Why People Can’t Just “Get a Job”

This morning, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered her pre-budget statement ahead of the Autumn Budget, scheduled for 26th November.

Despite mounting welfare costs, Reeves offered no meaningful solutions — only strong hints that taxes will rise, paired with blame deflected onto everything and everyone except the government itself.

It’s no surprise, then, that Nigel Farage rushed out a bold announcement promising welfare cuts if Reform wins the next general election yesterday, while Tory leader Kemi Badenoch quickly followed Reeves with an online broadcast that, in substance, amounted to much the same.

As the government flounders, it seems poised to announce little of substance of savings on benefits or public services — yet millions already trapped in a financial vice not of their own making will see the cost of living rise again, working harder for ever-diminishing returns.

The Tories — who helped engineer the current crisis over their 14-year tenure up to summer 2024 — and Reform — now visibly undergoing their own establishmentisation makeover — aren’t offering help to people either. They’re offering help to the economy.

And that’s precisely where the problems began for those whose lives revolve around the benefits system today.

There are hard truths here. Truths that many untouched by poverty still find just a little too uncomfortable to believe.

There will always be people who are:

• Out of work for valid reasons

• Unable to work due to illness, disability, or caring responsibilities

But there are also many people who want to work and are able to work — yet still can’t. Why? Because:

• They can’t find jobs that match their experience

• They can’t find roles that fit their qualifications

• They simply don’t “fit” the mould employers are looking for

It’s easy to assume that anyone who wants a job can get one — any job, at any time. And it’s just as easy to judge those who don’t take “any job” as lazy, entitled, or abusing the benefits system.

But those who make these judgments often haven’t experienced what it’s like to be unemployed and dependent on state support.

The Reality of Benefits

Let’s be clear: basic benefits are not enough to live on.

We’re surrounded by comforting myths — stories we rarely question unless we’re forced to confront the truth. One of the most dangerous myths is that the National Minimum Wage is enough to live on independently.

Here’s the reality in November 2025:

• Universal Credit: Between £316.98 and £628.10 per month, depending on your circumstances

• Minimum Wage: £12.21/hour. For a 40-hour week, that’s about £2,116.40/month

• Actual cost of living: To live independently, a single person likely needs £16–£17/hour — around £2,773.33/month

That’s a shortfall of over £600/month, even for someone working full-time on minimum wage.

The Impossible Choice

Now imagine you’re unemployed, with no savings or support, and your only option is to claim £628.10/month. What do you do?

• Take a job that still doesn’t cover your basic needs?

• Or claim every benefit you can, just to survive?

For many, working full-time in a low-paid job — often under poor conditions and public judgment — while still needing benefits just doesn’t make sense.

The Myth of the “Benefits Culture”

The idea that claiming benefits is an easy ride is a myth. Genuine claimants are treated the same as those gaming the system. The rules are rigid, often making it harder — not easier — to find meaningful work.

Pushing people into low-paid jobs that still leave them reliant on benefits, food banks, or debt might reduce one type of welfare cost. But it could as easily increase the others — through the problems that an ill-considered attempt to push everyone into ‘work’ will create, like mental health issues, workplace burnout, and long-term poverty.

The AI Displacement Problem

A growing wave of joblessness is being driven not by lack of talent, but by the unnecessary and unchecked takeover of roles by artificial intelligence.

Skilled, experienced professionals — once vital to their industries — are being sidelined by automation that prioritizes cost-cutting over human value.

As more capable workers are pushed into the job queue, many will find themselves forced to claim benefits, not because they lack ability, but because the system no longer has space for them.

The Bigger Problem

Most people on benefits aren’t lazy — they’re surviving.

When life becomes a daily struggle, the benefits system can feel like the only option.

But simply cutting benefits without creating real alternatives — like jobs that pay enough to live on — risks pushing thousands into homelessness and crisis.

The Psychology of Work and Pay

Most people don’t need prestige — they need security.

If lower-paid or less challenging jobs guaranteed that workers could meet all their financial obligations and live with dignity, many would take them without hesitation.

