Even a Christian religious leader has to denounce UK Nasty Party agenda for more poverty-creation!

0910 [0845] Hrs GMT London Tuesday 24 January 2012
By © Muhammad Haque

Even a Christian religious leader has to denounce UK Nasty Party agenda for more poverty-creation!

This extraordinary Collusion between the Nasty party and the Sick-Clegg party [note the small p here] is even more significant for the bankruptcy of the Official Opposition in the UK House of Commons over the state of Society in Britain today.
Monday’s routine promotion on the floor of the House of Commons of the Nasty party agenda against the already economically and socially disenfranchised as fronted jointly by the formerly disguised [“Quiet Man”] military man Iain Duncan Smith and the City Big Biz-funding linked “moral high ground claimant” and fanatical Nasty agenda-peddler Chris Grayling was only possible because there was no “Opposition”.
When the token Opposition “leader” on the Department for Want and Poverty-creation [=DWP] stood up, he exhibited more symptoms of his immorality and unfitness for purpose than had been evident in the callous note he had left in the UK Treasury boasting that there was “NO money left”!
Not a surprise then that Iain Duncan Smith came across as “morally” loud in comparison with the mechanical, morality-free ritual “critic” Liam Byrne!
When Byrne made an apparent attempt to put a “follow up” “challenge” to Iain Duncan Smith, the al most rehabilitated Far Right agitator and openly anti-democratic John Bercow of the “Federation of Conservative Students” [of the 1980s] was able to act as if he was indeed a legitimate almost “reasonable” chair of a\ DEMOCVARIOC Assembly. Bercow refused to let Byrne come back. Thus showing that he was as much active in letting the Nasty agenda peddlers have their say than in having even a pretend opponent make a comprehensive “retort” to the utterances…
Those who have been giving too much credit to Sally Bercow ought to examine the actual role that Bercow the “Labour Party poodle” has been playing in guiding the “debates” increasingly away from a semblance of democratic opposition to the resurgent reactionary House of Commons that has been visible since May 2010.
There was no evidence in the contents that Bercow allowed to be put in from the “Opposition” that the facts of the Poverty-Creating, Cruelty-increasing “Welfare Reform Bill” entails.

Outside of the Houses of Parliament and in the studio used by the BBC’s “Daily Politics” slot fronted by Jo Coburn on the day, Patricia Hollins, now being decorated as "Baroness" was physically earnestly displaying HER OWN BANKRUPT record as a Nasty agenda-prompter when in Tony Blair’s cabal.
Patrician came across just as empty of content as Liam Byrne

It is against the background of such dire lack of substance that the public and Society - now held hostage by a Nasty gang pretending to be a democratically formed Parliamentary alliance – is having to look to an otherwise minority group like the Bishops in the UK House of Peers for some sort of moral leadership against the Nasties who have taken over the UK State and are bent on unleashing a riot of violence against all the basic tents and values on which the Society has been reliant so far… [To be continued]

from the web site of the YORKSHIRE POST newspaper:

Bishop rebuffs Duncan Smith’s ‘diatribe’ in row on benefit cap

Bishop John Packer

Published on Monday 23 January 2012 08:37

ONE of Yorkshire’s leading religious figures has hit back following a cabinet Minister’s outspoken attack on the bishops who are fighting to reform the coalition’s proposed welfare cuts.

The Rt Rev John Packer, Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, said yesterday he was “surprised” by the “aggressive” stance of Welfare Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, after the Minister suggested bishops should show greater concern for working people rather than fighting for the benefits of unemployed families.

Bishop Packer will today put forward a motion in the House of Lords – where he sits alongside 25 fellow Church of England bishops – to amend Mr Duncan Smith’s proposed £26,000 cap on the total amount any household can receive in payouts.

The bishop wants child benefit to be exempt, so that children in large families do not suffer disproportionately.

Yesterday leading religious figures signed a letter backing his stance, and the Government now faces a real battle when the Lords vote is taken today, with Ministers fearing a combination of Church of England bishops and rebel Lib Dems could undermine the planned £500-a-week cap on benefit payments.

Mr Duncan Smith urged the bishops to rethink their objections, insisting they were not doing the poor any favours. “The question I’d ask these bishops is, over all these years, why have they sat back and watched people being placed in houses they cannot afford? It’s not a kindness,” he said.

“I would like to see their concerns about ordinary people, who are working hard, paying their tax and commuting long hours, who don’t have as much money as they would otherwise because they’re paying tax for all of this.”

Bishop Packer said he was taken aback by the Minister’s tone. “I am surprised we have got this diatribe, a real attack on the bishops,” he said. “I’m surprised they have taken this aggressive line.

“We are not talking here about people who have £26,000 to spend, we are talking about people whose rent may be £300 or even more per week – and so that money is going out again.

“These are people who may well find it very difficult to pay the rent ... because rents have escalated.”

The bishop said he shared some of the Government’s concerns about spending on welfare but he added: “As things stand, the Bill will give the same cap to people who have no children as it will to people with a number of children. It costs money to bring up children, and there need to be some payment here for that.”

Yesterday former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown became the highest-profile figure to speak out against the plans, denouncing them as “completely unacceptable” in their current form. He said that as president of the United Nations’ children’s agency Unicef he was not prepared to vote for them.

With other Lib Dem peers also expected to vote against his plans, Mr Duncan Smith acknowledged the result could come down to the independent “crossbenchers”, including the bishops.

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said he “completely backed” his cabinet colleague. “It surely can’t be fair, it can’t be right, that you can be earning more on benefits, than someone going out earning £35,000,” the Sheffield Hallam MP said.

Mr Clegg suggested there was scope for softening the impact of the changes through “transitional arrangements” around the introduction of the cap but he rejected Bishop Packer’s amendment.