The electorate was sent a message last week: if you want this government to take you seriously you must get rich, cultivate friends in the Conservative Party, and spend a lot of money on covert lobbying. We may be living in a democracy, but it doesn’t feel that way.
The electorate was sent a message last week: if you want this government to take you seriously you must get rich, cultivate friends in the Conservative Party, and spend a lot of money on covert lobbying. We may be living in a democracy, but it doesn’t feel that way.
On Wednesday July 10th sick and disabled activists were dealt one more blow by a government which Amnesty International has said is conducting ‘a regressive and lethal assault’ on their human rights.
In an Opposition Day debate calling for a cumulative impact assessment of the effect of spending cuts, the government voted down the motion. Some of the excuses given were so feeble they were embarrassing, perhaps the most embarrassing being “the last government didn’t do one” from a Minister who has boasted that these changes are the biggest to hit the welfare system for 60 years.
Although not unexpected, this refusal yet again to even examine the tsunami of cuts directed at people, many already living in poverty, was too much to bear for some. Severely disabled and housebound people whose campaigning had helped secure this debate were in tears.
On Friday July 12th, these activists were given a helpful pointer by the government as to where they are going wrong. They are not rich, and they do not have friends in the Conservative Party.
The government dropped plans to enforce plain packaging for cigarettes, because “it wants more time to study the impact of a similar law in Australia before deciding to press ahead with standardised cigarette packaging in England.”
So the impact on the tobacco industry of one relatively simple change must be studied so carefully that government plans are altered, but the biggest change for 60 years affecting the lives of millions of sick and disabled people and carers does not merit any such consideration.
The tobacco industry is rich and powerful, conducting lobbying both openly, and stealthily. It has access to the government via people like David Cameron’s strategist Lynton Crosby, whose PR and lobbying firm Crosby Textor has long-standing links with the tobacco industry. Health Minister Earl Howe has been accused of acting covertly for the industry to defeat legislation, and Kenneth Clarke was a director and deputy chairman of British American Tobacco until 2007.
So, it is quite clear that the wealth and influence of the tobacco industry has caused the government to balk at any change which may have an adverse impact, citing the need for further study of such impact. For ordinary voters however, particularly poor or vulnerable ones, massive change can be implemented without hesitation. Even when condemned by Amnesty International, the government refuses to reconsider.
The Speaker of the House of Commons last week said Prime Minister’s Questions had been “unedifying”. The whole week was unedifying as far as the government is concerned.
————
© Bernadette Meaden has written about political, religious and social issues for some years, and is strongly influenced by Christian Socialism, liberation theology and the Catholic Worker movement. She is an Ekklesia associate and regular contributor. You can follow her on Twitter: @BernaMeaden