Letters to the Canary: Universal Credit, white supremacy, pensions, and blacklisting

The Canary is excited to share the latest edition of our letters page. This is where we publish people’s responses to the news, politics, or anything else they want to get off their chest. We’ve now opened the letters page up so anyone can submit a contribution. As always, if you’d like to subscribe to the Canary – starting from just £1 a month – to support truly radical and independent media, then you can do that here:

Subscribe here

This week’s letters

This week we have people’s thoughts on a Canary article on white supremacy, a look at France’s pension reforms versus the UK’s, covert blacklisting, and one reader wonders if the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is scamming benefits claimants more than we realise. 

Responses to a Canary Lowdown on white supremacy

I’d just like to comment that ‘white supremacy’ is not just ‘protected’ – it is actively created and promoted.

The powerful actively promote this vicious nonsense to divide and rule us.

Remember the Jim Crow laws in the US?

Remember this Bob Dylan song from over 50 years ago?

John Wood, via email

French people: doing what British people won’t?

The French are protesting pension age rise from 62 to 64.

Unite the Union is protesting pension age rise to 68 in UK.

So where was Unite when Labour rose the pension age to 68 with the 2007 Pension Act, to people aged from 1980?

The government have said they will re-consider increasing pension age from 67 to 68 to 1970s born, within two-years of winning next general election (2024 or 2025), but they will be using a Labour law to do that.

1970s born are already still threatened with increase of early works pension age from 55 to 57, by amending Labour’s 2004 Finance Act that rose early works pension age from 50 to 55, brought into law by the Lib Dems Pension Minister in 2010.

Lib Dems Pension Minister rose 1960s born women’s pension age using the Tory 1995 Pension Act, Labour’s 2007 Pension Act, and the Lib Dems 2014 Pension Act. 1960s ladies began turning 60 from 2020. 1950s ladies got a pension age of 66 from Labour’s 2007 Pension Act, with more brought into that pension age by the Lib Dems 2011 Pension Act.

After 2015, the BackTo60 group gathered a near one million-signature petition to parliament for women’s pension age to revert to 60, but this was ignored by Tory government – and right-wing Labour ignored putting that into Jeremy Corbyn’s two general election manifestos, which anyway had no significant pension/money policies, nor pensioner policies.

Unelected left parties, even recently registered ones, say they could bring back person age 60, but they don’t know how, nor will they listen to women, the victims, on how that would be fully funded.

Christine Williams, Admin – Grey Swans www.over50sparty.org.uk, via email

Covert blacklisting?

Dear the Canary and Tom Coburg,

I was angry and shocked to read that trade unionist Mick Lynch was blacklisted by a private organisation operating for the private construction industry.

But it seems it is now the government (with taxpayers money) that is blacklisting each and every single person who dares to sue their employer via an Employment Tribunal.

Indeed, the Ministry of justice has created an online search tool allowing anyone to Google and look up the surname/name of an Employment Tribunal claimant by type of claim (example: disability claim, unpaid wages, unfair dismissal etc.)

See for yourselves: https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions

Even more sickening is the fact that tribunal decisions include the name of employees who made disability discrimination claims. This means, that while this information is confidential and private under law, the government has decided to put this sort of private and sensitive information in the public domain. Everyone can see that Mrs Smith who was employed for company XYZ plc between 2017 and 2021 suffered from cancer or lived with mental health issues. All their details are therefore available to HR departments of prospective employers, at the time the worker is applying for a job or about to be interviewed.

This sort of travesty of the open justice principle has to end.

Obviously, an isolated worker does not have the means to challenge the government. But trade unions and the few independent media we have left in this country must cover this story, and bring this policy of stigmatising workers who made tribunal claims to the public’s attention – and ended.

This is nothing short of the blacklisting of workers in general, and disabled jobseekers or jobseekers with past disabilities in particular.

In democratic countries, the names of parties in a tribunal dispute are always anonymised in court decisions.

Cathy, via email

Universal Credit increase: another DWP scam?

Hello,

I’m just wondering if the Canary are aware of the way the DWP and government have made false claims about sick and disabled people, and indeed all recipients of Universal Credit, receiving an in line with inflation benefits increase from April.

Surprise surprise, this is not actually the case. As you are probably aware, Universal Credit entitlement is assessed from the date your claim started until the day after this day the next month. In reality, most people won’t see any increase until May, however, because the DWP made the increase start date the 10 of April, anybody who’s pay date is before the 10 of the month will not actually see any payment increase until June! This is the case for me, my assessment period is from the 2 of the month until the 1 the next month, and my payment date is the 8.

I can only imagine that the number of people affected by this runs into the hundreds of thousands – which will amount to a very large sum the government has been saved by the DWP. The PM has stood at that box and claimed all sick and disabled people receiving Universal Credit will get an increase in payment from April. This is an outright blatant lie, and complete travesty.

Anonymous, via email

Want to get involved? Email membership(at)thecanary.co and we’ll publish your letters, too! Terms and conditions of publication apply.