Feb 212018
 

Our very committed steering group member Ellen Clifford stayed up until 1am to speak to canadian radio about our concerns on UBI. Also speaking about concerns about UBI was John Clarke from Ontario Coalition Against Poverty. You can hear the discussion here

Democracy North: Are Basic Income Programs Too Good to be True?

A much more detailed and authoratitive study will be published shortly but as others support the concept we wanted to flag up just some of the reasons we’d suggest great caution is needed in relation to a Universal Basic Income.

Concerns with UBI

  • The UK has in place a complex and targeted social security system. UBI trials in countries without the same levels of support infrastructure produce positive results, for example the pilots in Madhya Pradesh showed significant benefits for disabled people such as being able to afford food and medical assistance, as well as providing independent income for disabled people so they are not entirely reliant on families and enabling autonomy. Introducing a UBI in the UK would require that all or some of our present benefits and support systems are replaced which would be a far more complex undertaking. The distribution of gains and losses would depend upon the detail of the UBI scheme.
  • The cost of UBI in the UK at Guaranteed Minimum Income levels would significantly exceed current spending on cash benefits and tax-free allowances. A budget-neutral UBI would therefore require either a UBI below GMI levels, or additional tax increases.
  • Full UBI schemes that are in any way financially feasible result in big losses for disabled people. As a result, supporters of UBI such as the Citizen’s Income Trust now recommend a partial UBI where disability benefits (and housing) are retained as a separate parallel system. In Annie Miller’s 297 page Basic Income Handbook she includes just one page on “The needs of disabled people” (of which half a page is about carers) where she says “Disability benefits are based on need and are therefore a different system from BIs… Both housing and disability benefits are very much in need of revision but are beyond the scope of this book. The interaction between BI and support for these costs (and between them) would need to be considered in developing policy in each area.”
  • Supporters of a partial scheme where disability benefits are retained assure us that no disabled person will be worse off under UBI. We were told the same thing about Universal Credit and that has proved not to be true. The social security system is extremely complex and without detailed modelling setting out exactly how UBI would sit alongside a system of disability benefits sufficient to meet need it is difficult to be confident that it could work in this way without losses. A briefing to Nicola Sturgeon states: “Significant modelling effort would be required to establish levels which did not impact negatively on vulnerable groups.” One key benefit that UBI would most likely replace is ESA yet the rate of ESA for those in the support group is significantly higher than what is considered a feasible UBI level. This brings the prospect of “rough justice” for those who face the most disadvantages. The University of Bath paper presents an idea for a UBI with additional disability and severe disability premiums which when micro-simulated produces strong reductions in inequality and poverty but would be very expensive and require significant increases in income tax. The report authors conclude: “The unavoidable reality is that such schemes either have unacceptable distributional consequences or they simply cost too much.” DPAC members have concerns that the process for proving eligibility for disability premiums could be as problematic as the current system for applying for existing benefits.
  • Not only would running a UBI in parallel to disability benefit systems be complex, there is also the potential danger of increased stigma against those for whom the UBI is insufficient to meet their needs and less public will to fund them.
  • The disability benefits system is not fit for purpose. While proponents of partial UBI schemes propose retaining current disability benefits, disabled people are calling for an urgent overhaul. We are concerned about how the long and complex task of introducing a UBI would impact on the considerable task of reforming social security for disabled people. Attempting to manage both at the same time risks mistakes and as we have seen under welfare reform, where admittedly the many ‘mistakes’ are the result of deliberate ideological policy, mistakes cost lives.
  • Alongside an adequate standard of income, disabled people require other support services in order to enjoy full and equal participation in society. The current crisis in social care is one example of the urgency of the question of how to fund these. If independent living support remains under the administration of local authorities, then in order to end the situation whereby disabled people’s rights are being breached on a daily basis by lack of provision, one obvious solution would be to remove the cap and increase council tax. Increasing council tax alongside an increase in income tax to afford UBI could by very unpopular. Disabled people are calling for independent living support (i.e., social care) to be removed from local authorities and instead administered by a national independent living support system to be paid for out of general taxation. We are concerned that the introduction of UBI funded by increases in income tax will reduce the amount available to fund an independent living support system capable of meeting disabled people’s needs. While many disabled people would be in favour of tax rises to fund welfare provision – particularly corporation tax and a progressive rise in the higher rate of income tax – the use of this for a UBI rather than more traditional forms of disability and unemployment support would mean much of the benefit flowing back to employers rather than those in most need. In functioning as a wage subsidy UBI would act to significantly reduce employers NI contributions. It would be hard to make a case that this is a more progressive solution than simply reversing much of the damage that the Tories have done to current systems.
  • There is also a more general concern about pressures on public spending and negative impacts on social programmes as a result of introducing a UBI. In Hirsch’s paper for the JRF he warns about the need to take account of the fact that income tax is used for public expenditure other than income transfers and the dangers of underestimating the rate of income tax increase required without making cuts in public services.
  • The distributional impacts of a UBI mean that there are winners and there are losers– whereas under the current system the biggest losers tend to be those who face the biggest barriers, eg disabled people and the poorest members of society, some UBI models will benefit low income deciles while increasing inequality for the poorest. This is at odds with what the public generally understand as the aims of a social security system. It also has the potential to divide against each other groups of people who are currently united in our opposition to the rich elite who we see as responsible for growing inequality and poverty.
  • UBI provides a useful contribution to the debate on the future of social security where it adds support and evidence for the need to end conditionality and the impacts of inadequate income and punitive approaches in moving people further from the labour market. However DPAC’s view is that this is the extent of its usefulness.
  • UBI in the wrong hands could be extremely dangerous. Libertarians want to use it to sweep away the welfare state including the NHS while neoliberal governments see it as a way of forcing unemployed workers into insecure low paid jobs. The version of UBI being trialled by Finland’s right-wing government has been described as a “UBI-as-workhouse nightmare”[1]. Ontario Coalition Against Poverty issued a statement supported by Canada’s largest public services trade union saying “The emerging model of basic income reflected in pilot projects and initiatives in a number of countries and jurisdictions is one that would intensify the neoliberal agenda”[2]. John Clarke from OCAP has written ““The neoliberal attack is taking up Basic Income as a weapon. We need to fight it instead of laying down a welcome mat.”
  • UBI compensates for while leaving unchallenged the structures that cause inequality. This is no doubt why Silicon Valley is so much in favour of UBI as a way to tackle the problem of job losses through automation, because it ignores the question of the ownership of the technology. Instead, UBI accepts the status quo. By subsidising low wages there is a danger that UBI could encourage employers to further drive down wages and job security. This is a concern to disabled people who are statistically much more likely to be in low paid work than non-disabled people. A large proportion of politicised disabled people know that capitalism has no reason to accommodate us, in fact the very opposite, and that full disability equality cannot be achieved under the current system. Instead we need a socialist society operating on the principle of from each according to their abilities to each according to their needs.
  • The emancipatory impacts of UBI can only be realised by a level of payment sufficiently high to free us from wage labour. If the conditions were such that we could introduce that, it can be argued that we would then be in a situation where we had arrived at socialism and didn’t need UBI. Introducing a below poverty-line UBI will do little to improve the material circumstances of those who are most in need but would require a big upheaval – bearing in mind that millions are already suffering following the enormous shake up of the social security system introduced since 2010 – while creating a new pattern of winners and losers.
  • Britain is home to the biggest socialist movement in Europe where demands for a living wage, for health and social care support services free at the point of need and a social security system that provides an adequate standard of living free from conditionality are all popular. These are what we need to fight for.

 

 

 

[1] https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/01/ubi-finland-centre-party-unemployment-jobs

[2] https://ocaptoronto.wordpress.com/2017/09/18/the-neoliberal-danger-of-basic-income/

 Posted by at 20:18
Feb 212018
 

 

 

This is Wazim. Wazim is a Calais refugee. At first I was very apprehensive , about going to Calais. Did not know what to expect or what I would see. As you can imagine it was not good. On the way to this site , we passed the jungle. It was surrounded by razor wire and fencing which cost 4000000 pounds. Even though it has now been demolished , the size of it took my breath away. When we arrived at Wazim’s refugee camp I was shocked. At least 30 men all from Afghanistan huddled around a little fire trying to keep warm. We had a generator so they could charge their mobile phones and this is their only communication back home . Before all you racist , anti immigrant bigots jump on the fact they had mobile phones , they were donated and were at least 10.year old phones. As we opened the back of the van to hand out parcels with warm clothing in , Wazim who speaks the best English told them all go form a queue. They did without fuss. When Wazim approached he noticed my hat , which if you know me is my favourite one. Something in that instant happened. I gave him it , he immediately hugged me like I had given him a 1000000 pounds. Twice he tried to give it back, but I would not accept. Once we finished handing out parcels we were urged to talk to them. The stories were just horrendous. The police don’t leave them alone. Spray cs gas on sleeping bags. Put out their fires. I will never forget yesterday. I will never forget Wazim. Look at the photo , I look content. Wazim is a Calais refugee, but he is also a survivor. Thankyou @care4 Calais for all you do. Solidarity 4 ever.

Keith

 Posted by at 20:12
Feb 142018
 

No More Deaths on our Streets supported by DPAC

https://www.facebook.com/events/166541107460209/

 

March 3rd 3-6 pm

We will gather outside Downing Street to say enough is enough..
#NoMoreDeathsOnOurStreets.

Lets get together & organise how we can prevent any further needless deaths.

Today another rough sleeper died on the cold London streets just yards from Parliament.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/homeless-man-dies-outside-parliament-12023659

Please bring along sleeping bags & other essential supplies that will keep people alive & we will also distribute these that day to those that may need them across London.

Bring noise, banners, smiles, anger & your friends.

This is a simple call out that needs more supporters asap so please add your group if you are part of one.

We MUST work together to stop this shit.

#SolidarityNotCharity

 

 Posted by at 19:27
Feb 132018
 

 

Reblogged from Evolve Poltics

https://evolvepolitics.com/stopfundingthetories-here-are-36-companies-youll-want-to-avoid-if-you-dont-want-to-unwittingly-fund-the-tories/

So, you would never vote Tory in a million years and you hate everything they stand for, but, are you really sure you’re not inadvertently handing over your hard-earned money to major Tory party donors?

#StopFundingTheTories

The Electoral Commission keeps records of major donations to political parties, and we’ve been having a long hard look at them to weed out all the companies that fund the Tories.

In a campaign we are calling #StopFundingTheTories, we want to raise awareness of the companies, products and services that, if you hand over your hard-earned money to, you are unwittingly funding the Conservative Party.

The Tory Party have a despicable track record in government for enacting policies that intentionally benefit the super-rich at the expense of the most vulnerable people in our society. Poverty is soaring, rough sleeping has more than doubled since the Tories came to power in 2010, and, due to the hateful, divisive, divide-and-rule rhetoric spouted by the Conservatives, hate crimes against minorities are now rising year on year. All this whilst the wealth of the very richest people in Britain has more than doubled.

In contrast to Labour, whose membership numbers have soared under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, the Tories could now have as few as 60,000 paid-up members contributing to party coffers. And, due to this plummeting of their membership numbers, the Tories are now heavily reliant on their super-rich backers handing over vast sums of money to keep them afloat.

According the latest accounts, the Tories took in just £1,459,000 from ordinary membership fees, whilst Labour’s members contributed almost ten times as much to their party, at £14,393,000. The Tories, however, beat Labour in terms of donations.

Whilst Labour brought in over £14m, mostly made up of small donations from ordinary people, the Tories raked in more than £18m, almost exclusively from huge one-off donations from their super-rich backers.

In the last quarter [the Tories] received nearly £3million in private donations from less than 100 people. This means an average donation of £30,000 – or, as you or I would call it, a luxury car.

 

The Tories also received over £700,000 from 61 companies, with an average donation of over £10,000. A figure which goes to show exactly why their interests seem so closely wedded to corporations and the rich.

Donations to the Conservatives make up over 80% of donations by private individuals and corporations, whilst donations to Labour make up just under 0.5% of these figures.

It’s little wonder then that the Tories seem increasingly intent on pleasing their super-rich backers with policies that exclusively benefit them, to the detriment of ordinary people.

Given that there is very little likelihood of the Tories’ membership numbers rising any time soon, their only sustainable funding comes from the huge donations of their super-rich  backers – who are, through the products and services they sell, actually bankrolled by you and me – ordinary people. This means that, in essence, for every pound we hand over to one of these companies, a proportion of that money is then handed to the Tories.

So, if you want to avoid unwittingly funding the Tory party in any way, shape or form, here is a comprehensive list of the companies, products, and services you will want to avoid giving your money to at all costs.

Shopping

WestfieldThe company that owns Westfield London and Westfield Stratford City has donated almost £500k since 2008.

Selfridges. With shops in London, Birmingham and Manchester, the company has donated over £300k since 2009.

Bicester shopping village. Owned by Value Retail which has donated £9k since 2016.

Next. Director Simon Wolfson has donated over £400k since 2008.

JCB. You’re unlikely to be in the market for a bulldozer, but construction company JCB has licensed hundreds of products, from lightbulbs to boots to brooms to pyjamas. Since 2008, JCB and its subsidiaries have donated over £4.5m to the Tories.

Moonpig. Founder of flower and gift company Moonpig, Nick Jenkins, donated £166k between 2009-15.

Boden. CEO Julian Granville donated £12k between 2009-15.

Richer Sounds. Founder and 100% shareholder Julian Richer donated £150k between 2010-14

Services

Lycamobile. The SIM card company donated over £2m to the Tories between 2011-16.

Tempcover. Car insurance company, donated £400k since 2015.

Scottish Power. Have donated £48k since 2010. They’ve also given considerable amounts to Scottish Labour although the last donation was in 2016.

E.On UK. The gas and electricity supplier donated £8.4k to the Tories in 2016.

Pimlico Plumbers. Large London-based plumbers, have donated £65k since 2015

Microsoft Ltd (British subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation). £137k between 2006-15.

Food and drink

Sainsbury’s. President John Sainsbury has donated over £2m to the Tories since 2008.

Bestway. Cash and carry with huge network of outlets. Have donated over £700k since 2008.

Samworth Brothers. Make Ginsters, Soreen Malt Loaf, Melton Mowbray pies. Director Mark Samworth has donated £585,000 to the Tories since 2010.

Iceland. Director Malcolm Walker has donated £110k since 2012.

Warburtons. The bread company donated £25k in 2010.

Global Brands Ltd. Make various branded drinks including Hooch and VK alcopops.  Have donated £21k since 2015.

Radnor Hills Mineral Water Co Ltd. Mineral waters and fruit juices, donated £7k since 2015.

Frederic Robinson Ltd. Owns Robinson Breweries and 280 pubs in the north west. Produce various bottled and cask beers. Have donated £29k since 2012.

Delamere Dairy Ltd. Dairy products, especially goats milk. £7.5k since 2015.

Hotels and entertainment

Flamingo Land. This Yorkshire theme park and zoo has donated £83k since 2014.

The London Cabaret Club. Have donated £95k since 2015.

Imperial London Hotels Ltd. Seven hotels in central London. Have donated £12k since 2015.

Country House Weddings Ltd. Four wedding venues in the south. Have donated £33k since 2009.

Beds and Bars Ltd. Budget tourist accommodation in the UK and Europe. Donated £5k in 2017.

Cameron Mackintosh. The producer of Les Misérables, The Phantom of the Opera, Mary Poppins, Oliver!, Miss Saigon, Cats and Hamilton donated £15k between 2012-17.

Healthcare

Genix Healthcare Ltd. Network of NHS and private dental clinics. Has donated almost £500k since 2008.

New Cross Nursing Group Ltd. Nursing agency with branches across the country. Has donated £42k since 2014.

Travel

Gatwick Airport Ltd. Donated £18k in 2016.

National Express. The bus and coach company has donated £15k since 2011. They’ve also funded Labour in the past, although not since 2013.

Media

Express Newspapers Ltd. Donated £154k between 2008-17.

Northern and Shell. The company which publishes the Daily Express, Sunday Express, Daily Star, OK!, New!, and also owns Channel 5 and the Health lottery. Donated £10k in 2017. [A takeover by Trinity Mirror is imminent – Trinity Mirror are not Tory donors, as far as we can tell.]

 Posted by at 20:33
Feb 132018
 

If you’re planning a local action around March 1st please let us know.

UC Day of Action local protests

Brighton– March 1st Clock Tower, Brighton, 10.30 am – 1pm information handout.

Facebook Event Link:  https://www.facebook.com/events/327263861014031/

 

Bristol – March 1st at Broadmead Shopping Centre 12 – 2 pm all meeting up in the middle. Please wear black if possible.

Facebook Event Link:  https://www.facebook.com/events/1575085919265099/

 

Ceredigion – March 3rd 11am – 1pm Guildhall, Cardigan, SA43 1JL

https://www.facebook.com/events/1725015990888709/

Chester- March 1st 12-2pm Job Centre Plus, City Road, Chester, CH1 3AQ

Facebook event Link: https://www.facebook.com/events/177236042877566/

Derbyshire –  Online Event: 1-2pm

Facebook Event Link: https://www.facebook.com/events/1570832732972130/

Edinburgh
Thurs 1st March  1pm (till approx 2.30pm)
Leith Jobcentre, 199 Commercial St, Edinburgh EH6 6JF

Edinburgh action called by Edinburgh Coalition Against Poverty – grass-roots anti-austerity and disability rights groups invited to participate with their banners and stalls.

https://www.facebook.com/events/437482893334245/

 

Falmouth – March 1st 8-11am at Penryn Jobcentre, Penmarin House, Commercial Rd, Penryn TR10 8SB

https://www.facebook.com/events/560750934288894/

 

London (central action) –  11 am until 2pm.  House of Parliament, Westminster.

Facebook Event Link: https://www.facebook.com/events/323792051472634/

 

Manchester- March 1st at 13:00–15:00

Norwich – Norwich City Hall 12.30 – 2pm

Facebook Event Link:  https://www.facebook.com/events/217086858848908/

 

Sheffield–  12 noon until 1 pm.  Sheffield City Hall, Bakers Pool, Sheffield, S1 2JA.

Facebook Event Link:  https://www.facebook.com/events/1756747394635182/

 York – March 1st 10am -12pm Monkgate, York

https://www.facebook.com/events/1609285995821063/

More info
https://dpac.uk.net/2018/01/national-day-of-action-to-stopandscrap-universal-credit-march-1st/
https://dpac.uk.net/2018/01/dpac-position-statement-and-motion-for-union-branches-on-universal-credit/

 Posted by at 16:26
Feb 122018
 

Letter-from-the-Chair-to-SoS-for-Department-of-Work-and-Pensions-relating-to-PIP-appeal-data-9-February-2018

Work and Pensions Committee

14 Tothill Street, London SW1H 9NB

Tel 020 7219 5831 Email

workpencom@parliament.uk

Website www.parliament.uk/workpencom

 

From the Chair

 

9 February 2018

 

Rt Hon Esther McVey

Secretary of State

Department for Work and Pensions

 

PIP appeal data

During our inquiry on PIP and ESA assessments, your Department kindly provided to us

estimated unit costs of MRs and Appeals. This indicated that different costs are attached to

PIP appeals depending on whether they relate to new or reassessed claims.

Seeking to understand the financial implications of appeals for the Department, Committee

staff inquired on 30 January:

Of the 170,000 PIP appeals since 2013, how many were for new claims and how

many were reassessments?

We were duly informed:

The information on the number of PIP appeals is from HMCTS published statistics

and this information is not available from HMCTS for new claims and reassessments

We were therefore unable to estimate the full cost of appeals to your Department, although

the Ministry of Justice informed us that in 2016/17 its appeals expenditure was £103 million.

(Cost of Social Security and Child Support appeals, of which the majority relate to PIP/ESA.)

 

It was with some surprise, therefore, that we today received data released in response to an

FOI request. This provided estimated costs per month spent on PIP appeals broken down

by new and reassessed claims.

 

You will be aware that we are shortly due to publish our report. That this data was provided

in response to an FOI request, but not for our Report, is doubly regrettable since the key

theme of our report is the need to introduce much greater trust and transparency into the PIP

and ESA systems.

 

Might you please explain how this occurred?

 

Best wishes,

Rt Hon Frank Field MP

Chair

 

 Posted by at 20:24
Feb 092018
 

From Arts Against Cuts:

To draw your attention to the occupation of Tottenham Chances and its’ community lead campaign.
The Occupation is currently resisting eviction, and needs urgent support both on social media and at the public assembly and eviction resistance this coming Sat . They ask for a public acts of solidarity and that people raise awareness of the campaign and occupation urgently on social media.

The building is currently occupied due to major grievances with the current board of trustees  who have been making deals with property developers,  blocking user groups from the building, have allowed a white nationalist to broadcast from the centre and in support of a long term resident caretaker who has lived at the centre for 12 years and who is facing eviction.

