Cuts To Make A Difference

David Cameron has stated that the red lights were flashing on the dashboard of the global economy, however, George Osborne and David Cameron are biting their own nails as the global economy once again begins to waver, and also the irony of it all.


David Cameron warned that we’re going to front hard times because the Eurozone and Japan are facing a recurrence of the recession, and with the inevitable aftermath to our own economic system.

That’s true, just as it was true when Gordon Brown was Prime Minister, and the banking crisis broke out, and economy after economy endured the consequences in 2008 and 2009.


Back then David Cameron and George Osborne would tell you that this global cataclysm had been induced by additional wards in British hospitals and new school buildings being constructed for British kids, and to them it was all about the deficit, as it is now, all about the deficit.


Nevertheless, the deficit continues to be an emotional loadstone for the Tories, of amalgamating vanity. Because the one thing that David Cameron can invariably be counted on to debate, is that the deficit is an existential threat to our economic system.

The only way to stop the deficit is to drastically cut spending, and they don’t care how they do it, or who they destroy along the way. The manner in how they do that is of no importance to them, and it’s improbable they will ever become free from the deficit at all, the only way they would ever get rid of the deficit is if all the people they owed money to determine that they would waiver what they owed, and give our government a clear slate.

Still, it wouldn’t matter how much of a clean slate our government was given. They would still end up with a shortfall because they are greedy by nature, and have no thought on how to handle our economic system.

George Osborne has not accomplished anywhere near the reductions in the deficit that he claimed were so important, nevertheless, this nation has not fallen into despair, which signifies that the deficit was neither the reason of a global collapse or the answer to our economy’s woes.

Nevertheless, George Osborne has been unable to confess his wrongdoing, however, he still behaves like a  hard man with the bedroom tax, abolishing new school building programs, lashing out on the poor and unemployed, only these measure are political, and not economic, and they don’t make a difference to the deficit, but the cruelness of it does when it comes to taking it out on poor people that now can’t survive, and have to go to food banks to provide for themselves or their families.

Mr Osborne has played a large part in this unmerciful and non effective abolition, scrapping everything he possibly can from people, and he bowls out smart arse comments that definitely the public don’t agree with.

Perverse Westminster VIP Pedophile Party

Detectives are looking into three murders allegedly connected to a network of VIP deviants, because a victim of a Westminster pedophile abuse scandal has claimed he saw a Conservative MP murder a young boy during a perverted sex party.

Investigations agency uncovered the full extent of the scandalous events, and the alarming news report comes days after Scotland Yard corroborated that they have set up a murder investigation linked to the allegations of sexual abuse between the 1970’s and 1980’s.

The informant known as Nick claims the first death was of a boy aged 10 or 11 who was intentionally run down by a car. Another scary allegation is that he was in the same room in the 1980’s when a 12 year old boy was strangled by a Tory MP.

He stated that he watched while it happened, and eighteen months later, he claims a third boy was killed by two mysterious men in front of another MP.

He told of his panic as he and the choking victim were driven to an orgy.

He has been traumatized by what he has seen, and has given a vivid and agonizing report to the police. A second informant has already supported some of the information in this case, adding weight to Nick’s claims and strengthening his credibility.

The Tory’s has unquestionably gone onto prestige themselves, and to give themselves a platform of hand clapping when it comes down to their depraved relationships with adolescents that should have just been teens, and not teenagers for perverted abuse by people in power.

These Tory’s appear to have the power to do as they please, and get away with it for years before anyone comes forward, and has the resilience to do anything about it, and it’s not because of their timidity, or because it is of little or of no importance, it’s because there is so much manipulation going on inside the government, that most of the time these youngsters are too afraid to come forward for fear of what will happen to them.

Just because these people have power over the masses does not mean to say that they should be permitted to handle us like sheep, and to attack us when we least expect it. These are the people that are supposed to provide for us, but instead they undermine everything that we do, including our teenagers who should be doing teen things, not being taken to sleazy locations to be harmed in any way, shape or form.

These Tory MP’s are people in power that should know right from wrong, they are the people that are supposed to pattern our society, we are not here for their recreational pastime, however, instead it appears that they are flaunting us about like beasts, when the focal point should be glistening on those that take their dominance a little bit too far.

Now we should be doubting their credibility on whether they should be allowed to sit in parliament at all. Actually, the whole lot of them should be ousted from parliament, and all MP’s should be interrogated on their credibility.

After all, who are we to have faith in now? Because now, we can’t trust any of them. Their reputation is in shreds, and someone or many of them are going to take the rap for these foul and perverse things that they are doing to teenagers, whose lives have been taken from them, at a time when it was the most significant.

If the Tory’s are in question, then it is only reasonable that they be disbanded until such time that their credibility is intact once again, or if at all.

I know it would take a lot to convince me that any MP is of good character since all this perverseness has come to light. I would prefer that there is no government, than have one that seems to think that it can do what it likes, from whom it likes.

There appears to be some enjoyment inside all the parties concerning their refined parties with their vulgar, vernacular, and polluted perverseness. That appears to have been long-established, and under a great deal of scrutiny.

There is a question mark concerning the Tories, and this should be a big issue. In addition the press is going to go nuts on this one. Not only do we have politicians in the cabinet. But we have sociopaths as well – oh well, now we have the loony tunes, and it’s entirely hideous.

This will be resolved until this crime of power is resolved, and that the people implicated in this are put behind bars, so that everybody is safe. You cannot take advantage of a teenager just because you have dominance over someone less worthy than yourself, or at least you believe that they are.

Instantly there is going to be distrust in our government, and the masses will not stand for such behavior towards another human being, or at least that’s what I’d like to think. Nevertheless, that is not invariably the case.

The government has an obligation to make us feel safe, and we put trust in that faith, but now that trust has been wiped out, or has it?

There are certain people out there, particularly those that are fortunate enough to have an occupation. They truly believe that people who don’t work, or those that are disabled are manipulating the system, and they separate themselves from the less fortunate because they consider that they’re better than people who are out of work, or are disabled.

The aim of doing this is to make people aggress each other when anyone brings up the realness of their situation, then you don’t have to spend nearly as much time controlling them directly, however, now there opposition, and where there was compliance, there is rebellion against the corruptness inside the government.

The dominance they once had, and control that they thought they had has now gone, and that’s a chilling thought because we are now an agitated country. People that are twitchy are inclined to grow in numbers, and the more they increase, the more they escalate and fortify in numbers.

There are groups out there that want to take action, to dish out exceedingly hot venom to the people in power. These people are now bitter because of the codswallop that has been served up to them, and they are organizing choice methods of reprise.

Do they have the potential to pull it off, of course they do, and they will strike when no one anticipates it. As far as these groups are concerned, the government is nothing more than vermin straining to control their farm animals, and finally they will demolish anything that gets in their way.

Fears For Disabled Brits

From March, the discredited fit-for-work test firm Atos will stop doing appraisals on disabled people on behalf of the Coalition.


The Department for Work and Pensions has declared US company Maximus will carry out the controversial Work Capability Assessments.


Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith stated the switch over will mean there will be a fresh approach.

Iain Duncan Smith the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

However, US court files show Maximus has exhausted millions on payouts in the past settling lawsuits, including allegations of fraudulence, unlawful expenses and even disability discrimination.

MPs and disability groups are so concerned they have signed an open letter to Mr Duncan Smith warning of the deep concern over the £500 million contract, and the letter inquires why the government seems to have opted to reprise its errors.

In 2007, Maximus agreed to compensate £20 million to the US federal government to settle criminal charges.

The government said Maximus had assisted the District of Columbia’s Child and Family Services Agency submits fictitious claims to the Medicaid scheme, which supplies health care to primarily elderly and disabled people.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the government by Benjamin Turner, a previous human resources director at Maximus.

Claims are associated with help for ill-treated or neglected children. Maximus did not accept or reject the allegations.

This followed a previous payout of £600,000 to the state of Wisconsin in 2000.

Between 1997 and 2001, Maximus held £65.5 million in contracts at the Department of Workforce Development including the W-2 employment scheme, which gave cash assistance to poor families.

However, it was told to pay back £300,000 after charging the state for wrongful expenses including societal functions and entertainment.

As a display of good faith, it too wrote a cheque for a further £300,000.

Earlier this year, the State of Illinois terminated a £50 million contract with Maximus to help clear a Medicaid backlog for the Department of Healthcare and Family Services.

Maximus had claimed it would redeem the state £221 million by using advanced data-mining computer systems to kick ineligible people off Medicaid.

Finding out the needs of the disabled is a complex operation needing a skilled work force, and when we are finding out the needs of the disabled, it should never be about money, and how much we are going to economise.

Economy should be about how much food we’re putting in our shopping basket or whether we can really afford a motorcar, however, it should never be about human life or human welfare because we can never economise on a human life.

Our beingness is the rind that keeps us together, and because people are disabled should not mean that they should be set apart.

There have been many essays composed about differentiation, and we should not be different at all, but we are in many ways, whether we like it or not, consequently, there are some areas that should not be stepped upon because it makes disabled people really tense.

We should be a well-balance society of human beings that can depend on your government to do the right thing, and admittedly sometimes we have to do the wrong thing to do the right thing, but its when you do the wrong thing over and over again, that’s what makes our government poor fish.

It’s understandable that as human beings we’re not infallible, however, that also implies that as human beings we can also learn from our errors and amend them, which also implies that our government can right their wrongs at anytime they choose, but choose not to because economically human life is profitable.

Our government is a lucrative enterprise, however, they’re so clumsy that they have no thought as to what they need to do with it once they have it. Thusly, they take our money, but they’re not adept enough to circulate it to the right places, that’s how much of it ends up in the pockets of crooked MP’s who have in some way obtained a distinguished place in government.

The dominion of the masses is to keep us in the dark, and to feed us as much shit as is potentially possible, however, they make it so plausible that we really consider it to be true because they have such a hold on us, we would have to prise it off to become really free.

As human cattle we are so taken up with what is going on in everyone else’s lives, that we blank out that everyone is of significance, and as a whole we make a group that is being taken advantage of by the regime of our society (government).

The ruling classes manipulate us because they can, not only because they can, because we permit them to, however, nobody can keep you in line, not unless you want to be controlled, and it’s that clasp of power that they have over us.

I’m not saying that everyone wants to become manipulated, however, there are a flock of people out there that appear to be exuberant over the fact that they are. It’s not the rise and fall of our government that we have to watch out for. It’s the rise and fall of the masses who are willing to comply with whatever the government serves up to us.

We need to be more creative when dealing with the powers that be, because we are individuals with individual needs, and disabled people are worth more than the minimum wage, not less, and as I’ve said that, thinking about it, everybody should be worth more than the minimum wage – There should be no minimum wage at all!

I’m certain that we’re not the lowest minimum wage nation, and I’m sure that being low, it’s still not the lowest, still, it’s irrelevant, because there should be no minimum wage because human beings should not be categorised

If our government wants to take a firm stand on separating us into groups, then we’re of no more of importance than battery hens. In that event, why don’t they all put tags on us and stick us in pigeon holes, and if the masses want to be labeled then thats okay, however, the majority of us don’t, that’s why there are groups out there marching against what is wrongful.

Which now brings me onto another matter that’s been in the papers lately, and after reading this article I was utterly shocked.  Draconian Britain – We don’t live in 2014, we have now gone back to 1814.

During the period between 1812-1822, it could have been said that England suffered more, economically, socially and politically.  Therefore, there were a lot of demonstrations of discontentment and suffering in the form of riots and alienation – Are you getting the picture?

Parliament did not stand for the nation, and bribery and subversion were prevalent.

In 1815, the national debt stood at £834 million.  This was a huge incumbrance on the taxpayers. In 1816, Income Tax was revoked, but this was unjust because the onus had shifted proportionally more heavily onto the poor.

These taxes were used to pay off the interest on the nations debt, effectively going into the pockets of the wealthy (government) who had loaned money, and now had to pay back the shortfall.

The beginnings of what we now know as Jobcentre Plus goes back to the 15th century with the declivity of monasteries and the partitioning of medieval social structures, and charity was gradually superseded with a mandatory land tax levy.

The 1601 Act meant that people who couldn’t work could be cared for in almshouse’s or a poorhouse.  This law provided respite for people who were not in a position to work, chiefly those that were crippled, impotent, elderly and blind.

The able-bodied misfortunate would be shipped out to a house of industry, where materials would be supplied for the poor to be set to work. The idle poor and drifters would be sent to a house of correction or even prison, and pauper children would become apprentices.

Nothing much has been altered since 1601, if you interpreted the machinations of our government and governments before. Everything that they do is there to control us with cause and effect. It’s not a brainteaser. It’s as apparent as the nose on your face, because it’s all about manipulation.

Most manipulation is achieved by way of fear.  Animals cannot be controlled by fear because they are only frightened in the here and now, but as human beings we fear all the time, so we can be controlled. If we do not fear, then we cannot be controlled.

First Bus Invocation

Social separatism was formerly a thing of the yesteryear, however, it appears that lately it’s been on the ascent, and it has to be eliminated.

Almost all disabled people disqualify for virtually all things these days, so long as they can motivate their fingers they can do anything, if the mind still works enough to motivate the fingers, then screw it, they can’t be that disabled at all.

Every disabled person is different. The same as every able bodied person is different. We are not entirely the same, and if we were, then it would be a fairly goddam boring place, nevertheless, the world is not boring, but some of the people who live on this planet are unpleasant, unsympathetic and disgusting.

It becomes a reprehensible act when someone will not permit another human being on a bus, particularly when that person has a disability, and it does not matter what disability they have, its still shameful that in this day and age that this should be permitted to materialise.

Doug Paulley, 36, from Wetherby, was refused entree to a First Bus to Leeds when a woman with a pushchair declined to move. He won his claim the company had broken the Equality Act in a hearing at Leeds County Court in September.


Mr Paulley set about boarding the bus to call on his parents in Leeds in February 2012.

However, he was told to wait for another bus when a woman with a pushchair declined to move because her baby was asleep, when it’s really well-defined that as soon as she moved the pushchair to get off the bus the child would wake up anyway.

Did she not believe that Mr Paulley was disabled, maybe she had the idea that he was having a day trip out with his wheelchair to make people believe he was disabled, and that they might feel sad for him?  In that case should we assume that the lady with the pushchair did not really have a baby in the buggy, and that it was just a figment of our mental imagery so that it would be more easygoing for her to get a seat on the bus.

A judge at Leeds County Court stated First’s policy of requesting but not requiring non-disabled travellers, including those with babies and pushchairs, to vacate the space if it is required by a wheelchair user was in breach of the Equality Act 2010.

Mr Paulley was awarded £5,500 damages.

This calls for legal clarity on what bus drivers are required to do, and it should say in boldface lettering on buses that if a disabled person gets on that bus, that whoever is seated in that space will revoke his/her right to it.  Better still, all buses should have a space on either side of the bus, one for a pushchair, and the other for a wheelchair, that way there is no debate, and the bus driver doesn’t have to use his brains, in which clearly on this occasion the bus driver was evidently really befuddled on who had the right of access, and clearly the pushchair won.

Not Worth The Minimum Wage

Nick Clegg today condemned the profoundly deplorable and sickening comments by Tory welfare minister Lord Freud who hinted disabled people are not worth the minimum wage.


The Deputy Prime Minister repeatedly criticised the peer’s proposition that someone is worth less because of their disability.  David Cameron declined to dismiss Lord Freud over the wrangle, but Labour addressed the Prime Minister to release all government files on cutting the minimum salary for disabled people.

In a statement Lord Freud issued a broad and unreserved apology for his remarks, recorded at the Tory party conference, and tried to assert all disabled people should be paid at least the minimum wage without exclusion.


It seems that the government is not here any longer to care for the people of this nation. They are just here to yield from us at any given time, and chance that they can.

To undermine us, and eat away at our mortality.  They can call upon us, sanction us, and persist in being a real pain in the arse, as well as delivering misery.

They have a weird knack of holding us creditworthy for what is going on in this country, but we constantly take the blow, because they have absolutely no consideration for us at all.

The government centres all their attention on stamping on us. While they destroy our self respect with their political reforms, and their unfavourable judgement of us are so hidden at times that some people sink their heads in the sand and pretend it’s not happening.

What was so vile were the comments when Lord Freud ill-used his phrase ‘worth’ and he stated some people with disabilities weren’t worth the minimum wage.

That is precisely what, quite rightly, touched a raw nerve because it’s making a remark about someone’s individual value, and that is simply offensive.

It’s stomach churning to imagine that just one human being can paint such a characterisation about people that are so vulnerable, and that this low life can actually get away with it, and that there are people out there that are really eager to keep him in a position of such power.

The innate liberty of men and women, is to be gratuitous from any higher-ranking force on earth, and not to be under the bequeath or legislative sanction of any man, woman or groups therefrom, but only to have the jurisprudence of honest human nature, enshrined in our civilisation and of good moral sense for his own dominion.

Among the innate rights of the people are,

Foremost, the right to life, including that of their family.

Secondly, to liberty, including all rudimentary freedom, laying aside, deprivation, harm or injury.

Thirdly, to belongings, including that of the individual and labours.

This, together with the right to support and guard them in the best way that they can. These are discernible branches of, instead of subtractions from, the obligation of self-preservation, usually termed the first law of nature.

All humans are entitled to stay in a state of nature as long as they please, and in case of unbearable subjugation, authoritarianism or dictatorship, to eliminate the society they belong to, and make or go into another.

When people are located in a society, it can only be by voluntary consent, a consent that is not fabricated, produced before their birth, coerced, nor tethered into an opinion done by teaching or indoctrination.

Men and women have a right to ask and take a definite stand upon the rectification of their society, its conditions and limitations as formed by an original compact.

Every natural right not expressly given up by a person in his own head, or, from the nature of a societal compact consorted essential and only of superlative importance is ceded, stays theirs.

All legal philosophies of assorted forms of government must adapt, to the law of natural reason and fairness.

The natural autonomy of man, by entry into society, is abridged or limited only so far as is utterly necessary, by understanding, the best good of the whole and not that of the few.

In the province of nature, every human being is, under any creator he selects, judge and sole judge of his own rights and of the traumas done to him. By entering into society, nonetheless, it is interpreted he or she must agree to an arbitrator or unbiased judge of equal standing between him and his neighbours, only he no more disowns his original right than by taking a cause out of the average course of law, and bequeathing the conclusion to referees or indifferent arbitrators only when there occurs a loss, harm or encumbrance of any others right.

Governments have no right to try to take what they delight in. Nor authorise others to do so.  By this, rather than being content with the post allotted to them, that of honourable handmaids of the society, they before long turn into sheer masters, tyrants, and autocrats.

Authoritarianism by our oppressors, or government, makes us slaves, and gives our government delusions of grandeur, along with their narcissistic tendencies, and all for one thing, profit and gain. To obtain the power to groove out society, and to make us into what they want, and the really distressing thing about it, is that most of us don’t even see they’re doing it, and have been for a really long time.

We are moulded into a frame of the matrix in a pretence to seem like it’s about profiting the masses. While the government eats away at our souls, and slenderise our self-esteem. They’re not here to better us, they’re here to sacrifice us, like lambs to the slaughter, and as a community, we allow them to get away with it.

In addition to that we’re coached from a really early age, particularly in schools where the ruse is to shape us, and it’s been such a good strategy on the government’s part. Only now, the government have seen that education was a really bad thing in the scheme of things, and now they’re dumbing our children down, making them dumber in learning skills because education has taught us far too much, and that’s just not acceptable.

At present we’re really defenceless against our oppressors, and open to all kinds of hostility by the hoi polloi that were supposed to be looking out for us. This has become a really competitive game because we’re being marched about like cattle. Only we’re the cattle that’s right at the bottom of the keg.

The only thing the elite appear to have disregarded is that some of those cattle, possibly not all of them, but the bulk of them will ferment in the butt of that keg, and they will come out larger and more adept than before, and they’ll chevy such turmoil that the rest of the people will not follow, but will realise that they’re being taken advantage of, and finally, even those that still think they’re not being victimised, will realise that they’re are.

Whatever the government hurls at us, we must continue to be tenacious in our battle against austerity, and we must differentiate between good and evil, and those people that opposes us because they know no better.

Once someone is pronounced to have made a remark, whatever that remark may be, you can’t possibly shrink back from that comment because it’s already been said, it’s out there, in full, and you can’t save yourself from saying that disabled people are not worth the minimum wage.  It would be like me articulating that Lord Freud is not worthy of being in parliament because he is a ceremonious arse.  There, now it’s out in the open, I’ve said it, I can’t recant it with an apology, nor would I want to at any given time, and nor did he want to apologise, he was just made to apologise because it looked bad for all concerned, specially as we’re now fast approaching a general election.

What’s In Our water?

Anti-depressant tablets that Britons are taking in ever larger numbers are beginning to have an effect on the country’s water supply. And the results can be observed in the birds at the bottom of your garden.

Birds consuming antidepressants from water have lost interest in food and sex, scientists established after studying starlings. What else is in our water? And if that’s what it’s doing to birds, what is it doing to you?

How do drugs get into the water? When people take pills like antidepressants, not all of the medication is absorbed, meaning that tiny quantities progress into our urine which then passes into the water system. Even after it’s been treated and is safe to consume, it still consists of traces of the medication. The numbers of antidepressants taken by Britons have ascended sharply in the last 20 years.

Since birds drink out of rivers they can be affected by the drugs too.

Here’s what it does to the birds. One recently developed study of starlings near waste plants showed that even low levels of antidepressants drastically affected their behaviour. They looked at levels of the antidepressant fluoxetine which is the master component of Prozac amidst other medication.

Researchers gave food to starlings, worms and water that had been processed with fluoxetine, a dose of 0.92 micrograms per day. That’s the level scientists calculated roughly that birds were exposed to in the wild. They then documented the starlings’ behaviour.

They established that the birds that were on antidepressants didn’t eat as much, lost weight, and as well lost interest in prospective mates.

This is significant as, through the wintertime, the birds need to eat enough to be in a position to remain alive. If they’re consuming antidepressants in the ecosystem, they are less able to survive.

And here’s what it does to humans. In humans, the dose is a lot less elevated, however, the side effects of this specific drug can be identical – reduced sex drive, plus fatigue and possible sickness.

You’d need to consume loads to be affected by anti-depressants in the water, and there’s not a lot of data about levels of antidepressants in British waters. Nevertheless, American research concluded that there could be as much as 0.32-0.54 micrograms per litre in the water.

This is a high estimate from the United States, however, if this were the occurrence in British water, you’d still need to drink 37,000 – 62,500 litres of water at this concentration to get a dose of fluoxetine as normally prescribed.

And that’s not all that’s going around in the tap water

Here’s what else can find in our water:

Oestrogen – from contraceptive pills


Blood pressure tablets

Ibuprofen and other painkillers

Even if the levels are tiny now, the result of so many different drugs interacting with each other is not well-known and is a huge foundation for concern once they reach more powerful levels. The number of antidepressants taken in the United Kingdom is only going up.

Iain Duncan Smith Deceives Twice

Work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith has been caught telling great big dirty lies twice in a T.V discussion about the knock on effect of his apparent improvements for disabled people. Even managing to challenge his own notable mentor.

Iain Duncan Smith

Iain Duncan Smith has been the centre of vexation for disabled protesters since he took over the post in 2010, however, his recent television discussion this week, with Channel 4 News, saw him lie twice about the effects of his alterations on disabled people in an interview that lasted under five minutes.

He lied initially about how lavish Britain was in disability payouts, and then fibbed about Conservative proposals for a benefits freeze following the election. Iain Duncan Smith asserted that those disabled people in the support group of the out of work disability benefit employment and support allowance (ESA), that those with the most elevated support requirements would be not subjected from the benefits freeze.

Nevertheless, his own special adviser, informed the Disability News Service (DNS) just three weeks ago that this group would not be excused from the benefits freeze, a position that was finally confirmed by Chancellor George Osborne’s own special consultant.

They confirmed to the Disability News Service that the core ESA component would be frozen, so affecting all those in the support group, and that it was just the support group top up that would be exempted from the freeze.

Iain Duncan Smith was questioned how disabled people should feel about the disputable remarks of his welfare reform minister Lord Freud, who professed at a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham that some disabled people were not valuable enough to receive the minimum wage.


Iain Duncan Smith responded that the UK government in all probability dish out more than nearly any other nation in the developed world, and that we squander almost two fold what Germany fritters away.

This repeated assertion made by both Lord Freud and their conservative ministerial colleague Esther McVey, who had used figures from the OECD (the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) to put forward that the government was a world leader in disability spending.


They said last year that the UK used up nearly double the OECD norm on disabled people, paying out 2.4 percent against the OECD average of 1.3 percent in 2009.

Nonetheless, they were only capable of making that assertion by reciting the OECD’s disability statistics, and disregarding those for sickness, which incorporates expenditure on ESA and incapacity benefit.

If a differentiation is established between the United Kingdom and all of its immediate OECD neighbours, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland and Ireland, the UK’s spending is lower than average.

Where the United Kingdom used up 2.9 per cent of GDP on disability and sickness in 2009, its nine OECD neighbours consumed an average of 3.2 per cent. Also, the UK’s spending is only a little bit more preeminent than Germany’s, which is 2.6 per cent of GDP, a long way from being almost double.

Iain Duncan Smith declined to remark when called upon to reply to claims that he had lied about both matters in the Channel 4 discussion.