on NEWS SABC 2  You've just got to love this new SA.!!! In a new initiative to advance racial integration in South Africa, the ANC government has proposed a bill to Parliament which states that all Angus Buchan's "Mighty Men" conferences must be representative of the population of South Africa. The proposal includes legislation that will force the sellers of these tickets to first sell 70% of all tickets to native Africans, before any tickets may be sold to whites / settlers. Mrs Beauty Kumalo, (proud to be a black) Chairperson of Africans for Jesus, has commended the initiative by the ANC government. "Too long real South Africans (blacks) have been excluded from having the same privileges as the whites in serving our Lord Jesus Christ from Nazareth (now relocated to heaven). Apartheid has given the white man better churches, Bibles and theologians which gives them an unfair advantage of reaching heaven. We require equal rights for all Christians. We are tired of the racist white man trying to keep us out of heaven.” This is the best I've heard in months! And she's in GOVERNMENT. Just goes to show that the Labour Party isn't the only one with sheds full of illiterate idiots.

Paedophiles in Parliament

This email sent to Gordon Marsden MP for Blackpool South.

Dear Mr Marsden,

 

You've been in Parliament for Blackpool South for many years.  What are you doing to make these paedophiles stand before a jury for their heinous crimes?

 

Stephen Flanigan

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, another mass murderer?

A High School yearbook image of Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez

If this man was responsible for the murder of the Marines in Chattanooga, then he answered his own question.  The shame is that Western Politicians can't see the writing on the wall as Political Correctness still blinds these fools we have as leaders.

Fracking V Wind Turbines

As the Luddites and local cowards on Lancashire County Council attempt to put a lid on fracking, not a single word on what could be the advantage of exploring and extracting the largest known reserve of gas and oil reserves in Britain.

As FEAR overtakes rational debate and investigation, the Loonie Greens are dancing with joy as they sabotage any attempts for Northern Industries and Jobs to leap into the 21st Century.  A quick perusal at a report on their beloved wind turbine should dampen their enthusiasm, but it will not as they are too engrossed in their lunatic beliefs, like fundamental religious nuts, oblivious to anything but their ideals.

When Professor David MacKay stepped down as chief scientific adviser to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) last year, he produced a report comparing the environmental impact of a fracking site to that of wind farms. Over 25 years, he calculated, a single “shale gas pad” covering five acres, with a drilling rig 85ft high (only needed for less than a year), would produce as much energy as 87 giant wind turbines, covering 5.6 square miles and visible up to 20 miles away. Yet, to the Greens, the first of these, capable of producing energy whenever needed, without a penny of subsidy, is anathema; while the second, producing electricity very unreliably in return for millions of pounds in subsidies, fills them with rapture.

More research is good, but not if wind experts are told what to find

There are allegations that suggest the Senate Committee is less interested in truly independent, high-quality research than its members might claim, and is instead recommending to the NHMRC the researchers whose work they would like to see included in future assessments.
Those allegations would seem to be supported by the following exchange from the committee’s hearings on Friday, between Senator Back and the NHMRC’s executive director for evidence, advice and governance, Samantha Robertson:

Back: Are you familiar with [Simon] Carlile and the work he does in neurophysiology?
Robertson: Not personally, no.
Back: Ok, [he is] at the University of Sydney, so perhaps I could urge that you do.

That is not what I would call independent, and nor do I think it is likely to lead to high-quality science. This is nothing to do with the quality of Carlile’s research, but rather the principle of scientific advice to government. It is the NHMRC’s job to select the most relevant science and present it to government, not the other way around.

In the UK, the spectre of FEAR and MORE FEAR is raised whenever anyone asks pertinent questions, or even points to the problems of costs and removal of sites once the turbine has become obsolete.

 

Mensa minds

Some years ago, there was a Mensa convention in San Francisco.

Mensa, as you know, is a national organization for people who have an IQ of 140 or higher.

Several of the Mensa members went out for lunch at a local cafe.

When they sat down, one of them discovered that their salt shaker contained pepper and their pepper shaker was full of salt. How could they swap the contents of the two bottles without spilling any and using only the implements at hand?

Clearly -- this was a job for Mensa minds.

The group debated the problem and presented ideas and finally, came up with a brilliant solution involving a napkin, a straw, and an empty saucer.

They called the waitress over, ready to dazzle her with their solution.

"Ma'am," they said," we couldn't help but notice that the pepper shaker contains salt and the salt shaker pepper."

But before they could finish, the waitress interrupted.

"Oh! Sorry about that."

She leaned over the table, unscrewed the caps of both bottles and switched them.

There was dead silence at the Mensa table.

Kinda reminds ya of the government, doesn't it.

Solutions to our problems should be so simple, but the brilliant minds in Washington always seem to make them so difficult.

Reminder to everyone - MY PENSION and yours

HERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S CALCULATION OF AVAILABLE PENSION, THEY FORGOT TO FIGURE IN ALL THE PEOPLE WHO DIED BEFORE THEY EVER COLLECTED  Old AGE PENSION.
     

WHERE HAS ALL THAT MONEY GONE?
     

Remember, not only did you and I contribute to our Pension, our employer did, too.   It totaled 15% of your income before taxes. If you averaged only £15 000 over your working life, that's close to £220,500.  Read that again.  Did you see anywhere that the Government paid in one single penny?
 

We are talking about the money you and your employer put into a Government bank to ensure that you and I would have a retirement pension from that money we put into that Bank, it was not money that the Government had any right to spend elsewhere.

 

Now they've started to call that money we paid in an 'entitlement' when we reach the age to take it back. 

 

If you calculate the future invested value of  £2500 per year (yours & your employer's  contribution) at a simple 5% interest (that's less than what  the govt. pays on the money that it borrows from overseas), after 49  years of working you'd have £892,919.98.

     
If you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive £26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30  years (that means until you're 95 if you retire at age 65) and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on  deposit! 

 

If you bought an annuity with the money and it paid 4% per  year, you'd have a lifetime income of £1976.40 per  month.

 
THE CROOKS IN GOVERNMENT HAVE PULLED OFF A BIGGER ROBBERY THAN THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERS EVER DID.

     
Entitlement!!??  My foot!  IT'S MY MONEY!!  I paid IN cash for my pension.

 

Just because they borrowed the money to spend on other things, that  doesn't make my pension some kind of charity or  handout!!

     
Remember MP's benefits (?) --- free healthcare, outrageous retirement packages, 67 days paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days.  Now that really should be called welfare entitlements, yet they have the nerve to call my O A P retirement payments entitlements?

 

We're "broke" and the government can't help our own OAPs, our ex-service personnel, our orphans or our homeless.

 

Yet in the past few years we  have provided aid to Haiti, Chile, Turkey, India, Pakistan,  etc., etc., etc.   Literally, BILLIONS of £s !!!  And they can't help our own citizens!
     

Our retired seniors living on a 'fixed old age pension have to beg social services to receive additional aid, while our government and religious  organizations pour hundreds of billions of £££, tons of food, to foreign countries!

They call the old age pension an entitlement even  though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives. Now, when it's time for us to collect, the government is running out of our money. 

 

Why  did the government borrow from it in the first place? 

It was supposed to be in a securely locked box, not to be used as part of the  Government's general  funds.
  

Sad, isn't it, that 99% of people won't have the guts to remind others of this.  I'm in the 1% with guts enough to do it - - - and I just did.

 

I hope some of you will do the same.