Disabled try to storm parliament.

[sgtkate]

Well it does beg the question don't you think?

 

Did you not think that maybe the ones storming parliament do work but are defending those less fortunate than themselves?

 

Many employers actively seek to avoid employing people with disabilities because they believe disabled people won't be as good at the job. Of course it's illegal to state that but the reasons given will be like 'you weren't the best candidate' as opposed to 'the wheelchair mate'.

 

And a lot of the money that is being cut is nothing to do with working anyway. It's extra money to people deemed as needing more support. Say someone who is paralyzed so can't get out of bed on their own so needs a carer to assist them etc.

[alchemist]

A number of disabled people, many of them in wheelchairs, have tried to storm the parliamentary chamber during prime minister's question time. They very nearly made it, but were stopped just in time. They are demonstrating against plans to cut disabled benefits.

 

Now what sort of government tries to take money off the poorest and most vulnerable in society?

 

A tory one that was undemocratically voted in. Next?

[Anna B]

They're fit enough to storm parliament but too disabled to work a non physical job.

 

A comment that basically just shows your own ignorance.

 

You obviously have no understanding of the problems facing disabled people, but then that's a typically heartless Tory response.

[alchemist]

From the BBC website

 

Prime Minister's Questions carried on inside the chamber, and Commons officials told broadcasters not to film the protest, which continued outside in Westminster's central lobby.

 

So, state sponsored censoring. Why are they afaid of the truth?

 

---------- Post added 24-06-2015 at 15:30 ----------

 

A comment that basically just shows your own ignorance.

 

You obviously have no understanding of the problems facing disabled people, but then that's a typically heartless Tory response.

 

I desagree Anna, a typical tory response would be "let them eat cake"

[Berberis]

A tory one that was undemocratically voted in. Next?

 

No, you mean one that was voted in by a system you supported until it gave you a result you didn't like. Now you want to move the goal posts.

 

Get over it. The Torys won. Whining is never going to change that fact.

[Happ Hazzard]

They are just bad losers. People are sick of others swinging the lead while they work. Nobody should be better rewarded for being disabled than others are for working a full time job. There should be benefits for those that absolutely need there but they should be reasonable and they should come with strict responsibilites for those that claim them.

[GLASGOWOODS]

They're fit enough to storm parliament but too disabled to work a non physical job.

 

It's getting companies to employ the disabled that's the problem.

[Happ Hazzard]

Probably because of the amount of legal requirements that employing disabled people entails.

[loraward]

It's getting companies to employ the disabled that's the problem.

 

Especially when there are 100's of thousands of hard working, well educated, young able bodied immigrants arriving each year willing to work long hours of low pay.

[Obelix]

A tory one that was undemocratically voted in. Next?

 

Still sore about losing the election? You know there was never these complaints from the right when Labour won....

 

You lost. Move on. You get another go in just under five years.

 

---------- Post added 24-06-2015 at 17:12 ----------

 

Probably because of the amount of legal requirements that employing disabled people entails.

 

Er really?

 

I've got one guy here in a wheelchair. All I had to do was provide him with a safe refuge and a radio in case of a fire.

 

Thats it.

 

I appreciate it may be tricker in more dangerous places than an office, and you could get the "vocal" complaining people like you could the able bodied, but I've never found it a problem. Which begs the question of course as to why others seem to find it a problem.