The problem isn’t the work itself — it’s that the pay doesn’t match the cost of living.

When people know they can cover rent, bills, food, and essentials every month, they’re far more willing to contribute, even in roles that society undervalues.

What Needs to Change

We can’t fix the benefits system without fixing the economic system that creates the need for it.

If we want fewer people on benefits, we must:

• Build an economy where full-time work pays enough to live on — without top-ups

• Stop supporting a system that enriches a few by impoverishing the many.

Until the government legislates for a fairer system — one where the lowest-paid can live independently on a full day’s work — poverty will persist.

That’s where real change begins.

The Basic Living Standard Explained

The Basic Living Standard is a foundational guarantee that ensures every individual earning the lowest legal weekly wage can afford all essential costs of living—without falling into debt, relying on welfare, or turning to charity.

It defines the minimum threshold of financial independence, where core needs—such as food, housing, utilities, healthcare, transport, clothing, communication, and modest social participation—are fully covered by earned income alone. It also includes provision for savings, unexpected costs, and fair contributions to society.

This standard is not aspirational—it is structural. It affirms that full-time work at the lowest wage must equate to full dignity, autonomy, and security.

***

No food banks. No emergency loans. No skipped prescriptions or unpaid bills. Just a life that’s livable, sustainable, and free from poverty.

Any Fool Can Be a Politician

But it will take something very special to clear up the mess they’ve created

I recently heard it said that politicians are all psychopaths. It may have been in the script of some comedy-based show or drama I was watching. But the sentiment and what it reminded me of from my own experience of being in politics and working with many different politicians really struck home.

Whilst we can be certain that not all politicians are psychopaths, the evidence of our own eyes certainly suggests that the Government is under the control of either psychopaths, people with psychopathic tendencies or people who certainly behave like them; for the simple reason that no matter what the messaging from government and the establishment may say, the impact and delivery of both governance and policy is not focused upon what’s good for the electorate and our communities in any kind of good or human way.

However, before running away with the conclusion that every well known name we hear on the news is a psycho, it might be a better idea to consider the reality that things are more likely to have turned to complete shit, because of the way that the politicians we have behave so badly, selfishly and inconsiderately, and because of the character flaws and traits they typically have in common between them, that are impacting what they do and therefore us, in so many different ways.

Who really wants to be a politician and why?

This is a question that we should all be asking ourselves, a lot more frequently than we do.

The answer – when we really think about this and consider the real mechanics of how the political system puts its people onto the list of candidates on our ballot papers at election time – will soon begin to reveal many of the answers, not only to this, but to many other pressing questions about the way the U.K. is being run, that we all need to know.

Before going further, I will insert the caveat, that in my own experience, many people put themselves forward to become political party candidates with what we might all agree as being the best of intentions.

But that’s as far as any default allowance should ever go.

As even the best intentions can only really be considered for what they are, once we look at each candidate and ask the question ‘The best of intentions for who?’

Who politicians really serve is also an important and very timely question. Because if the current polls and polling are to be believed, the benches of our parliament and councils up and down the UK will soon be filled with people who’ve never been politicians before.

People who have nonetheless stepped up and become candidates for some political party like Reform, armed only with what for many of them will be the sincere belief that they will be the person to break the downward trend of everything we know and once elected will get things done.

But what things will they get done? And the things they aim to achieve will be good for who?

Beliefs built without foundation quickly get blown away then replaced

Few of those who are newbies to politics realise that there is a whole new set of rules at work for anyone and everyone to follow and work with in frontline or elected politics, just as soon as they have walked through the electoral door to an electoral ‘seat’.

By newbies I mean anyone who hasn’t personally held an elected office of any kind, at any level – whether they’ve never been politically active before, been on a pathway, been a lobby journalist or even an activist or commentator of some kind who has racked up millions of likes and followers on YouTube, because their words connect with people in some way.

