Philpott family of Derby.
- 6 April 2013 23:57224106No I didn't. I wanted to take politics out of it but our esteemed moderator jumped straight on the party bandwagon in post 2.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
7 April 2013 00:01224111with leading politicians making these type of comments its unlikely to keep politics outALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 7 April 2013 00:06224118Why do you insist on being led by politicians, Keith? Don't you have a mind of your own?I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
7 April 2013 00:09224121Im led by no one peter
but you suggested you wanted it to be non political but a major politician had alread y made it political sadlyALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 7 April 2013 11:04224163Peter Garstin wrote:I'm surprised that this has not surfaced before now so here goes.
It's obvious that we are dealing with sick-minded criminals here but surely the problems run deeper than that.
Issues such as:
- three adults and 11 kids in a 3 bedroom council house?
- allegedly £60k annually in benefits to keep Mick in some style?
Comments please but no party political points.
I am willing to give this another shot.
Peter, we can begin with your post #1, from the bottom up.
-We can leave Party Politics out of it simply enough, by not alluding to which side said what, and we can attempt to discuss the issue without being overtly political by sticking to more of the 'human condition'. We can try anyway.
-£60k. I have no idea how that figure was arrived at, presumably it has more to do with family size than anything else, the home being relatively modest.
If this is child related we have to leave it there. To do otherwise impacts upon the children, and this was none of their making.
-At root, the relatively modest housing says something about Local Authority and Social Worker involvement or lack thereof. This situation seems to have been left to go out of hand, the State Actors joining-in with the adults of the home in letting the benefit payment system deal with it all.
-On the point, "the problems run deeper than that". I'll simply throw another situation into the mix...run it up the flag-pole and see if it catches a breeze, so to speak.
When I was young, about eleven or twelve, I popped into our local village shop, where I was well known. The shop was run by an avuncular Italian-Scot who had grown up in the retail/ice-cream/café trade, he was astute and dedicated and had expanded upon the work of his parents, in short he knew what he was about.
When I arrived it was fairly obvious the his conversation with a local family man had been going on for a while. The conversation appeared to centre upon an imminent family breakdown, the customer was fearful of his wife upping sticks.
The salient point here is that I was in time to hear the crux of the advice offered to him...
"Get her pregnant again, that way she is 'bound' to stay." (or words to that direct effect)
Are we now approaching the deeper issue to which you allude Peter?Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
7 April 2013 11:07224166Just on the issue i dont think theres a poster on here who supports the present system, and calling out for reform.
The issue in hand is how you do it, and that you protect those that it was set up to protectALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 7 April 2013 11:09224169P.S.
This then leaves this as a two issue matter.
-The Local Government relationship to this family, or maybe more correctly 'with' this family. Something that led almost directly to the fire.
-Man's inhumanity to womankind, womb-kind as slave to biology.Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 7 April 2013 11:12224171# 61......tell it to the marines.........
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
7 April 2013 11:14224172Tom
theres probably quite a few issues;
1; Why this family was able to claim so many benefits
2; Did he realy love his kids(showed otherwise)
3; as lesley said just one life sentence not enough
4; change in the way benefits can be claimed and by whom needs addressing
5; why were so many in the house
6; innocent children died in this case and a total horror story this bloke should have got a life sentence for each kid he killed
thats for startersALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 7 April 2013 11:21224173Keith, you seem to have left the 'handle' for higher things.
Points 3 and 6 are after the fact.
Points 1, 4 and 5 are to do with the relationship of Local Government to residents.
Point 2, what is love?Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
7 April 2013 11:28224178Tom
that was a start
love
i have certainly never thought of setting fire to my house knowing my children to be inside
so maybe thats says it all
the rest i have laid down as a startALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 7 April 2013 13:23224192Comparing this case to people on benefits in general would be as comparing the Pistorious case in South Africa to all people who live a trendy life-style.
