Posts Tagged ‘Benefits’

Riot police officer in hospital as 1,700 migrants storm Channel Tunnel in Calais Catastrophe

August 4, 2015

Riot police officer in hospital as 1,700 migrants storm Channel Tunnel in Calais Catastrophe
By Dark Politricks

• French riot police battle 1,700 migrants desperate to reach Britain
• Policeman in hospital after being hit with stone ‘by Sudanese man’
• Chaos on both sides of the tunnel set to continue into another week
• New measures to give powers to landlords to evict illegal immigrants
• Failed asylum seekers with children to be stripped of benefits
• Kent pays migrants’ £150 Dover-to-London cab fares Some news from today from Calais, more can be found at

Sudanese migrants prepare food near the Eurotunnel site in Calais (REX/Shutterstock)

Sudanese migrants prepare food near the Eurotunnel site in Calais (REX/Shutterstock)

Responding to the latest reports from Calais, Labour’s Shadow Immigration Minister David Hanson MP said:

The Government seriously need to get a grip on this situation. A series of panicky announcements on policies that were planned before this crisis emerged just won’t cut it. Telling landlords to act as a second tier border force and removing support from asylum seekers already in our country will not stop so many desperate people putting themselves and others in danger to get across the border.

This needs a careful and considered international response. The government should be focused on leading pan-European efforts to stop people crossing the Mediterranean, then making their way to Britain’s borders, instead of using a series of re-announcements as a distraction.

However the The European Commission has appealed to Britain to show “solidarity” and take more migrants under Jean Claude-Juncker’s controversial quota scheme. Mina Andreeva, Juncker’s spokesman, said the situation in Calais has “deteriorated” and co-operation between the French and the UK is welcome but she said the crisis proves that “all” EU member states need to take part in a scheme that sought to resettle 40,000 migrants across the continent to ease the pressure on Italy and Greece, which are taking the lion’s share of those arriving across the Mediterranean.

Britain (of course – seeing we created most of the mess in Africa e.g Libya) has opted out from the scheme, as is it right under the special carve-outs given to the UK and Denmark when it comes to EU justice and home affairs rules.

French gendarmes try to stop migrants on the Eurotunnel site in Coquelles near Calais (AFP)

French gendarmes try to stop migrants on the Eurotunnel site in Coquelles near Calais (AFP)

Henri Guaino, a lawmaker from the opposition French right-wing party Les Republicains, called on the UK to “do their share”, saying:

There is no reason for these people to be stored – if I may say this because it’s almost that – in France. It cannot go on like this. The situation is fairly simple. Migrants come to Calais to get to England. England does not want them. Therefore the migrants pile up in Calais and try by whatever means they can to reach England.

A policeman watches men move away from a security fence beside train tracks

A policeman watches men move away from a security fence beside train tracks

Ukip’s Nigel Farage had to join into the debate on migrants with the following tweet



What happens when an illegal migrant reaches the UK?

What happens when the migrants reach the UK

French migrants rush UK border guards to enter the country

  • If discovered, they are normally dealt with by police while any criminal investigation is carried out. If judged to be an immigration matter, it is passed to the Home Office.
  • Then what?
  • They are questioned about their reasons for entering the UK. If deemed to be in the UK illegally (and they do not claim asylum) they are deported
  • Where are they detained?
  • The obvious destination for those arriving from Calais is the immigration removal centre in Dover, but there are 12 centres in the UK.
  • What if someone claims asylum?
  • They are detained or granted temporary release while a decision is made.
  • How many are making it across the Channel?
  • In the five weeks from the start of June, more than 400 immigrants were found by British police hiding in vehicles or trains. As many as 148 are thought to have reached Britain on a single day in July.

200 Migrants breaching Eurotunnel fences to get into Britain

And what gets me the most is that our benefit system is not exactly the best in Europe anyway. A lot of migrants flock to London where the prices are the highest and a jobseekers allowance or income support of £140 a fortnight would literally get you nowhere.

It may be a lot of money back in the migrants homeland of Sudan or Libya but over here with high fuel costs, high rent, high food and other costs it is nothing. It was nothing when I was on it – one day up the pub usually – only because I lived at home when I had just left college.

However if you look at Germany’s benefit system, there are two levels depending on whether you have been working or haven’t or have come to the end of the first section which states:

If the claimant has no children, they receive 60 percent of their previous net earnings. If caring for children under 18, this rises to 67 percent. This benefit is payable for 90 to 360 days, depending on the length of previously insured employment and age. A full year’s unemployment benefit is received if the person has worked for two calendar years or more (18 months for those aged over 55).

That means myself, who has worked for the last 10+ years without a break would get my whole years salary for the first year! That is way more than £140 * 12 (£1,680) a good few dozen times more. The more you earn, the more you get when your unemployed, this is how it should be. If you are living a more expensive lifestyle due to the amount of money your job was bringing in then you would need a lot more money to survive on wouldn’t you. Figures taken from: Here it’s a fixed £140 whether you were a McDonalds worker or high-flying city stock broker! Then after this first year OR if you have never worked OR worked at least one day in Germany and for at least 360 days over 3 years in your last EU country of residence you get the following.

Subsistence allowance (Arbeitslosengeld II)

This allowance is lower than ordinary unemployment benefit and is payable when the claimant cannot receive full benefit or their period of benefit has come to an end, but they are still fit to work and registered as unemployed. Whether or not a person can claim for Arbeitslosengeld II will depend on savings, spouse’s earnings and life insurance. A set amount is paid for those requiring social assistance (about €350 per month). Claimants must attend training courses, and be ready to step into any job offered them by the Arbeitsamt, even a very low paid one. Exceptions to this rule are sometimes allowed on mental, physical or psychological grounds or in cases where pay rates are deemed immorally low.

Exactly how much social assistance an individual receives depends on several factors, such as number and age of children as well as marital status.

So €350 is about £245.97 and more than two fortnights £140 however at least Germany has the logic to split their system up so that people who need more get more. How it treats migrants and asylum seekers I don’t know but for David Cameron to claim people cross deserts and seas just to claim our generous benefit system really pisses me off.

In my area if you are NFA (No Fixed Abode – Homeless) it doesn’t even put you on the priority list for housing! You have to be dying (with less than a year to live) or seriously disabled to get a place om our register. I was on it then I got kicked off after reaching enough points to bid on places saying single men should be able to look after themselves – or words to those affect.

If you are lucky enough to have already had a place to stay and are made unemployed you can claim housing benefit but this is being slashed by our caring loving Tory government. Anyway I just thought I would break it down for you about what is happening on this side of the pond regarding the masses of people trying to get into the country.

By Dark Politricks

View the original article with videos at

© 2015 By Dark Politricks


The hypocrisy of politicians wanting to drug test welfare recipients

November 30, 2011

By Dark Politricks

So Newt Gingrich is following in the footsteps of state governors and other GOP politicians in calling out for recipients of welfare benefits to be drug tested before they can get any help from the government.

From a recent interview with Yahoo’s Chris Moody:

[MOODY:] Speaking of Ron Paul, at the last debate, he said that the war on drugs has been an utter failure. We’ve spent billions of dollars since President Nixon and we still have rising levels of drug use. Should we continue down the same path given the amount of money we’ve spent? How can we reform our approach?

[GINGRICH:] I think that we need to consider taking more explicit steps to make it expensive to be a drug user. It could be through testing before you get any kind of federal aid. Unemployment compensation, food stamps, you name it.


It has always struck me that if you’re serious about trying to stop drug use, then you need to find a way to have a fairly easy approach to it and you need to find a way to be pretty aggressive about insisting–I don’t think actually locking up users is a very good thing. I think finding ways to sanction them and to give them medical help and to get them to detox is a more logical long-term policy.

I have many issues with this tact and the first is that just like junkies, governments always look for short term fixes.

If any government really wanted to get people off drug habits it would cost more money as proper detox and rehabilitation doesn’t come cheap. I have no problem with criminals who offend being offered treatment at proper centers instead of being locked up in prisons as they currently are but once again this will cost money, and as we keep getting told – there just aint any of that around at the moment.

My second point is what happens to any of the millions of kids born each year to people receiving benefits and who is on drugs?