If any candidate ‘won’ a ‘seat’ by being on a party ticket – no matter which party ticket they aligned their name with to get there, they will be on their own, rejected and probably on their way straight back out of the door, if they don’t do whatever they are told and say yes to whoever seems to be running things, whether they agree with it or not, from the moment the euphoria of ‘their’ election has died down.

Yes, finding common ground with other newbies and giving themselves a group voice can and will give them influence over some things.

But those things won’t be anything that will really change the things that really need to be changed in the way most entrants to politics sincerely intended, before they walked through the ‘elected’ door.

Most newbies, if not all, will find themselves facing a rather stark and deflating reality. That they have the choice of becoming part of the machine. Or at best to annoy their so-called political colleagues by attempting to do what is actually the right thing for the people who elected them and use their own voice – as they were elected to do so. Leaving them with very little they can do, when as a public representative, they should have been able to do so much.

The choice is rarely one that’s thought through consciously by those who have ‘arrived’. And that’s where many of the real problems with this mess of a political system begin.

Politics today is addictive for those foolish enough to believe the spin

Do ask yourself how many elected politicians you see, at any level, who resign the party whip at any point in a council or parliamentary term, and don’t immediately ‘walk the floor’ to join another party.

The reality is that very few do. And of those that do, most will have themselves been pushed out or in all likelihood found themselves questioning the whole purpose of politics; the electoral system and what being there or being part of it is really for – once they have seen the truth of how things really work.

The people who stay or try to move to another party, aren’t people who are there to represent you or I.

Being ‘in it to win it’, ‘staying in the tent’, or anything along those lines is a self serving myth that gives unscrupulous and ambitious politicians the excuse that they are ‘keeping their powder dry’ until it’s the right time – or rather when they get to the top. By which time they will of course no longer recognise any such need.

We have a party political and electoral system that guarantees the top-down functionality that minimises our influence

Politics in the UK isn’t the place for people who have the skills, experience and ability to change the things that need to be changed in this Country, today.

The party and electoral system that we have currently combine to ensure we either don’t get the right people in the majority of elected roles. Or that they are rejected by the party that put them there when there is even the smallest hint that we do.

The reality that any politician joining parliament, a council or entering any elected government role faces, is that the only politicians who are making meaningful decisions – or getting in the way of those that could stop people being harmed in some way, are those who are right at the very top of the top-down hierarchy that keeps them insulated from what people like you and me need.

Some truths about U.K. politics and our Electoral system, today

We say we have a democracy in the UK. Many believe that we do.

But we don’t choose the candidates on a ballot paper that we choose from.

We don’t choose the politicians who take key jobs in councils, in parliament or those who become mayors.

When we’ve voted and the votes have been counted, that’s the last moment that anything we have to say about anything will count or have meaning for anyone. Right up until the moment that the next election is called.

The system works and is controlled by the political parties who are all running in very similar ways to each other, by people with the same motives and same wishes to make it big in politics and be seen to be ‘the one’ who is in charge.

The only people who become political candidates, get elected, then stay, acquiesce, take part and contribute to what is a supposedly democratic form of government today by doing exactly whatever they are told, are yes men and yes women.

People who do and can only do well because they are on message and turn a blind eye to the needs of the people who put them there.

These people aren’t leaders or capable of leadership.

They are fools who live in fear of losing the roles that once elected they quickly perceive as being rightfully theirs.

All the time they are blind and deaf to the true responsibilities of what being a public representative demands them to be.

A downward system that takes everything downward as it keeps going down

The so-called leaders that we believe we currently have are just the latest incumbents on an intergenerational chain of weak, yes-men/yes-women politicians who have continuously said yes until they have found themselves right at the top.

Yet they can only maintain the pretence of leadership by saying yes to any advisor or specialist who tells them what to do, because they are not used to saying, meaning and being prepared to risk everything for themselves by putting those they represent first by saying no.

These people should never possess the power and responsibility they have, as they continually harm others by obsessively running from anything they believe will cause harm to themselves and the roles they now have.

This is not how leadership works. This is not how real change gets done.

These people are out of their depth. They have little or no view of real life or how the world works beyond their own perspective.

The politicians we have today have typically been corrupted by the power and influence that comes from having a role where they confuse having a microphone or camera rammed in their face, from the moment they are elected, as being only because they have been elected. Rather than it being because they are just the latest person to have been elected by voters or appointed by their political piers to carry out a particular role which commands public and media interest, no matter who they are.

Control, feeling in control, being seen to be in control, demonstrating that they are in control. These are the only things that are important to the would-be leaders we have in politics who cannot lead even themselves in any way.

Everyone and everything are a risk or threat to their position, once they reach the top.

So, they surround themselves with politicians who are even weaker and more inept or incompetent than they are.

The even weaker versions of themselves take over from them when their moment in the sun is done.

Then the process of replacing the weak with the even weaker begins all over again.

Fear and Power are a very dangerous mix

These politicians are people just like you and me.

But instead of being different in the ways that their position would make many of us expect, they are fearful in ways that everyday people fail to understand.

The level of fear of loss today’s political class have for themselves also makes them vulnerable to the whims and influence of those they look up to.

Much like an orphan meeting the parent that they never believed it possible to have, being certain that they will be protected in ways that will make them invulnerable against anything bad that they feel might otherwise lay in store.

The reality of our ‘leaders’

Some of those who have stepped into politics and made it to the political equivalent of the C suite without being rejected, spat out, sidelined or becoming victim to the many temptations that befall so many who have found themselves in these positions, and fallen into the trap of believing it was something special about themselves, began the process by being genuine in their desire to do something good.

However, this certainly wasn’t the case with them all.

There are many who have ended up on this gravy train, that has made life so intolerably bad for people who we all pass by in the streets each and every day, for no better reason than they wanted the job and the glory they believed it would give them. Probably from an early age.

But they also had no concept of what political influence can and should enable good public representatives to do.

They therefore have no passion for the responsibility they have and they lack the talent, skill and ability that responsibility to others also requires; that politics done for all the right reason inevitably always involves.

People who could be good politicians and have the selflessness and sense of public service that change requires, are either put off by what they discern as being no better than a circus of egos. Or they soon find out once they have stepped inside the system, that politics in the UK is no better than a fun house at a run-down traveling fair creating irreparable damage to every bit of ground it stands on.

The people who enter and stay in politics today and the people who really think they and only they can make the difference that none of the people they have watched on TV have managed so far, are the fools that have made the UK political system a fool’s paradise where those within believe that they really do know better than anyone else, and that their actions have no real life consequences for us all, beyond the immediate focus of whatever they have been led to believe they are doing.

The truth is that anyone who can say yes, look and sound the part, and not think twice to do whatever is demanded of them, to gain whatever they have been promised as the reward, will fit right into the political machine that exists in the UK today.

The political party or apparent political leaning of whatever the group or movement out in front of everyone else might be called doesn’t matter in any way.

The people who thrive in this system, at the cost of everyone they are supposed to represent, are fundamentally the same.

Uk Politics today is a game for fools, run by fools, that benefits only fools, and treats everyone outside of politics as if they are the fools.

We are all suffering now, as the direct result.

Assisted Dying is not the same as Suicide

Assisted Dying may be controversial for those uncomfortable with the realities of Death. But it’s not the same thing as suicide and anyone uncomfortable with that reality should not be influencing public policy

Whilst much of our attention has been focused elsewhere recently, the Assisted Dying Bill (Terminally Ill Adults [End of Life] Bill) has been making its way through The Lords. Attracting yet more criticism and bad feeling, in no small part due to former Prime Minister Theresa May equating the outcome with Suicide last week.

To say the issues underpinning the purpose of the Bill are proving to be massively controversial would be an understatement.

But the whole question is very complex even before beginning to consider the answer and mechanics of a solution. And this reality seems to yet again be being missed by many politicians by who really should know much better.

Sadly, for us, they don’t. And whilst the Bill could and should have been handled far better than it has by the current government, the different fear-driven arguments lining up against it risks thousands – and potentially even some of those who are arguing against it right now – finding themselves unable to access the relief that they need. For no better reason than the indulgence of the unfounded fears of those who probably never will.

The tricky part is Death

Perhaps one of the most difficult subjects for any of us to deal with in life, is the question of mortality and death.

Few of us find comfort with the certain reality that our bodies will eventually die.

We certainly don’t wish to contemplate the idea that we could find ourselves incapacitated one day.

And we really don’t feel comfortable considering the possibility of a situation ever existing where we would be unable to communicate with others at the time when wishing to find a peacefully assisted way out of life may in fact be the genuinely preferential choice.

It is much easier instead to assume that we would and could never want to end our own life and have reason to ask for help to do it. That this is something that would never happen to me. And that what life means to us today must be protected and held secure in any way that it possibly can be.

To be fair, this is a feeling shared by almost everyone who has no health problems; is perhaps younger than most, or who has no reason to believe that they could ever find themselves at a very difficult stage of life where death might be the preferable option.

A situation where they would be experiencing significant and potentially intolerable discomfort and pain, that may itself be beyond the scope of functional life if to continue means becoming dependent upon high levels of pain relief.

However, for those who have already found themselves staring their mortality in the eye, knowing that there’s unlikely to be anything good about their last hours, days and perhaps many weeks before they go, looking reality in the eye takes on a very different meaning.

As we consider what the outcome of this Bill really means for people other than ourselves, it’s important for us all to understand that the experience of dealing with an end of life that has now become expected and what that means to the patient can be just the same if not worse for very close family and loved ones – who will know what this kind of suffering means more than most thankfully could.

Assisted Dying and Suicide are only similar in so far as they both involve the choice to end your own life

The fact that we are culturally backwards when it comes to death, means that we fail to have or take part in the conversations and openness about what is essentially the last part of life.

We don’t discuss or consider the realities of death as we really should.

Therefore, we avoid looking more closely at what the process of dying for those who do go with the knowledge they are going to do so really means.

The prickliness this lack of discourse creates leaves many of us facing the ridiculous situation where we back off from friends and people we know with terminal illnesses and even cancer diagnoses; sometimes without even realising that we are avoiding the issues around mortality.

Issues that would make life a lot easier for everyone if we were more willing to embrace them as being normal.

That said, everyone should recognise that there is a very distinct difference between the circumstances where a person will have to contemplate the otherwise unthinkable need to alleviate pain and suffering by ending their life sooner than what will already be an early death, and the equally tragic but also all too often isolated and lonely circumstances that surround the question of Suicide for those who have reached or are reaching anything like the conclusion that they no longer wish to continue in their life.

Assisted Dying and Suicide are not the same thing

There is a significant difference between choosing to die by committing Suicide and choosing to die through a process of Assisted Dying.

People choose to end their life through Suicide because they find the prospect of continuing to remain alive in their body too painful to contemplate.

People would choose Assisted Dying, not because they want to die. But because remaining in their body has become too painful or difficult to continue being alive – and what we would likely all agree as being a realistic quality of life is therefore no longer possible.

Whilst some would argue that there is no difference between the two, or that the differences are too subtle to make any real difference, the reality is that the need for Assisted Dying is based upon the alleviation of pain and circumstances that are or will be created by our physical state. Whereas the wish to end life through Suicide reflects pain and circumstances that are ultimately created by our mental health – often by external factors and our relationship with them – that are outside of our control.

In the most basic terms, we are talking about the differences between physical and mental pain.

As Assisted Dying is about addressing physical pain, it seems only appropriate that this is dealt with as any other physical health issue would be – with specific policies and procedures to deal with it.

Being idealistic is great, until idealism meets practical reality

We are at least talking about Assisted Dying – even if there is a significant risk that those who are afraid of what will happen if the Bill becomes law are potentially being as inconsiderate to the few that really need this option, as those involved in the debate who may well have more sinister considerations in mind.

Suicide, on the other hand, is the silent tip of the wider mental health epidemic. Quietly swept under the carpet. Probably because just like the prospect of experiencing a natural death, which may be unbearably painful, very few of us believe that we could ever reach the level of desperation, where we might want to take our own life, simply because we no longer felt able to go on.

Where the picture can blur: Suicide and the Mental Health Epidemic

Regrettably, we are living in times where the boundaries of common sense and the values that underpin life have been deliberately blurred so that experiences and actions that are either different or motivated very differently can be argued as either being the same or resulting in the same thing.

People in genuine need of consideration and help are forgotten, whilst fashionable problems become the priority for all.

Whilst the realities that underpin Suicide and Assisted Dying can be defined between the escape from mental or physical pain, it must also be recognised that there is a potentially significant group of people who may feel more open to the idea of ending their lives, if they were to be able to engage in the process of Suicide with the assistance of someone else.

It’s easy for those looking on to scoff at this and therefore write off any such position as being whimsical. But for those who are thinking about the process of taking their own life methodically, the prospect of failing but making things worse for themselves is as real as the reality that others need help either to see things from a different perspective, or more likely changes to their circumstances which at that point feel well beyond their own control.

We should be under no illusion that those who have really reached the point where they cannot continue to live will find a way to make an exit.

The real selfishness that rumbles alongside the difficult subject of Suicide, isn’t the act on the part of the person who succeeds in taking their own life – no matter who or what circumstances they may leave behind.

The genuine selfishness surrounding Suicide is the lack of empathy and consideration on the part of others who cannot or will not conceive, just how desperate, lonely and hopeless a situation will have become for anyone, when they have concluded that the only solution for them is to take their own life.

Instead, many others make ‘their’ pain, about ‘me’.

It is an absolute tragedy that any person, no matter the circumstances, should find themselves considering Suicide as an option.

But the problem is very real, and anyone choosing to pretend that the questions this whole debate raises don’t matter, because it’s not something that normal people deal with every day, is simply deluding both themselves and anyone they are making decisions about life on behalf of.

According to The Samaritans, there were 5656 Suicides in 2023 (Which included a rise of 372 from the year before), whilst the Financial Times recently reported that after 10 years of the Bill being implemented, the number of Assisted Deaths would have then reached 4559 per year.

Meanwhile, the ONS tells us that in 2024 there were 568,613 deaths in England & Wales, meaning that in today’s terms, we are talking about at least 1% of deaths each year for Suicide and Assisted Dying (More than 2% or 2 deaths in every 100), which feels like a lot of people to be trying to escape life or death level pain, who are currently being overlooked.

Assisted Suicide is something different, again

Opening up the meaning of Assisted Dying so that it is considered to be the same as Assisted Suicide could indeed be a significant problem. If the appropriate safeguards are not in place.

However, the circumstances should never exist where Assisted Suicide becomes a problem. Provided that an adequate system of checks and balances are put in place that prevent any situation from coming into existence where death could arguably become a lifestyle choice. Thereby effectively legalising the death of ‘unwanted’ people at the hands of others who get away with murder. Because the establishment has helpfully allowed circumstances to exist where this terrible act can be given a different meaning by using an alternative name.

However, shutting down those possibilities does not address the reality that there are a lot of very unhappy people across the UK.

People whose lives could be improved massively if those responsible for public policy and direction were doing their jobs properly.  

And there are a lot more suffering with these problems than any of our politicians might openly like to think.

The mental health epidemic being experienced by people like you and I across the UK is very real indeed, with well-known Mental Health Charity Mind suggesting that 1 in 4 of us in the UK will experience a mental health issue of some kind each year, with 1 in 6 of us experiencing a more common Mental Health issue like anxiety or depression each week.

Regrettably, as with most things where politicians and influencers are getting so wrong about the lives they are supposed to be improving, you really do have to have experienced a mental health problem or had your life touched by someone experiencing one to even begin understanding how very real the impact on functional life for the sufferer and those around them can be.