The Chancellor has branded the Nasty Party with another hallmark of identification.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
7 April 2013 18:49224245I think peter was well aware when he opened this thread the way it would go and quick to send in an alternative view
a debate on benefits would have been more usefulALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 7 April 2013 19:51224258Then start one Keith.
I just wanted to throw the whole subject open for discussion to find out what people felt was the key issue ( or issues. )
Unfortunately many think its a party political issue. Nothing could be further from the truth yet politicians on both sides and their fellow travellers are using it as a stick to beat each other, and innocent bystanders, with.
Reg's 68 is an example. Playground stuff again.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
7 April 2013 19:58224260more closet than playground peter,oh and ive spoken to the marines as well. - 7 April 2013 19:59224261the way i have been reading it all parties are in favour of a benefit cap, outside of london 26 grand is more than enough for a family to live on - the public seem to agree.
politicians are pre-programmed to snipe at each other, they are totally out of touch with the general public that see their behaviour as petty. - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 April 2013 11:09224349yes but peter mentioned just one person yet others have done same from other parties
strange??? not at all expected,,,, yesALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 8 April 2013 12:45224381Mores the merrier...
"Can there be a more tragic figure than Mairead Philpott? Losing six children is tragedy enough, but through her own act of collusion in a bungled plot? Disowned by family and despised by public opinion, she is now in prison.
She had suffered the humiliation of sharing her home with her partner's girlfriend; was treated as a domestic slave and a child-bearing machine. Meanwhile, Mick Philpott was being offered a media celebrity that could well have fuelled in him a sense of invincibility. What was an undereducated woman of low self-esteem to make of that?
The issue of her being abused as a child was raised. There have been countless examples of children reporting abuse who have been disbelieved. The burden of proof is set very high; and the reputation of the accused may take priority over the protection of the child. If a child is not believed and protected, he/she may enter exploitative relationships. Mairead Philpott spoke of her partner as her protector.
But this case is only unusual in terms of the scale of the tragedy. Mick Philpott's plan to take revenge on his former girlfriend Lisa Willis through children is by no means unique. In this country two women a week are killed by partners or ex-partners and there are regular reports of fathers killing their children and themselves as revenge against women.
Women's Aid has aways struggled for funding but never more so than now. The Philpott case must not be used to divert attention from the mounting pressure on low-income families reaching crisis point.
Pauline M Colledge
London"
More remarks on the circumstances...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/07/welfare-mick-philpott-killerIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 9 April 2013 09:15224494# 72........agree.....................
Courtesy Independent............
'Nasty' George Osborne
DWP faces court challenge over benefit reforms
Disabled people say the government's consultation over the new system was unlawful
The controversial reforms to disability benefits will be challenged in court by a group of
disabled people who say that the government's consultation over the new rules was
unlawful. If successful, the campaign would deal a second major blow to Iain Duncan Smith's wide-ranging reforms.
Three activists have asked for permission to bring a judicial review of the government's
consultation over the introduction of the Personal Independence Payment, which is
replacing the Disability Living Allowance. They claim that ministers made the regulations
more stringent after the consultation process was finished.
Their challenge was launched as Labour leader Ed Miliband attacked the government
over its attempts to link the Philpott case and so-called "benefits culture" as "nasty,
divisive" politics. Mr Miliband acknowledged Labour would need to tackle the issue
but said the tragic deaths of six of Philpott's children should not be exploited.
Mr Miliband said: "There are two different views you can take on this. Do you try and
unite the country, and bring it together, or do you exploit tragedy, like the Philpott tragedy?
"The right place for Mr Philpott is behind bars, but do you exploit the deaths of six children
to try and make a political point about the welfare system, and at the same time say
to people that this is somehow a common truth about people on benefits?"
Rosa Curling, the lawyer representing the three disability activists applying to bring
judicial review, said: "Removing this vital benefit to disabled people will have a
devastating effect on many people's lives and their ability to access and be part of our communities." - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
9 April 2013 10:39224518I often disagree with ED;s views but hes correct on this oneALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS