Edwina Currie is part of the UK’s debt problem

For lovemoney.com

She had it all figured out. Instantly.

Former Tory MP Edwina Currie’s first question to Hayley Sanderson, a struggling young mother who had phoned 5 Live to discuss her financial problems was somewhat off-kilter: “Have you by any chance got any animals, a dog or anything?” Her second question was equally pointless: “you feed the dog every day?” What answer did she expect? “No Ms Currie, Rover has his own diner’s club card.”

From here, one almost expected the former minister to prescribe flogging the family pooch. Or eating it.

Yes, Edwina – seemingly riding high on an attitudinal wave of daytime TV detective dramas – clearly thought this was an open and shut case. The verdict: the mother – who works two jobs, has a partner who had recently lost his job and claims to regularly miss meals so her children could eat – had been living ‘the good life’ without any thought of the future.

At this point, Miss Sanderson broke down into tears.

But beyond the vitriol of the former MP’s bulldog attack lurks a more sinister view towards UK poverty. An attitude that, far from the ‘cruel to be kind’ approach many may ascribe to it, is in fact a major barrier that prevents people every day from dealing with their debt problems.

Does poverty exist?

Edwina Currie is no stranger to controversy where poverty is concerned. Back in October 2011 she claimed that no one in Britain was really going without food. She did concede that some “real people” were starving in the world, but they were not in the United Kingdom.

This assertion swiftly feeds into the (self-defined) ‘Africa argument’: whereby groups of usually well-heeled individuals claim that those moaning about poverty in the UK don’t know what they are talking about, as everyone in Africa is far worse off. (This is often accompanied by visual proof courtesy of their son or daughter’s gap year.)

But a swift look at just three recent studies turns this argument on its head and into a straw man.

Firstly, the netmums study that was the subject of the 5 Live discussion. Its main findings include that 70% of families are currently ‘on the edge’ of surviving and that one in five mums were missing meals to feed their children.

Secondly, October’s research by the widely respect Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) stating that in 2010 2.1 million working-age parents were living in absolute poverty. The think tank also forecast that by 2013 3.1 million children would be in poverty across the UK – an increase of 600,000 in just three years.

And finally, a report issued by the charity Shelter in the very same week as the IFS data stating that 38% of families with children who rent privately have cut back on buying food to help pay rent.

The situation in Africa may be terrible and worthy of our attention. But it doesn’t have anything to do with these home-grown problems.

However Currie was right about one thing. Although, perhaps for the wrong reasons.

Credit boom

Turning back to the 5 Live debate, the former minister seemed to think that Miss Sanderson had splurged on credit in the boom years and was now paying the price. In fact, as the mother attempted to explain, the ‘bills’ she was currently paying off were for energy and council tax from the period when her partner was unemployed. Hardly luxuries.

Yet one fact not mentioned on 5 Live does support Currie’s wider point. According to the Daily Mail, Miss Sanderson and her partner have a mortgage on a two-bedroom terrace home costing £450 per month that they are in arrears on.

Now, my word limit is looking a little cosy for a full ding-dong over who to blame for the lax lending of the housing bubble (although I’m sure you’ll oblige in the comment box below). But outside of this argument, Miss Sanderson’s property arrangements are indicative of a post-credit boom population suffering the growing pains of living within their means.

Millions who were wrongly granted credit in the early noughties are suffering. The toxic practice of rate jacking, whereby a lender hikes the interest rates for customers with dodgy credit histories, is the perfect example of this catch-22 situation. The poor get poorer while Edwina Currie sneers away because they have a dog and once took out a credit card.

Prove that you’re poor!

Observer columnist Barbara Ellen hit the nail on the head on Sunday when she placed Edwina Currie’s comments within a wider culture that requires poverty not only to be provable, but also highly visible in a ‘theatrical way’. Exorbitant energy bills and rising food prices are not good enough anymore. Again: how can you be poor if you have a dog?

This wouldn’t be a problem if the culture was restricted to doddery gentleman’s clubs, decrepit public houses and the set of Top Gear. But it has now gained such traction in public life that those it speaks of: the poor, have fallen victim to it. Those that need the help, aren’t asking for it – trapped in an illusion that their situation isn’t that bad.

A survey carried out last year by the New Policy Institute (NPI) found that millions were missing out on help with energy bills because they didn’t think benefits were for ‘people like me’. The problem is now so severe that British Gas has even begun paying people to hand over the names of struggling households who are in need of help with insulation.

The NPI report also found that 31% of under-70s said they were too embarrassed to claim benefits. Embarrassment breeds a head-in-the-sand culture when it comes to debt. Instead of turning to charities like the CCCS, National Debtline or Citizen Advice and sorting their finances once and for all, people bite their tongue and poor another dinners worth of cornflakes, thinking themselves lucky that they have that.

Hayley Sanderson fits slap bang in the middle of this: receiving no benefits and no idea of any debt helpline numbers.

People shouldn’t be starving in the UK – we have a welfare state and charity sector most other countries can only dream of. And yet they still are.

The requirement of people like Edwina Currie that a certain level of self-flagellation is reached before you’re granted the status of poor is to blame for this.

Selling the dog is no way out of poverty.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Racist or not, Diane Abbott is still wrong

The race row that never was, swiftly followed by the apology that never was. Yes, Twitter’s five-minutes hate today was directed at Diane Abbott for her ill-judged tweet: “white people love playing “divide and rule” We should not play their game #tacticsasoldascolonialism.

The Labour MP initially defended her comment stating that her tweet was taken out of context and referred to “the nature of 19th century European colonialism. Bit much to get into 140 characters” (to which the question begs: ‘Why try then?’ Swiftly followed by the answer: because I’m Diane Abbott).

However after a ‘stern dressing down’ from Ed Miliband (as one tweeter put it: about as scary as a stern dressing gown from the Labour leader) Abbott backed into the wet, shallow ground occupied by many a red-faced politician, as she resorted to the weasly line: ‘I apologise if any offence was caused’.

Personally, I would have been happier for the condemned to take to Sky News and recite David Cameron’s one sentence commandment for all forms of social media: “too many tweets makes a twat”, swiftly followed by a bow and an immediate return to her day job of flicking globules of paper at Michael Portillo.

Yes, today’s furore was another dog-with-a-bone moment for the Twitterati, most of whom probably missed the juicy argument lurking right beside them.

Diane Abbot made her tweet while sat firmly on the wrong side of an argument with freelance journalist Bim Adewunmi about the use of term ‘black community’. Writing in the Guardian after the debacle Adewunmi sets out her assertion.

a) Something deemed to be a “black issue” is on the news agenda; b) Without fail, “community leaders” and the now standard “ex-gang member” are wheeled out to be interviewed…I hardly ever recognise any of the so-called “community leaders” on these programmes – I doubt many ordinary black people, i.e. those they purport to represent, ever do.”

By not viewing ‘the black community’ as one homogeneous population Diane Abbot somehow concluded that Adewunmi was “playing into a divide and rule agenda”; a risible and idiotic suggestion if ever there was one.

Even without the ugly colonialist echoes, it’s not hard to find fault with the entire premise of Abbott’s argument. Ethnic communities yes, local communities yes, national communities yes; you can even have music communities – but monolithic communities ordered solely by colour of skin? I think, nay hope not.

Abbott’s argument hinges on a binary, separatist mentality between colours. The events of this week have proved our society is fighting hard to move away from this ugly order.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The truth behind Quakle’s collapse

An investigative piece looking at the reasons behind the collapse of the social lender and what lessons other P2P lending sites can take from this demise.

The truth behind Quakle’s collapse

The role of troubled payday loan borrowers is particularly interesting.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Facebook, fashion and feminism

‘I learned more about Emily Maitlis’ wardrobe than Facebook’ was one criticism of BBC2′s recent documentary charting the rise of the social networking giant. Yes, according to the Daily Mail outraged viewers took to online forums and social networking sites “in droves” to express bewilderment at Miss Maitlis’ numerous costume changes throughout the program.

Attacks were levelled at the frequent connecting shots of the presenter strolling around California, apparently ‘showcasing her designer wardrobe’. Posters criticised Miss Maitlis’ ‘swaggering style’ and her ‘fawning’ manner with Zuckerberg. According to the Mail, one person said that they thought the documentary “was more about Emily Maitlis wandering about looking hot and occasionally stopping to chat to folk”.

Now, I watched that program. And while Maitis’ costume changes were somewhat noticeable (especially that rather odd jumper) they were far superseded by the in-depth, interesting interviews and snapshots from inside the Facebook machine. This was thorough, interrogative journalism at its best. Anyone who watched the site’s PR man sit in stoney silence at the suggestion that users who ‘liked’ certain products on Facebook did not want to advertise it should realise that.

As for the Mail’s suggestion that several viewers were somewhat distracted by the shots of Maitlis “striding the sunny streets of California”. Well – at the risk of sounding like an utter snob – if that’s what it takes for your attention to be diverted from a documentary you have actively chosen to watch, you probably shouldn’t be watching it. After all, if you were really looking to fill your Sunday night with jean-clad arse waggling and ridiculous costumes, Beyonce was over on ITV  excelling on both fronts.

No, this storm in a tea cup comes from the same cloud as the #womenontheleft saga that kicked off at the Leveson Inquiry, Fiona Bruce’s Da Vinci doco controversy and the entire tabloid turd that was the press coverage of the Amanda Knox case. Yes, it seems that across media law, documentary journalism, and Italian murder cases – female physical attractiveness is just too out-of-place for many to comprehend (although I’ve never really got the attraction of ‘Foxy Knoxy’ myself’).

This is a logic akin to Harry Enfield’s Mr Chumley Warner sketch: “the lady has foolishly attempted to join the conversation with a wild and dangerous opinion of her own. Women know your limits” the narrator snuffs after a comment about the gold standard from a female member of the party.

This shallow, Nuts magazine-esque reaction that says attractive woman cannot ‘do serious stuff’ on TV is an utterly repulsive attitude to hold in modern society. Especially in a country where Noel Edmonds, Adrian Chiles and James May’s shirt collection all appear on-screen every week completely unchallenged.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Fuel duty rise scrapped

So it’s success for Peter Carroll and the FairFuelUK campaign as the planned rise in fuel duty was axed in the Autumn statement. One of the few pieces of good news lurking in the ‘mini-budget’.

Here are a couple of videos reports I put together featuring FairfuelUK’s Peter Carroll:

Cost of motoring soars to £130 a week

Robert Powell finds out what is driving up the cost of owning and running a car…

Petrol prices fall at supermarkets

Robert Powell reports on the recent supermarket petrol price war and finds out if these dips in costs could be the start of a general fall in fuel prices…

And an article on why petrol prices keep rising despite falling fuel costs.

I will be covering this topic in more detail next week when I look at three reasons why petrol prices will keep increasing, despite the tax cut.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Cost of motoring soars to £130 a week

My latest video for lovemoney.com on the soaring cost of motoring.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Guardian’s Nick Davies on phone hacking

Here’s an interview I conducted with Nick Davies: the Guardian’s lead investigator into News of the World phone hacking. The interview was shot in February 2010, before the key phone hacking revelations that led to the closure of the NOTW emerged. As you’ll see, even back then, Davies knew the importance and scope of the story he was onto.

This video will also be logged in the other video section of this site.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Julian Assange and Occupy LSX audio

I’ve uploaded audio from OnFM’s breakfast show on Thursday 3rd November. There’s a live discussion of the Occupy LSX camp – including an interview with a protestor. As well as a recording of Georgina and I debating the changing public image of Julian Assange (including audio of Julian speaking at a rally in October).

Here are full links:

Occupy LSX St Paul’s anti-capitalist protest camp

Here is an interview (4’20″) with a protestor at the Finsbury Square camp focussed on what would happen if the police attempted to evict the camp, allegations of empty tents overnight and what the camps aims actually are.

Finsbury Square protestor interview.

Here is a live recording (2’03″) of Georgina and I discussing the public perception of the camp on OnFM on Thursday 3rd November.

The public perception of the camps – discussion.

Julian Assange

A live chat (2’28″) between Georgina and I on the public image of Julian Assange in light of his recent extradition hearing. This recording includes a clip of Julian Assange recorded at a recent Stop the War rally.

Julian Assange – live discussion.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

VAT hits the poor hardest

This week’s video for lovemoney.com is on the latest report from the Office for National Statistics showing that the poorest 20% spend more on VAT than the richest 20%. The report also looks at Bank of England lending data showing that both unsecured borrowing and personal debt is peaking.

I speak to James Browne from The Institiute for Fiscal Studies and ask why VAT is now hitting the poor hardest and get some tips on dealing with debt from CCCS‘s Matt Hartley.

This video will also be logged in the lovemoney.com video section of this site.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Second home tax-hike could inflate MP expenses

Oh, and one final thought:

In my article on proposed changes to council tax I noted that despite councils being forced to offer up to a 50% tax discount to second home owners, most only go for the minimum exemption of 10%. However one group of people who almost always get the full 50% exemption are those who buy second homes in order to be near their place of work.

One profession common to this group of second home owners: MPs. Not that they need worry, as council tax on second homes can be claimed back as an expense on the tax-payer anyway.

But if all council tax discounts for second homes are axed – including those for workplace homes – council tax for MP’s second homes will rise and in turn the tax-payer funded tab for expenses will inflate.

Are there any MPs still so red-faced from the expenses scandal that they will bring this up?

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized