What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists
3:46 pm - February 15th 2012
| Tweet |
Lots of people have already asked me: “But what did yesterday mean and I’m afraid it will be a while before anyone can properly answer that.
The House of Lords scrutinises a bill “line-by-line”. They are there to go through every last detail of policy and amend it where they find fault. There are no big-bangs, no fireworks, just lots and lots and lots of technical details. They get harder and harder to report and harder still to explain.
What I can tell you is what it meant politically.
Let’s go back a year. The Broken of Britain were in the last days of their “One Month Before Heartbreak” campaign. The DLA/PIP consultation was just about to close and they had successfully inspired thousands to make a submission in a first blaze of social media activity.
We had nothing and no-one.
Welfare reform was the one rock solid area for the Government. The media were eagerly whipping the public into the full throes of rabid scrounger hating. The “opposition” were, erm, not opposing. At all. In fact they were actively supporting both the Government and the stigma.
We couldn’t get a journalist anywhere to report welfare, they practically held lavender hankies to their noses at the thought. No-one cared about the details of the bill and it marched on, seemingly unstoppably, towards becoming law.
That’s what we won. That’s what we changed.
Step by step, tiny victory by tiny victory, we chipped away relentlessly. A story here, a journalist there, a politician persuaded, a peer convinced. Chip, chip! Exposing their mistakes and their fibs, speaking at this conference, speaking on that radio show. Chip, chip! An email or a letter or a blog post or an article.
And somehow, magically, the tiny chips became a dent and the dent became a hole and the hole became a tunnel, right through to Chris Grayling and Maria Miller and Lord Freud. Right through to the Daily Mail. Right through to Newsnight and the Spartacus Report and the ESA defeats in the Lords and our DLA amendment. We had an amendment! In the House of Lords!! Lord Freud had to answer our report!!
What’s that got to do with yesterday?
Power.
Without it, as we all know so very well, you have nothing. But by yesterday, we held some cards. By yesterday, the Government were unsure. By yesterday, they had to compromise.
I know that compromise is a boring word. We all wanted explosives, heavy artillery and preferably, for Freud, Miller, Grayling and IDS to be permanently exiled to somewhere in Afghanistan with a lot of bandits. But compromise is what the Lords are there to ensure and finally, dragged kicking and screaming towards the naughty-step-of-honesty, Freud had to suck it up.
We pushed the Government further than they – or indeed we – ever imagined possible. We opposed. We informed, we had them on the ropes. The public started to wake up, a few journalists came blinking into the light and the entire welfare debate has changed forever.
We still have a filthy bill, crammed with awful policies. But from now on, it will be a much, much more equal fight. And that is something the Government never, ever expected in their worst nightmares.
—
A longer version is at Diary of a Benefit Scrounger
| Tweet |  |
Sue is a regular contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. She blogs on Diary of a Benefits Scounger and tweets from here.
· Other posts by Sue Marsh
Story Filed Under: Blog ,Equality ,Westminster
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
Pyrrhic victory. 80% of the public support the bill, and the amendment will be swiftly overturned in the commons.
You won nothing apart from the sympathies of a few truculent, powerless crossbench bleeding hearts.
@1
Maybe if the public had the first fucking clue about the true facts of the benefit system their opinion would be worth something, unfortunately that isn’t the case, the thick mindless cretins are being spoon fed their daily propaganda and are making their decisions based on that. That’s the only reason 80% of the public back it, nice to see so many people with a desire for a demagoguery though,
Which group of people should the public have power over next?
Which group of people should the public have power over next?
Pensioners, if the public really care more about the nation’s finances than people. The pension bill dwarfs the JSA and DLA bills combined after all. I’m sure the tabloids could drum up support for a Logan’s run option by using phrases like ‘oxygen thief’ or ‘morgue cheater’ in place of ‘retired pensioner’ or ‘elderly person’, and making up stories about foreigners trying to get here in order to take advantage of our generous winter fuel payments scheme cos we’re all a bunch of fucking mugs that are too soft. Or some such.
(Although I’m joking, I’ve a horrible feeling that I’ve just gone and given Richard Desmond an idea for Friday’s Express…)
I still want a strong commitment from Labour on reversing the bill: not just the parts that gain easy sympathy when they effect disabled people and children, but the parts about housing benefit and halting proper JSa rises.
@1
Pay attention much? The Commons can not overturn concessions Freud himself gave.
@4 – Rentergirl
No Labour government is going to reverse this bill because when a minimum wage worker pays their taxes to line the pockets of greedy landlords and keep people who don’t work in better housing than themselves it simply isn’t fair.
Along with the unfairness of the current system in respect of housing benefit there used to be a time when the Labour Party cared about the plight of the working class.
I know that seems hard to believe with a countess toff as deputy leader and the likes of the tax avoiding millionaire leader who hasn’t worked a day in his life but it’s true.
The days of supporting the workers seem a long time ago and now the Guardian reading middle class luvvies and childish socialist dreamers who contaminate the Labour Party need to go elsewhere and let the people get their party back…
6. Anon E Mouse
It is rightwingers who obsess about such irrelevancies.
Most working class people just want a job to feed and house their families. Nothing more, nothing less.
The Tories and the coalition are denying them this.
Where their taxes go is of secondary importance. Its importance inflated by those like you with other intentions – none of them pro working class.
@7 – BenM
I’m not too sure where you get your “facts” from since YouGov showed 70% odd of Labour voters support the housing benefit cuts. Perhaps they too agree that to put minimum wage earner’s taxes into the pockets of greedy landlords is just wrong.
Funny how the Labour Party has been hijacked by the types of people who think that it is acceptable to behave in such an unfair way towards working people.
Where people’s taxes go is of absolute primary importance. If we follow your logic in that we’ll end up with a government that steals our money in expenses and spends £millions on overseas conflicts or £billions on ID Card schemes and the like.
Your views are not shared by the majority of Labour voters BenM and I think it’s time you joined the Socialist Workers Party or some other such collection of nutters with unpopular desires.
Your opinions are not welcome to real Labour voters in this country and it’s time to go elsewhere and let the party start representing the workers again…
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
- Alice in Blunderland
RT @leftlinks Liberal Conspiracy – What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/qEyr60iF
- Virginia Moffatt
What yesterday's Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/6Ik3nIUw
- BevR
RT @leftlinks Liberal Conspiracy – What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/qEyr60iF
- Lilacwheelz
What yesterday's Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/6Ik3nIUw
- BevR
What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/38nZRyAc via @libcon
- Little Linden
RT @leftlinks Liberal Conspiracy – What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/qEyr60iF
- TheCreativeCrip
What yesterday's Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/6Ik3nIUw
- Kyron Hodgetts
What yesterday's Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/6Ik3nIUw
- Nick H.
What yesterday's Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists http://t.co/6Ik3nIUw
- David Davies
What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists ~ http://t.co/6V1cB7oY
- christina sosseh
What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/cQKZ5TZK via @libcon
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
