The BBC have been busy trying to dig up anyone who has been ‘victimised’ by the government’s welfare reforms as Guido highlights:
Newsnight have been caught red-handed using a private firm to try stir up outrage toward’s the government’s, legal, tweaking of Housing Benefit changes.
No mention of all those who have been or will be helped by this reform…all those needing a family home but are crammed into tiny houses, bedsits or hostels.
What does the company, Support Solutions, that was running this man hunt for the BBC say about its services?
Our aim is to influence policy in favour of the sector in these challenging times and to be the first to know of and interpret policy development and change which impacts on our sector.
- We are experts in the Welfare Reform Act & Universal Credit, especially as these affect vulnerable people and organisations that provide and/or commission services for vulnerable people.
- We help clients to enhance their housing revenue streams
Their aim…to influence policy and get more money for clients in the housing arena….sounds quite political to me….and in direct opposition to government policy.
Wonder why the BBC chose them to dig up some suitably disadvantaged persons to put on the telly as examples of government cruelty?
The BBC Trust could not be reached for comment…..
The bBC, really must be held to order, it is acting as an unofficial political party where it uses its tax funded media outlets to promote the political agenda of its woolly school boy mindset so we have:
Support of anything anti-Government=Because the People can only be victims of the Tory Party
Support of anything Islamic=Becasue as we keep getting told Muslims can only be victims
Support of anything ‘Homosexual= Becasue as we all know Gays can only be victims., unless the people doing the bullying are Muslims, then you pull out an article about how Gays and Muslims should stick together as both are victims of….white racism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21260383
The bBC must be held to account for acting as a political party outside its remit of impartiality
“acting as an unofficial political party”
Well said Pounce. How disgustingly true this is.
Doe anyone know if individuals can be held accountable in some legal sense for what they do within the BBC?The corporation itself has litttle or no sanctions applied and even when a wrist is smacked it does not directly affect the individuals who are responsible.
‘Does anyone know if individuals can be held accountable in some legal sense for what they do within the BBC?’
—-
Guessing from the actual outcomes of a lot of very expensive… Internal… Redacted… Legal defence-funded inquiries, not.
As to the BBC as a corporation being held accountable for what individuals say externally, even if under the BBC banner, it would appear ‘views my own’ is a get out of anything free card for employee and employer.
It’s just one of the many things that make them so unique.
In light of the recent finding in the John Humphries and welfare case, the BBC will no doubt be commissioning an equal and opposite survey of those who had benefitted.
I remember that “Tell Mama”-the voice of the Muslim victim, after Lee Rigbys murder( he was the victim of a dodgy clutch, so the BBC might tell me)-was also trawling for “anti-Islam” incidents on its website, because Channel 4 wanted some footage for some upcoming exclusive on whiteys intolerance of Muslims.
Clearly the liberal broadcasting media have money to spare. and-like gun gangs in Harpurhey etc-can be bought for a few minutes of “playing the victim” film.
Traitors in our midst indeed!
Dodgy clutch plus major misunderstanding of CPR probably caused by lack of training courses available to those nice men who were first on the scene first aiders seeking to clear his airway – bloody Tory cuts again
Chris H wrote:
I remember that “Tell Mama”-the voice of the Muslim victim, after Lee Rigbys murder( he was the victim of a dodgy clutch, so the BBC might tell me)-was also trawling for “anti-Islam” incidents on its website,
Oh I can better that. A few days ago bombs were set off in the city of Kano in Nigeria, these bombs not only happened to innocently go off in Christian areas, but for some reason outside Bars selling Alcohol. The bbC ensured that anybody reading their version would feel that actually Muslims can only be the victims:
“Correspondents say the Muslim majority in the city are now anxious about possible reprisals, as people come out onto the streets after breaking their daytime fast during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.”
So the Islamic majority in the city. Err Don’t you mean the whole north of Nigeria. Here is a link
link to a map of Nigeria which shows just how many Muslims live there: Which lets be honest mirrors everyother Islamic area of the World, where,where there are Muslims, no other faiths exist. Be it in the ME,Asia or even East London. So if the Area around Kano is 99% Islamic just whom are the Islamic popualtion there worried about attacking them for reprisals, as unlike the West that small 1% of a minority isn’t going to take up arms against the Islamic majority. Gee I wonder why
In the North of Nigeria, Muslims angry over how their man didn’t get the Job of president in 2011 have supported the Islamic terrorist groups ‘Boko Haram’ in pushing for a break-a-way state in which Islam will rule. and thus affording Muhammadu Buhari his chance to become….Dictator for life. Who you say? Here is the bBC’s whitewash of profile of the former Islamic dictator. The only thing is, the bBC don’t call him one, yet he took power in a military coup and his record was everything a dictator stood by. Which is why they write these nice things about him:
But others remember it as a praiseworthy attempt to fight the endemic graft that prevented Nigeria’s development.
He retains a rare reputation for honesty among Nigeria’s politicians, both military and civilian, largely because of this campaign.
As part of his “War Against Indiscipline”, he ordered Nigerians to form neat queues at bus stops, under the sharp eyes of whip-wielding soldiers.
Civil servants who were late for work were publicly humiliated by being forced to do “frog jumps”.
A very notable incident concerning the above dictator was when he had his former transportation minister Umaru Dikko kidnapped from the UK in 1984 and then flew a Air Nigerian jet to Stanstead to quietly take the Dikko back to Nigeria. So let me get this right, A former Nigerian MP living in exile in London is kidnapped by the Nigerian Government and minutes before been loaded onto a Nigerian aircraft is found and who does the bBC lay the most blame on….Why the Israeli. The Dictator of Nigeria at the time Muhammadu Buhari isn’t even mentioned. Here read the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20211380
The bBC, the traitors within our Midst
The main aim of Boko Haram is to ethnically cleanse the North of all Non-Muslims and once the region is 100% Islamic, their bid for a new Islamic state-let will be promoted by the likes of the..bBC.
So it really makes me laugh when I read how the bBC correspondents claim that the 99% Islamic population of the city of Kano are worried about …reprisals. More like the 1% Christian population are.
The bBC, the traitors within our midst
Well pursued Pounce. BBC are traitors to their culture and live to be hip through supporting anything anti UK in order to distance themselves from the evil British Empire.
The knives are out for the bbc now. First Miller, then IDS, Shapps today, all cabinet or senior Tories expressing anger at the bias. I predict the BBC will be taken down a major peg or two now.
Perhaps BBC can cut its news spending from £430m and get some sport that people actually want to watch, and make some funny comedy instead.
Actually says:
I blame Dismal Dave, he has had ample time to deal with the lying Marxist corporation, yet has done nothing other than blow kisses at them like a lovestruck schoolgirl.
You have to wonder just what his game is.
—————————————————————————
Cut ‘n’ paste from guido. Says it all really.
Wavy Davy couldn’t get a majority when up agin Mad Gordon MacRuin who was three hours away from the cash machines not working. Pretends to love Droidsville and the NHS and acts as though he does. Lazy as buggery and leaves all the hard-lifting to gove ids etc.
Still, in fairness he has almost single-handedly built up a party from nothing intoto a major political force.
UKIP.
I predict the BBC will be taken down a major peg or two
I wonder whether a hopeful sign is that the government has insisted on the BBC being included in the discussions about ‘media plurality’, and the statistics in their consultation document heavily emphasise the dominance of the BBC, although nowhere do they make the obvious point that we all are forced to pay for the BBC whereas we can choose whether to pay for all the rest.
I hope that all Biased-BBC readers will respond to the consultation (by 22 October 2013) with appropriate comments about the bBBC.
Oh yes Hattie’s law. If Cameron had any balls he would use that stick to beat the BBC until they realised how their bread is buttered. After all the Tories have nothing to lose, sucking up to the BBC will gain them nothing whereas threatening their monopoly may make them pause for thought
Nothing ‘concentrates a mans mind’ and all that
Exactly.
Make funny comedy again – how long is Brigstocke’s contract? — Spot another payoff scandal ahead!
“No mention of all those who have been or will be helped by this reform…all those needing a family home but are crammed into tiny houses, bedsits or hostels.”
Unless this policy will somehow increase the supply of housing will we not just see different individuals in “tiny houses, bedsits or hostels.”
Perhaps you can tell us how may people have been “helped” so far bearing in mind the chronic shortage of social housing in the UK and the lack of affordable private housing.
Albaman to give you just one borough:
Welwyn Hatfield Council’s Cabinet Planning and Housing Panel on Thursday intimated 56 out of the roughly 870 tenants affected have (already) made the move at this early stage.
Add the results from thousands of other boroughs together and that is not a bad start to alleviate the other part of the equation, which you do not seem to want to mention;
Part of the housing crisis that the last Government left the coalition to sort out and cope with the extra millions they imported with such needs, to go with the school places, NHS , GP and hospital facilities they also need. Not only did they stupidly have an open borders policy they certainly did not leave a golden legacy, like they inherited in 97, to pay for the obviously resulting consequences.
Quite the opposite actually.. Remember My Byrne “There is no money left”.
Combine this with Liebores body bag foreign and NHS policies. Are you are proud of their achievements?
You should also appreciate frequently in overcrowded properties there is one or more members of the household disabled. There are 900,000 social housing homes with at least one adult who is disabled or long term sick. There are many others with disabled children.
Critics of the Government’s changes to Housing Benefits to reduce under-occupancy often portray the change as an attack on the disabled, never mentioning the needs of the disabled in overcrowded accommodation.
Did you know that
economic migrantsrefugees are allowed to jump the social housing queue?Ian Hills,
“Did you know that refugees are allowed to jump the social housing queue?”
Evidence?
Click and you shall find Desmond.
http://www.google.co.uk
“Click and you shall find Desmond.”
Ah yes, silly me…
“Alleged jumping of housing queues by new arrivals is a myth, research reveals”
http://gu.com/p/xbv9f
And this happened how?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2379478/Revealed-How-500-000-immigrants-given-social-housing-decade-number-families-waiting-list-hits-record-high.html
Thanks Stewart, that’s what I was looking for but I didn’t have the energy to hunt it up for the goat botherer (see troll)
I’m not sure I should have either
Stewart,
“And this happened how?”
Yes some immigrants live in social housing. But nowhere in that report is any evidence that; “refugees are allowed to jump the social housing queue”
FAIL.
No you have failed to explain this apparent anomaly
Let me help you
Social housing is awarded on a points system points are awarded on the basis of need
a lone parent arriving in the country with 2 children will automatically have more points than a married couple with2 children, living in overcrowded private accommodation, no matter how long they have been on the waiting list
Similarly a couple arriving with 3 or more children will also have more points
They, de facto, jump the cue, pushing people already on this list down even if ,as is the case in Lewisham and Newham no ‘corruption’ of the point awarding system has taken place
At least this is the explanation given to me when I was a tenant of red ken,
living with my wife and 18 month old child in a one bedroomed 10 floor flat
Wyfold house in Thamesmead I recommend any who care to take a look for themselves
I take particular and profound exception to your characterising mine and many others first hand lived experience as a failure
Dez,
My local authority gives preferential rates to illegal immigrants and refugees for adult education courses – 50p an hour. So for the most expensive course the council offers at £230, they would pay £15. Good, eh?
PS Your socialist leanings are pretty clear, so your unqualified support for the BBC does their ‘impartiality’ claim no favours.
Nice to see you took my advice, but you must stop liking your own posts. It’s just not a good thing, it shows you to be needy and desperately craving attention, oh silly me I forgot your one of our resident under bridge dwellers so that explains it. Haven’t you some goats to be harassing?
Where is Great Big Billy-Goat Gruff when we need him ? lol
dez: More evidence for you:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10205963/Half-a-million-immigrants-given-social-housing-in-the-last-decade.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1196444/At-truth-immigration-council-house-queue-jumping.html
http://scriptonitedaily.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/fc21.jpg
i’ll post the pic of the that last link you made
The Beebinator,
“i’ll post the pic of the that last link you made”
Completely nonsensical Mr. Beebinator. Illegal immigrants don’t get benefits. Asylum Seekers aren’t illegal immigrants.
Neither is it evidence that: “refugees are allowed to jump the social housing queue”
FAIL.
Charlatans,
“dez: More evidence for you:”
There is no evidence in any of your links that; “refugees are allowed to jump the social housing queue”
FAIL.
Dezi, you ask for evidence, you ask for links. All is provided but you refuse to even contemplate the real world. It is you who have failed, not them, and you know it. That’s why you hate this site so much, thousands of examples of evidence of BBC bias but you stick your head in the sand and pretend it is not there.
Dez
This link should help you: Note UKBA involvement and Local Authority Housing, (or provision of Private through LA auspices): http://www.nat.org.uk/Media%20library/Files/Policy/Poverty%20and%20Social%20Disadvantage/Housing%20and%20HIV%20updated-1.pdf
1.2 Asylum seekers and housing
entitlement
The majority of asylum seekers are
not entitled to housing support from
local authorities; those who need
accommodation have it provided by
the UKBA. In order to be eligible for
UKBA housing asylum seekers must
have:
Claimed asylum ‘as soon as
reasonably practicable’ after arrival
in the UK10
Have no access to alternative
support
And/or be able to show that refusing
them support would breach their
human rights.11
Asylum seekers can claim for
accommodation support, or subsistence
support, or both of these. In 2007 around
70 per cent of support applications were
for accommodation and subsistence
support. In the first quarter of 2008, 175
principal asylum applicants, out of 4,770
total applications, were ruled ineligible for
support.12
Accommodation is paid for by the
UKBA and may be provided by local
authority housing, a registered social
landlord or a private landlord. Asylum
seekers cannot choose where they will
live and will be dispersed to identified
areas across the country, staying in
self-contained accommodation or
hostels.13 They cannot move from their
assigned accommodation without
permission from the UKBA.
Housing for asylum seekers is often
of a particularly poor standard, shared
and overcrowded, causing significant
vulnerability and harm. A 2001 Shelter
study into quality of private rented
housing provided by agencies to
asylum seekers, found that 86 per
cent of houses of multiple occupancy
were unfit for the number of occupants
and 17 per cent of dwellings were
unfit for human habitation.14 A 2005
study in Leeds uncovered further
evidence of poor quality housing,
including a woman with two young
children living in accommodation
with a leaking toilet and collapsing
ceilings.15 An asylum seeker quoted
in a 2006 study of housing needs in
Nottingham described accommodation
for asylum seekers as “places where
no one else wants to live.”16 In 2007
the Joint Committee on Human Rights
concluded that in some cases the
quality of the accommodation provided
contravened the human rights of
asylum seekers.17
Once a decision is made on their
asylum claim, asylum seekers
may lose the right to their existing
housing support, whether their claim
is accepted or not. If their claim is
accepted they have 28 days to find
alternative accommodation and
can apply to their local authority for
housing assistance. The Home Office
also offers an interest-free loan of
between £100 and £1,000 depending
on need to help with a deposit for
accommodation, training for a job or
buying essential items for their home.
However, problems can arise here
where applications for housing benefit
take longer to come through and there
is a gap between UKBA support being
withdrawn and new support becoming
available.
If an asylum seeker’s claim is refused
and they opt to return home voluntarily
they can continue to receive their
accommodation support under Section
4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act
1999, commonly known as ‘hard case’
support.
Case Study
Ruth is an HIV-positive asylum
seeker waiting for a decision on
her claim.
She was given private
accommodation by the UKBA
which was dirty, damp and
in poor repair. She requested
alternative accommodation as
she has two young children who
could not live in those conditions.
With just 24 hours notice she was
told she would be moved to new
accommodation, giving her very
little time to pack and let friends
know she was moving.
She had no opportunity to check
if the new flat was suitable. When
she arrived she discovered it was
so dirty that her children could
not stay there the first night.
When she asked for
improvements to be made the
private landlord said she would
have to pay half the costs for
repair work
dez, do you think that the BBC is bias in it’s news gathering and reporting?
Can Dez be on the ‘Nuremberg’ style list when these lefties are finally held to account?
Dez: Did you understand my reply? All clear now for you? Please do us all a favour and conduct your own research next time and stop wasting everyone else time. Why do you want to live in denial anyway? For the sake of what? Do you have some political agenda here?
When you say ‘their story’ you mean ‘their’ as in the BBC
The trolls are out in force today!