I note this report in the FT this morning:
Overweight or unhealthy people who refuse to attend exercise sessions prescribed by doctors face having benefits docked under proposals to be put forward by a Tory-run local authority on Thursday. The initiative from Westminster council comes as responsibility for “community wellbeing and public health” is transferred to local authorities as part of a big overhaul.
I find that pretty amazing. Of course obesity and poverty are not perfectly correlated: far from it. But surely anyone with any sense realises that poor diet that can lead to obesity is often related to poverty? In that case, aren't this (Conservative) council entirely missing the point?
Or is it deliberate? After all, universal credit is now only going to be available to those with internet access. The poorest have the lowest access, and unsurprisingly the lowest IT literacy. And councils are closing libraries that might give those without a computer the access they need.
And now they're saying because you reveal the symptoms of poverty you may be denied the benefits you're entitled to.
Sorry, but I don't smell cock-up here. I smell conspiracy.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Wouldn’t it better for LAs and DfT to provide better active transport infrastructure in preference to car use so that people actually get fitter and healthier as they go about their daily business by doing some exercise (and not realise that they’re doing exercise)? This would be a better medium/long term approach, especially in towns and cities.
‘After all, universal credit is now only going to be available to those with internet access. The poorest have the lowest access, and unsurprisingly the lowest IT literacy. And councils are closing libraries that might give those without a computer the access they need.’
Just to add a little more on this, Richard. Through 2011-12 I was working with some colleagues on an EC funded project evaluating the use of IT to tackle social exclusion. At one point two of my colleagues attended a day workshop in Brussels which was discussing online access to benefits. They were pretty shocked to hear from nearly everyone there (from various EC countries) that there was wide support for moving to totally online systems despite the millions (at the time the estimate for the UK was 9 million) who don’t have access. Unsurprisingly perhaps the people pushing this hardest were techies (i.e IT specialists) and people working for companies providing the hardware and software.
So, conspiracy, no. Planned, yes, or due to complete ignorance – and very little wish to consider – the impact.
Fascinating
Healthy eating does not cost more than unhealthy eating. Portion size is a big factor in the cause of obesity, and more food tends to cost more money. Therefore it is wrong to blame obesity on lack of money. People become obese because they consume too much of the wrong types of food and lead sedentary lifestyles. If they don’t have the willpower to reduce their calorie intake then the least they can do is take up the offer of exercise classes. And if they refuse to take responsibilty and help themselves at the expense of those who do take personal responsibility seriously, then they should pay for their own excessive food intake. No conspiracy, just common sense.
I’d love to agree with you – and as I noted, there is no perfect correlation between wealth and obesity: far from it
I don’t because a) you ignore social factors b) you ignore education factors c) you ignore transport factors d) you presume a degree of personal responsibility that society denies to many – and deliberately, not least my manipulating choice through advertising
How much more does healthy grass-fed beef cost than unhealthy beef pumped up with steroids, water and chemicals to make it last forever on the shelf? Loads. You’re talking nonsense.
Well said Bill. Statechaos doesn’t realise the cost of eating healthily.
Perhaps the obese poor are suppose to become Freegans and raid the food bins outside the supermarkets at night, if they can’t fight it out for the expiry date reduced price items in the evening. That way they’ll be sure to get there exercise!
I’m sorry to resort to ridicule, but this smacks of prejudice, which I can’t abide.
stats suggest that 1.5m people in the UK dont have internet access at home due to cost – not sure whether this also covers smartphones though (which obviously has internet capabilities)
see http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-270031
re statechaos – its a complicated situation, obviously its relatively cheap to go and buy fresh veg from a market, the problem is that a large proportion of the demographic we are talking about have no idea how to cook them, so they end up going to McDonalds and getting a burger for 99p (which is also quicker and less hassle)
I agree
Fresh veg are often cheap – especially if seasonal – and I happen to enjoy cooking them a lot (because I just love cooking)
But the knowledge of how to cook properly is now poorly taught in a curriculum captured by the needs of business
You get fresh veg from a market though and the smart cards won’t be redeemable as cash. There’ll only be outlets like Tesco that can handle them. Many would suggest the idea of getting fresh veg from there is laughable.
Good point
Is Dame Shirley back there then ?
I’ll await that council invoking voting online and then only allowing high earners to have inet access.
It’s not as if it doesn’t have form in illegal activity.
You’re right. It’s not the first time Westminster City Council have practiced social engineering/cleansing. They have form. In the late sixties/early seventies they were actively trying to drive poorer, Labour voting residents out of council housing in the north of the borough and if possible out of Westminster altogether. I’m not surprised they’re jumping at this coalition-created excuse to further pressure the least advantaged.
Cancer sufferes will doubtless have to attend “end of life planning” courses.
Asthma/copd sufferers will have to attend “pulmonary rehabilitation” courses.
Those unable to walk far will probably get bus passes (the local JC told a 60 year old he could get a bus pass to get to work, ignoring that the age has gone up now and that locally they are invalid between 2300 and 0930z)
It occurs to me to wonder, has anyone checked to see how many shares Westminster Councillors own in local gyms? This could be less to do with making people healthy and more to do with rent-seeking, turning the unemployed once again into an income stream.
So Eric Pickles will be having his MP’s salary and expenses cut then! Sauce for the goose…..!.
what about those with genuine metabolic disorders such as hypothyroidism where they cant lose weight and require help with medication and lots of help with endocrinolgists.
sometimes that can take up to one year. As a suffer of hypothyroidism, I know what its like
here are the symptoms – love to see the government try with me
http://www.stopthethyroidmadness.com/long-and-pathetic/
[…] the war on the poor goes further than that. As Richard Murphy @ Tax Research UK explains; the government’s Universal Credit, cuts to library services and proposals from one Tory […]