Saturday, 3 April 2010

HOW CAN THE PUBLIC BE EXPECTED TO VOTE FOR?

While we fully support candidates with disabilities standing for the Local Elections, that is one of the mainstays of setting up this site after others interfered to De-select candidates because of their physical disabilities. But to be honest we are having trouble making sense of the latest piece of info to come our way.

It appears that one of the North Street Mafia has been on sickness/incapacity benefits for a number of years, no problem with that at all, but, we are told that the reason they are receiving these benefits is that they have been diagnosed as a Manic Depressive.

This as many will know can be quiet a serious Mental Health problem, and can we believe incapacitate the sufferer for weeks if not months at a time, and many would, we feel question if they were right to stand for office, without of course informing the voters first so that the voters can then make an informed decision.

Lets wait and see if we can have some openess and transparancy from North Street.

11 comments:

  1. I think this thread covers the instigators of this very thread itself. Too out of touch with local people, and not willing, or able to change. Dinosaurs in fact with no way forward.The main four or five, know who they are, and so will everyone before too long.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Whats new about what you say in the posting, we have known for ages they are all Barking mad.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have heard that Winston Churchill was a manic depressant .... should 'we' have not voted for him?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Once again you have shown your narrow minded views just by putting this up on the blog.

    Just checkout some of the sites on the internet which have great people in there fields who are sufferers of depression manic or otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In response to anons @ 13.19 and 13.44 of course you are both correct in what you say. Churchill did suffer from bouts of depression, we understand he used to call them "his black dog days" and yes there are many others of note who have suffered at times with depression.

    BUT,

    We think that there is a difference other, than the obvious one with Churchill, and others with this candidate.

    The big difference is that others have not claimed for many years that their manic depression is so bad it prevents them from working. Also we cannot see Churchill ever standing in a queue to cash his giro.

    So, if this candidate now claims that they can do the job of Councillor or any other job come to that, we are suggesting they come of their benefits and prove to the electorate they can hold down a job.

    Otherwise the voters may very well feel short changed when if elected the candidate does not or can do the job because they are incapacitated by their manic depression.

    Easy one to solve really.

    Since posting this, we have received other evidence of a similar vein and will post that up when we have crossed the t and dotted the i.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Incapacity benefit decisions are based upon a persons ability in general to maintain a full time job between the hours of 9-5 monday to friday.

    As i understand it people are scored as being incapacited if the liklihood is that they will not manage the above.

    People with depression can often put in more than 35 hours a week but not necessarily mon-fri 9-5.

    Again as i understand it working as a councillor is not 9-5 it is very flexible with people working not just days but evenings, weekends and even in the case of one councillor, bizarrely in the early hours of the morning between 2-4 am (could be insomnia or another mental health condition such as rumination of the mind)

    The original statement assumed that manic depression will incapacitate for weeks or months at a time. This is just one part of the spectrum. In other cases like Churchill for example it was his "black dog days".

    As that was disproved your secondary comments posted at 03.16 change tack entirely and talk about benefits etc.

    I would not think that the electorate would feel short changed because there are already a number of sitting councillors with long term health problems who could not hold down a job. This blog and the people that control it conveniently forget this fact.

    In fact i am sure that a very prominent councillor has also suffered from mental health problems in this borough and nobody talks about that.

    The editors comments (03.16 am!!) are ill founded and not very well thought out. Move on now

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks anon @ 4.49 for your professional advice on benefits, but, funnily enough we feel you have proved our case for us.

    If as you seem to believe being a councillor is not a full time job then we would suggest you think again.

    We have canvassed many councillors not only in this borough but outside as well, they are all of a mind that the job has changed dramatically over the last few years, they say that it is increasingly difficult for those who work full time to be able to do the job to its fullest extent. Please note the use of the word 'job' because that is how its being described to us.

    No longer to be an effective councillor can you just do a couple of hours a week.

    But that aside, the candidate concerned has claimed that they are unable to work because of their being a Manic Depressive, that covers work either full time or part time we have learned.

    So its about being honest with the electorate, which we would hope that North Street would want to be.

    As for your claims that all ready sitting Councillors have disabilities, yes you are right, but, on checking this out we learn that they do not allow this to impact on their work, and we certainly have no knowledge of them claiming Incapacity Benefit.

    Finally, as we are not answerable to you, we are sure you will understand why we decline to follow your rather bullying final comment where you instruct us to "move on now".

    We say " Up yours sunbeam"

    And we of course will continue to out the North Street Mafia where we feel that they are not being honest with the voters.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Up yours sunbeam. A very intelligent way for an editor to react, especially when losing an argument. Suffice it to say, without the mixing from the infamous, no, more like the pointless four of you that the elections really have nothing at all to do with you now, do they? Candidates go before the elcorate and are judged by them, not on any particular skills whatsoever, but by their views.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why or how do you keep coming up with the figure 4?

    Up yours sunbeam seems a very intelligent way to react to a bully who seems to think they can come on here and instruct us to move on.

    From what we are hearing and reading across Barking many of the electorate have already made up their minds, and certainly in Thames ward it looks as though Labour has lost.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Think again batman - Labour have a very strong vote in Thames despite what you keep writing but May 6th will tell us all.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Editor please read more carefully. I stated that the role of a cllr is flexible not just 9-5. I am sure that there are many hardworking night shift workers, who would agree with this.

    The sitting cllrs with disabilities do not have a choice regarding whether their disabilities effect there work, their disabilities dictate what they can or can't do.

    They wouldn't claim incapacity benefit as they are over retirement age and therefore claim a state pension instead.

    The issue over full time jobs is very interesting because several members of the executive do/have worked full time over the last 4/5 years including the leader and other prominent members.

    I am sure that they work 60/70 hours a week in total and do a good job. Would you agree editor?

    No bullying in my comments, just facts.

    ReplyDelete