More, detailed information is on this flyer and info pamphlet:
http://save399.org/images/the-problem-with-tchances-oct17.pdf

This is also linked to the development dealings:
https://onlybrighton.co.uk/news/brighton-and-hove-city-council-emergency-accommodation-provider-a?edited=1

https://www.facebook.com/TWSICharity/
is a page purporting to be written by the charitable trust that owns the T. Chances building, the Tottenham War Services Institute. It is being ghost-written by a single trustee, this fascist youtuber named Mark Windows, in league the TWSI chair Penny Potter.

The occupation is asking for support from political groups as the court hearing is tomorrow am and the eviction/bayliffs on Saturday.

There is also a crowd fundraiser where people can donate
: https://www.gofundme.com/t-chances-eviction-resistance

Finally as the occupation has been served eviction notice yesterday: it would be great if people can show support by joining the assembly and eviction.

For further info and co-ordination please see https://m.facebook.com/save399.org

Since posting this as requested by Arts Uncut with whom we’ve worked in the past we’ve been contacted to be told this is libellous and have had the following message sent. We don’t know which version is the truth but anyone interested can follow up themselves.

 I have just been sent a post from your website.
The content is entirely untrue and libelous, it is also inflammatory and incites hatred.
Justin Katko and Lucy Beynon have been working with a small group of subversives to destroy the TWSI Trust.
This includes criminal damage and fraud by impersonation plus libel.
The Trustees have been under attack and the venue is not for sale. The group are funded and have destroyed the community activities within the building even gatecrashing events.
It is clear that they are working for outside interests which are under investigation.
Justin Katko was offered space in the building but has an agenda to takeover the Trust.
Please remove the libelous post and issue an apology.
The matter is being dealt with by the police.
Mark Creathorne
TWSI
 Posted by at 16:15
Feb 072018
 

In solidarity with Women’s Strike DPAC supports the Women’s Strike in London.

Taking place in more than 56 countries on International Women’s Day, the strike, organised by the Women’s Strike Assembly UK will see women walk out of paid work in offices, shops and factories, as well as unpaid domestic work in homes, communities and bedrooms.

Women’s Strike – 8 March 2018
Actions and events will be announced in the coming weeks – stay tuned!

Capitalism has always relied on the free labour of women to provide support for the paid work of men and to nurture families even when women themselves are also working. The children of women then become the next generation suffering Capitalist exploitation. Working women have 2 jobs – one paid- often low paid and one unpaid.

Regardless of this the only work that is valued both economically and socially is work contributing to the market economy, through the production of goods and services. As disabled people we know this from first hand experience as even those of us who aren’t women have been scapegoated as useless eaters by the Tories and their corporate lackies.

Like disabled people women are often devalued, and divided leaving them with little power to fight against their oppressors. When women do join together and fight back however they can achieve amazing things like Greenham Common, Women for Peace  Campaign in Belfast, Sisters Uncut and the amazing Focus E15 Mums.

So DPAC women please support this strike from home or if possible on the street in London or Birmingham. For the first time since 2010 there will be no service available from DPAC on March 8th as we support the strike.

 Posted by at 20:44
Feb 052018
 

Summary

No one will lose what they’ve already been awarded.

No one will have to have a face to face assessment – the 1.6 million claims being reviewed.

Your money if you’re entitled to more following the court case and new rules will be backdated if you would qualify under the new rules.

full details in Hansard link

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-30/debates/F35E85CB-FF67-467E-AD63-1C13EB1EC32B/PIPBackPayments#contribution-63A310F8-D0A8-4D50-9E81-D402E30498AB

 

 Posted by at 21:34
Feb 012018
 

Cara Williams, a PhD student at Lancaster University is conducting research into disabled people’s experience of working for small and medium size organisations (SMEs) , and the SME experience of employing disabled people in their workplace.

She is looking to  recruit twenty disabled people and twenty small and medium size organisations to take part in interviews .

If you are interested, you can read Cara’s blog to know more about this research here https://disabledpeopleworksmes.wordpress.com/ , contact her by email c.williams10@lancaster.ac.uk, or find her on Twitter @Cara_J_Williams 

 Posted by at 18:57
Feb 012018
 
Mike works for the Chronicle, Newcastle, and is looking for someone who has suffered through PIP assessments. he needs a case study from the North East – Tyne and Wear, Northumberland, County Durham – who is prepared to be photographed and named in the story.

If you are willing to help with this please email him mike.kelly@ncjmedia.co.uk or his direct line is 0191 201 6406

 Posted by at 13:15