When they can’t justify #DisabilityBenefits cuts, they deflect: 1. David Lammy’s relative who ‘shouldn’t be claiming’ 2. Keir Starmer’s mum and brother who now speak for all disabled people. One imagined fraud. One family anecdote. Neither justify punishing a million. - ThreadSky

shrinkatlarge.bsky.social • 3 days ago

When they can’t justify #DisabilityBenefits cuts, they deflect:

1. David Lammy’s relative who ‘shouldn’t be claiming’
2. Keir Starmer’s mum and brother who now speak for all disabled people.

One imagined fraud. One family anecdote. Neither justify punishing a million.

Comments

trisstock.bsky.social•3 days ago

Keir Starmer’s mum and brother are, of course, dead. Perhaps David Lammy is seeking a similar resolution for his kin?

Labour canot waiver from its "Kill 'em all" fiscal policy.

depressedandsick.bsky.social•3 days ago

They're breaking their own manifesto with this.

anthonyvickers.bsky.social•3 days ago

It's far better the tiny number of guilty go free than all the innocent get punished.

davidashleydavies.bsky.social•3 days ago

The level of motivated reasoning — bad-faith arguments dressed up as logic — from those in power who should know better, is truly alarming.

purpleelectric.bsky.social•3 days ago

They DO know better. This is malice, not ignorance.

davidashleydavies.bsky.social•3 days ago

Just more flood-the-zone?

purpleelectric.bsky.social•3 days ago

One more dead cat after another.

paganmagick.bsky.social•3 days ago

It makes me angry how Kier Starmer does a David Cameron and uses disabled relatives as a shield, and to add credibility to his views. It is insulting, as is the assumption that all disabled people are the same. Reducing those relatives to pawns for political reasons is highly unethical.

turnedtofire.bsky.social•3 days ago

It's their last refuge when they know they've been justly called out. "I've got a disabled relative." So what: one person in six people globally is disabled. It'd be more surprising if they had no disabled relatives, but it's revealing that they see it as a gotcha.

paganmagick.bsky.social•3 days ago

I totally agree. I'm guessing that any relatives may get hefty private financial support, meaning they're not totally reliant on the welfare system.

turnedtofire.bsky.social•3 days ago

Yes, it's so disingenuous for them to present their relatives as if their experience is likely to be representative. I also have a hard time believing that the highly publicised relative of a politician would have the experiences many ordinary claimants have.

purpleelectric.bsky.social•3 days ago

Can someone please explain why “my neighbour is claiming fraudulently” - even if it is true, and not just based on seeing them on rare good days - justifies slashing billions from legitimate claimants?

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply