Stephen Fry - Good Egg or Pompous Prat up his own arse? You decide!

It's been a while.

The novelty of working again after being on the scrapheap (the pre 2012 Workfare programme!!) for 4 years has caused me to ignore you (Am I now being a pompous prat up my own arse assuming both people read this and look forward to the next Blog?!). I am loving being back at work and doing well I'm told. I'm very tired but after a head-injury as bad as mine I was always going to be!

However, it's brought some unwelcome memories back.

After my accident in 1991 I went into the Rehab unit as a "no-hoper". Everybody there apart from my family, friends and a few of the medical staff thought that.Over the next 10 weeks I made a remarkable recovery, which was great. However, I became aware that I was getting better quicker than the other patients and so did they. Rather than being thrilled at what was happening all I can remember is feeling guilty. Why am I getting better and Gary/ Chris/ etc aren't? That guilt has stayed with me!

So, my return to the rat-race has awoken similar feelings. Why have I got a job and people like me (in fact, me for 4 years!) can't seem to get past the initial screening process?

The Spartacus Report awoke a felling of belonging to the disabled community in me. Once I got past the guilt (most of the people I tweet with appear to have "proper visible disabilities" that make me feel like a fraud!!) I wanted to do my bit. Now I am back in work I still want to do my bit if I can.

Which brings us to Stephen Fry. I have noticed that the Spartaci have been ignored by the press and everybody else. A few notable exceptions in the Lords (Thanks Tanni) have fought hard but the mainstream are unaware of the potential holocaust facing us. I though that some of our famous friends who have a position of responsibility to the disabled (i.e. The President of MIND) might say something that people might listen to.

Stephen Fry Tweets a lot. He is disabled. People might listen to him. Will he help?

Not unless you're a disabled Rhino or Tiger, threatened by man. Why are animals more important to him than the disabled. He didn't have to be President of MIND.

My activism against Stephen Fry highlighted a problem. I fell out on Twitter with 2 people.

• Grace @Greyseahorse thought I was being anti-endangered species. I engaged with her and explained my position re the pompous Oxbridge twit and she became a supporter. 
• @CreativeCrip held a different view than me and we fell out (I got un-followed for the first time I know of!!). I am sorry for upsetting her.

I asked MIND how I could mobilise a vote against him through their procedures. The reply is below.
Don't forget, MIND uses workfare as slave labour. MIND reports people to the DWP for not carrying out Workfare. MIND is working with the CONDEM's to reprogramme the disabled. If you read below MIND (a Charity) WILL cut off services to disabled people that lose their funding.

MIND have told me I am the only person to complain about Mr Fry. Their contact details are below. If their attitude is OK then file me in the rebel without a cause box. If you think they are wrong, contact them.

Mt final question.......

Who do these Charities represent?



Some of us have started a "Post Spartacus Blog" link below. Please have a look?

 

Read more: http://nowr.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=charities&thread=12&page=1#ixzz1slYPoy9F

Dear Ian

The appointment of the President is aninternal decision, voted and approved by our board of trustees. It is notsubject to external election or review. Our trustees are elected by our membersand are therefore empowered to make decisions on their behalf.

We have no plans to review the appointment.We would do so if the postholder was not fulfilling the role or we felt theywere bringing our values and organisation into disrepute. This is not the caseat the present time.

Best

Ruth

Ruth Richards
Head of Communications
020 8215 2318
Mind
15-19 Broadway, Stratford,London E15 4BQ
 www.mind.org.uk

---

From:Ian Jones [mailto:ian8jones@me.com]
Sent: 19 April 2012 12:40
To: r.richards@mind.org.uk
Subject: Re: Tweet by MindCharity

Dear Ruth

Can I suggest you consult with Twitter for other negative commentsabout your President. You have not told me the mechanism by which he can beremoved?

Thanks

Ian

Sent from my iPhone

On 19 Apr 2012, at 11:48, r.richards@mind.org.ukwrote:

Dear Ian

Thank you for your message.

I assume you're referring towhether individuals with personal budgets will be able to access services fromMind if this funding is cut? This is complex, as it would depend on what thecontract was to deliver those services and how the costs are covered. Someservices are funded in a way that allows us to offer universal access. Someservices require a referral.

Mind operates a federatedstructure, so each local Mind is an independent charity in its own right. Ifyou want to know the access requirements for their services, you would need tocontact the local Mind involved. They would be able to tell you whether theycould offer the service to someone without a personal budget.

Of course this isn't aperfect situation. We want to see everyone be able to access the support theyneed. We are always working on ways that we can improve access. At a nationallevel we're campaigning hard to see mental health services improve across theboard.

But, being charities, allMinds are reliant on funding. We can only carry out the work we have money for.We work hard to encourage people to donate to us but the reality is, like manysmaller charities, many local Minds are struggling in the current climate.

We'd never want to withdrawa service, but sometimes we don't have a choice.

In response to your secondquery, I'm aware that you have expressed disappointment in our appointment ofStephen Fry as our President. This feedback has been logged. However, we havenot received any other negative comments. In fact, we have received verypositive feedback from members and supporters. So we do not feel we need toreview the arrangement.

The 'President' of Mind is ahonourary post. It's an awareness raising role. We want Stephen to use his publicprofile and popularity to reach out to people who may not know much aboutmental health and helping us challenge the stigma that exists in much of themedia.

This is a very different rolefrom that of our Chair and trustee board who oversee the governance of Mind.They are responsible for ensuring we operate in a way that holds true to ourvalues and that is of maximum benefit to everybody with a mental healthproblem.  

Best wishes

Ruth

RuthRichards
Headof Communications
0208215 2318

Mind
15-19Broadway, Stratford,London E15 4BQ
t: 020 8519 2122
w: www.mind.org.uk
Registered charity number 219830. Registered in Englandnumber 424348.

-----Original Message-----

From: Ian Jones [mailto:ian8jones@me.com]

Sent: 12 April 2012 12:38

To: contact@mind.org.uk

Subject: Tweet by MindCharity

@edwinmandella That isn'twhat we're saying, but it's difficult to answer in 140 characters. Please emailcontact@mind.org.uk.

Hi

A Group of ex-Spartaci areconcerned that the mentally ill/ head injured/ etc are not being properlyrepresented by the Charities that claim to represent us.

As a first stage we arecanvassing major charities to establish their charitable response to usershaving their finding cut off. How would you deal with that situation and wouldyou withdraw services in any circumstance?

I am still awaitinginformation as to whether it is possible to oppose Stephen Fry's position asPresident.

Thank you

Ian Jones

by MindCharity at 12/04/201212:30

(Source: http://twitter.com/MindCharity/status/190401389439102976)

Sent from my iPhone

E-mail to The Right Honourable Theresa May MP following her Surgery on the 3rd February 2012

Dear The Right Honourable Theresa,

Thank you for meeting with me on Friday and I felt we had a useful discussion.

I would just like to confirm that you were planning to approach Lord Coe to identify why he hadn't mentioned in his correspondence to you why LOCOG had appointed an American into a Management Position both prior to the closing date for applications for that position and in preference to qualified UK applicants whose applications were not considered. I also would like to amplify my request to you that the reason why LOCOG were granted a work permit for this position by your department be disclosed to me.

I was aware that you seemed genuinely upset when I related to you that I felt the Government was demonising me and the many millions of other disabled people in the UK. My interpretation was that you explained to me that this was neither Government Policy nor the intention of the Government. I also believe that you did not accept that the actions of your Government could be reasonably interpreted in such a way. I believed this to be a very sincere expression of your views on this subject, for which I thank you.

With this in mind, I would like to point you towards an article in tomorrows Guardian, titled: -

"Benefit cuts are fuelling abuse of disabled people, say charities"

http://gu.com/p/359a9/tw
which reinforces my point that the disabled community is starting to feel demonised, scapegoated and threatened by attacks from Government Ministers which in my opinion bear a slight, but very worrying, resemblance to the way that the Nazi's targeted elements of the German population in the 1930s.

I would therefore be very grateful if you could consider this article alongside our discussion on Friday and consider whether the actions of your Government are in any way encouraging this.

I have, and will continue to, include copies of our correspondences and my thoughts on our meetings on my Blog, which is at address: - edwinmandella.blogspot.com. If you have any concerns or worries about the content of this Blog, either in respect of its accuracy or my interpretation of the facts, please contact me and I will be happy to resolve these with you.

Thank you once again for seeing me at your Surgery last Friday evening and I once again very much enjoyed the opportunity to discuss the issues affecting me, with you.

With kind regards,

Ian M Jones

Headway Opposes WRB

Headway reiterates opposition to Welfare Reform Bill

15 September 2011
Headway - the brain injury association has reiterated its opposition to the Welfare Reform Bill in its current form. The charity is concerned that the Bill will make it harder for disabled people to access the appropriate levels of help from the state they need in order to live lives that are as full and independent as possible.
The charity believes the Bill disguises cuts to benefits across the board. Of particular concern is the proposal to limit claims of contributory Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) to one year, placing unacceptable pressure on disabled people to find a job.
The vast majority of people with long-term conditions such as brain injury want to find work in order to boost their self-esteem and integration back into society, while allowing them to regain a level of independence. However, for some this is simply not possible and placing arbitrary limits on claims will push many families and individuals into poverty and add to the difficulties and anxieties they face.
Many Headway service users have already approached the charity for support and advice following ESA assessments in which they have been inaccurately judged as being fit for work. It is Headway's considered opinion that the current ESA assessment process is flawed and as such, people who are unable to work and therefore rely on this benefit are being denied appropriate financial support.
Headway also has concerns regarding replacing Disability Living Allowance (DLA) with Personal Independence Payment (PIP), with the Government targeting a 20% reduction in expenditure with the switch to PIPs. It is vital that lessons are learned from the ESA assessment process and that the PIP assessment process enables complex conditions to be identified and adequately catered for.
Objectivity and independence in assessing people for disability payments is understandable and laudable. However, such assessments can only be deemed appropriate if they are sound and accurate; to this end, Headway believes the qualified opinions of doctors and specialists should continue to be acceptable in many cases. By not utilising expert opinions, many people with hidden disabilities are at risk of having their valid claims rejected.
Headway has outlined its concerns to the Government through participation in various consultations since the inception of the Bill. In addition, the charity's Chief Executive Peter McCabe has written to Maria Miller MP, Minister for Disabled People at the Department for Work and Pensions, to urge the Government to give further consideration to the impact the Bill will have on some of the most vulnerable members of society.
The charity is encouraging its service users and supporters to contact their MPs to register their concerns and highlight the personal impact the Bill will have on their lives.
"The message is clear," said Peter McCabe. "The Bill poses significant risk to the quality of life of disabled people who are already at a disadvantage in society. Such cuts can have no moral justification."