It is not their fault if they are unfortunate enough to be born to parents who have a drug problem so why should they forgo food, money, clothes and any kind of state help?

Yes the parents might already be spending most of their welfare cheques on drugs but removing food from the mouths of children by stopping food stamps? I think that’s totally unfair but then I suppose these people might have other plans for the kids. Maybe we might see the return of Victorian workhouses full of kids stolen from drug users working for nothing. Well it might stimulate the economy if we can reduce worker pay and conditions….

If the government wants to stop drug taking welfare recipients then they are looking in the wrong direction.

I reckon if they piled up the amounts of coke snorted by banksters in the City, Wall Street and every other major financial institution that has recently received bailouts (welfare from us tax payers) and compared it to the amounts of various home made crystal meth, pub coke and other shit quality gear taken by the poorest of society then I think I know which pile would be worth getting stuck into.

The City of London used to run on coke and it got so bad that many firms had to start drug testing many of the workers. I reckon profits probably fell the year they did that but that’s another debate. This is from a Daily Mail article in 2006.

A study by The Rowntree Foundation which found “anecdotal evidence for an increase of drug testing in some high-profile firms, particularly in the financial sector where there are no obvious health or safety justifications.”

One corporate lawyer quoted in the Rowntree Foundation study which reveals growing drug use said: “I have known one company that had a ‘snorting room’ in the City.

“People turn a blind eye with regard to drugs and alcohol – but also with a range of other behaviour – because they don’t want to lose a key employee…someone who can make a lot of money.”

So it’s okay if the person can make the firm a lot of money but if your on your ass living in a squat or some other kind of shit hole literally living hand to mouth having to rely on food stamps to feed yourself. Where a dole cheque would last less than an hour or two if you had a proper banksters coke habit then fuck you. Go and jump off a bridge, and take your kids with you?

Why not, they are just more mouths to feed and in these times of austerity we need to be looking after our “wealth creating” drug takers rather than those useless eaters consuming up tax dollars.

Ron Paul made more than a valid point when he said the war on drugs has failed. Just like the war on terror it was always doomed to fail as you cannot beat something as intangible as the innate desire for a sizable chunk of the world population to want to change their living conditions for a temporary period by taking various substances.

Unless we can make our world a viable utopia in which the need to escape poverty, memories of abuse, lack of hope and the myriad of other reasons that cause people to drink, take drugs, gamble, have sex and any other form of escapist behaviour – we will always have drugs.

Mankind has been getting high for thousands of years and it is not going to stop by “just one more push” and a harder crack down on drug users – especially when if they actually drug tested the whole population and sacked everyone with even a hint of an illegal (or legal) stimulant or downer in their system we would probably have less than half a workforce left.

And not let forget all the politicians. They are welfare recipients as well. We pay their salaries so we deserve to know if they are taking us for a ride by snorting, jacking or nibbling a bean at the weekend.

We have all read the stories about politicians being caught with their pants down stuck in a glory hole after spending their careers denouncing gay people as “ungodly”.

And just as many have been caught with dope after spending far too much time attacking drug users. Just do a search on Google for politicians caught with drugs or with their pants down and find out for yourself the size of the hypocrisy on display.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander and in this case welfare recipients fall in the same category as politicians and many big banks as well as any other company that has been bailed out by taxpayers across the world.

Therefore if we are going to start drug testing we should start at the top and work our way down.

I think if we did that we wouldn’t be hearing so much from certain corners about drugs and sex.

The Tories Wet Dream

October 5, 2010

By Dark Politricks

I am starting to believe that the current economic situation is a Tories wet dream come true for many reasons.

Not only does it give them a chance to dismantle much of the state and reduce the huge public sector that Labour pumped up over the last decade but they can put all the blame for doing so squarely at Labours door.

Many Tories are not shy of stating publicly that they believe in a small state and that our current populus relies

far too much on the government for support. However many other Tories hold these beliefs but dare not speak them for want of being attacked as the uncaring nasty party a label they aquired during the 90’s and one which they have been working hard to shake off.

Today George Osborne told the Tory Conference that the universal Child Benefit would become a lot less universal in the future. The cutting of this benefit which was until Osborne’s speech today a benefit enjoyed by all families regardless of wage would normally attract much outrage from all sections of society. However now that the Tories have the perfect excuse in the deficit and they can happily renege on pre-election promises to not cut child benefit or raise VAT whilst at the same time pointing their finger at Labour and blaming it all on them. It’s like all their Christmases have come at once in that they can dismantle the state bit by bit all the while blaming Labour and having most of the country believe that it’s necessary.

Many Tories have wished for a chance to dismantle the birth to grave welfare state that was devised after the war to help pay back the many who swapped slums for trenches and who came back home deserving a land fit for heroes. It was quite right and proper that a country who had asked its least privileged and poorest to waste their lives walking towards machine guns sought to re-balance its books by installing a system that tried to even out the massive inequality that our country suffered from at the time.

Successive governments both Tory and Labour have added to this system and whilst many Americans might denounce this socialised system as some Communist nightmare many who live within its boundaries are rightly proud that we have a system that offers health care to all and which tries to rebalance natures cruel trick of birth by trying to ensure sanitary and safe housing for those that need it and care to those who can’t look after themselves. I personally have no problem knowing that a portion of my tax and national insurance goes toward social insurance and the care of others.

Do I dislike benefit cheats and scroungers? Of course, but I dislike rich arrogant banksters a lot more and they have done more to bankrupt our country and ruin future generations prospects than any teenage mum on housing benefit could ever do. I have had the good grace to experience life from both ends of the social scale and have had the joyful experience of signing on and living on an amount for a fortnight what many earn in a day and what most City bankers would earn in an hour or less.

Tories educated at Eton with little or no concept of what its like to survive on £100 a fortnight must feel vindicated

by what they are doing when they read one of the never ending stories about dole bludgers and gym slip mums that fill

the red tops every day of the week. The Murdoch owned gutter press seem addicted to stories about sex and scrounging. If it’s not a story about another Premiership footballer playing too many away games with strippers and professional party girls it’s another story about teenage dads who are intent on milking the social for every penny. Kids are nothing but a means to an end it seems and a quick way of getting bonus points on the housing register. Why work 48 hour weeks to earn the minimum wage and live in expensive private accommodation when you can drop a couple of nippers and jump straight into a new build paid for by mugs like you and me.

A single man who works legitimatley has little hope of getting a place from the social even if they are on minimum wage. However a single mum can expect instant housing, first in a shared house for expectent mums or maybe a bedsit and then as the kids drop out one by one you slowly move your way up the housing ladder. I don’t want to even guestimate the number of working dads who get paid cash to avoid tax and NI and don’t officially live with the mother of their children to avoid being thrown out of their nice council homes. The Tories are right to try and change the system in this regards as a system in which work pays less than benefits is one in which people will rightly play and I personally find it hard to blame some of the people who play it so well.

If I was an uneducated poor girl who could at best hope for a lifetime working in McDonalds earning barely £200 a week before tax and who has grown up in a society that is bombarded by advertising drumming the “have it all” mentality into their heads I would probably grab my council house as fast as I could open my legs.

It’s very easy for those of us who have the tools and skills to better ourselves through hard work to judge and tell others to just buckle down and work hard and eventually it will all come to you but we all know that this isn’t always true. Many very clever and hard working people spend their whole lives striving to better themselves only to be given no breaks or to make little or no difference by the time they retire. Time on this earth is short and in many places also brutal and hard. Some may consider it morally the right thing to put up with the shit in the hope that one day your righteousness is rewarded but if the state is willing to hand certain things to you on a plate is it really your fault for taking them or the societies for making it too easy to say yes please.

I remember the 80’s and I don’t remember stories of dole scroungers and benefit cheats filling the press. It was a time when the state paid you to go to University and you could even claim the dole whilst you were there. Whole swathes of the country had been put out of work due to the “de-regualtrion” of the Thatcher years and whereas before the cuts working class and poorly educated but skilled men could expect a life time of work in manufacturing or down the pit the closure of the mines and ship yards and the export of our good skilled jobs overseas to be replaced by a service industry meant that whole towns worth of men were put on the dole. Sociologists have documented well the problems that Thatchers “revolution” brought to working class Britain but one of the reasons that so many people “choose” the dole over work is because of the lack of good skilled labour jobs that pay well.

If you are lucky enough to be well educated and qualified you can take your pick of some of the more interesting service based jobs the UK has to offer such as IT but if your a product of our woeful comprehensive system then your job choices are usually narrow and few.

Our state school system is shit and I know because I barely survived it myself. I would have excelled at a Grammar school if any still existed but my family wasn’t rich enough to pay for private education so I went to the local comp where I quickly became bored and fell into the wrong crowd.

Putting young men of all backgrounds together may seem like a socialist dream but if their energies are not put to good use and their brains not stretched and filled with an enthusiasm for learning their focus can quickly turn to mischief. However because of the mixed social strata what might be a few old school pranks in public school equates to serious crime, drugs and debauchery in a bog standard comp.

In the same way that young boys need to be occupied with worthwhile activities that leave them tired at the end of the day the same is said for men in the workplace. For the skilled labourer they require a job in which they can have pride that fills them with self worth and a healthy pay packet.

Otherwise it’s either a life of crime or unskilled work in a factory or shop making minimum wage and there is little

pride in those types of jobs apart from being able to say you earned your wage on the straight and up. If there were more skilled manufacturing jobs then the number of unemployed men would dwindle quickly as I don’t really believe the red tops when they claim that many people on the dole are rejoicing in an idle lifestyle happy to live off the state.

It may be hard for some people to understand but it really is not easy to live on £100 or so a fortnight. When I was on the dole I used to take home £80  every two weeks. Could you live on that? Is that really milking the state and living a life of luxury? I could spent that amount on a bad night out however we ask many to live on that amount and then berate them for doing so. It maybe the life of Riley for a few who have money coming in from other means and it surely is right and proper that those people who work and still claim benefits are sought out and punished but for those jobseekers who have to rely on the jobseeker allowance alone I cannot imagine that there are many who would rather stay on benefits instead of returning to work.

And when it comes to Incapacity Benefit which is currently claimed by millions we must remember that the sole reason that there are so many people claiming this and not Jobseeker’s Allowance is that in the early 90’s after the last major recession the job centers were directed by those who pull the strings to move long term jobseeker claimants from the dole to that benefit purely so that they could claims that the number of jobless was falling.

It was pure government statistic massaging that caused such a large number of incapacity claimants and the workers at the jobcenter would often ask signers straight out if they had illnesses or injuries which they could then use as a reason to switch them over. The fact that the government is now trying to reduce this number does not excuse them from their past misdeeds and whilst incapcity benefit does pay more than jobseekers it is not so easy to get on as it used to be and unless you like jumping through hoops like circus lions then a life milking the system for a pittance is not an easy job to spend your life doing.

I for one am happy to admit that I would rather the richest in society pay a lot more before we start attacking those at the bottom. I really don’t understand why we cannot just take over the banks that caused this mess and then just keep them as national assets milking the profits like a big fat cash cow directing them straight into the government coffers to fill them back up.

Yes Labour did spend too much and it definitely wasted a fair few billion on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that weren’t required and have only served to make our country more unsafe not less. However it was the casino bankers that ignited the big debt stink bomb and whilst we would have been in a far better condition to manage if the country wasn’t already loaded up with debt the banks were the drug pushers standing outside the school gate pushing cheap easy debt onto every passer by and then using the careful savers money to throw huge win only bets on the biggest bookie in town i.e the stock exchange.

I for one want to see hundreds of bankers jumping from Canary Wharf due to their bonuses being confiscated to pay for housing benefit for immigrants before I would support a wholescale dismantlment of the welfare state. Once there are enough suits in the Thames to create the Isle of Barclays and only if the profits from the banks over a good few years are not enough to fill the void then I would support a re-arrangment of our welfare state.

First however I would want Ian Duncan Smith and David Cameron to spend a month living in a bedsit in Aldershot with only jobseekers allowance before I would accept any moralising about benefits being too generous. I dare anyone to try it before attacking me for my liberal or socialist outlook. One day you too might need some help from the state.