It is horrid to have to consider that once any person has stepped into the living tragedy that is the mental health epidemic, there is very little available to help those suffering to find a cure, beyond management of the condition itself.

Unfortunately, many of the causes of the wider mental health problem and indeed the absence of the types of support and the environments that create real happiness stem from the massively unsustainable, money and material orientated and valueless lives that we are now leading and that we are encouraged to live.

It is a situation that is itself dehumanizing the way that we approach everything and is therefore making our interpretation of such difficult issues as Assisted Dying and Suicide considerably worse.

The role of fear for those making decisions for us who are themselves completely unaffected

Our political system is failing us through the selection and appointment of so-called leaders who cannot lead, who we know today as politicians.

Lack of good leadership and public representation has become so problematic and embedded across society that it has become difficult to comprehend just how far the rot has spread throughout the public sector and our entire system of governance.

Regrettably, poor leaders, who don’t have the qualities and abilities necessary to lead, are as likely to indulge their own fears whilst identifying them as being those of everyone, as they are to being led in any direction that they are advised by whoever they might choose to listen to or be influenced by at any time.

Yes, there are very good reasons why no sanctioned or legalized form of death that involves the assistance of anyone else should simply not be allowed.

However, this is the 21st century. We do not exist in times where a system of checks and balances would be difficult to put in place and maintain.

If any good government were to consider the facts and mechanics of how the genuine need for a pain-free or comfortable death for those who are already known to be terminally ill and have rapidly reducing or arguably no remaining quality of life, a properly considered and fully consulted process should be more than possible.

However, it would need to be conducted without the emotion and the irrationality that is running rampant through the corridors of power at this time.

We would then surely be able to create and implement a system that would work for everyone, providing all the assurances necessary, whilst managing what are the relatively small figures of people who need Assisted Dying as an option in real terms, so that they can make the choice.

It is unacceptable that we have people who have been elected to represent us and therefore make meaningful and fully considered decisions upon our behalf, who do not have sufficient self-awareness to be able to discern that they are considering only their own views and experiences.

Nobody should be enabled to consider their own view to be qualified and therefore more reliable than that of others, purely because of the position that they have attained, and nothing more.

The Depopulation Agenda

Perhaps the most destructive element of the Assisted Dying debate entering public discourse, is the growing fear that the whole Bill has been introduced as some kind of trojan horse; rolled into the legislative agenda with the intention of facilitating a Depopulation plan of the kind that has been mentioned by a number of different speakers linked either to the worlds elites or world-government-obsessed organisations such as the WEF.

Sadly, experience suggests that both the last Conservative as well as the current Labour Governments have pursued agendas that have zero alignment with the public good.

Decisions made and policies enacted are massively out of touch with reality and common sense.

They appear to have either been built upon the ignorance and ineptitude of the politicians themselves; because they are having their strings pulled by someone else, or both.

Regrettably, the fact remains that in terms of the things that politicians have and are doing that harm us and have the potential to harm us even more in the future, there are much bigger and much more real issues that we are choosing to ignore that are already affecting us and our lives today. Issues that are themselves laying the groundwork for sinister levels of societal control that make clear there really is no need for politicians to use such obvious tools as this Bill to achieve such aims – if that’s what they intend.

The fear that a growing number have of the establishment and all those who seem to have been able to maintain unquestionable levels of societal control, is very real to those who feel it.

But this fear could quickly be addressed if we were to all stop going along with the information meal that we keep getting served; take back our own power and begin taking steps to make every decision that relates to our lives, our communities and our environment, for ourselves.

Done properly, Assisted Dying would not be open to abuse by the State or anyone else

Were the process of putting a policy for Assisted Dying together conducted properly and with the resources, time and impartiality that it should be – given that as things stand, we are arguably kinder to our pets than we are to other people when it comes to the practicalities of dealing with a physical need for euthanasia, there is no reason to doubt that the necessary safeguards and protections could be put in place to ensure that no circumstances could exist where assisted suicide – whether voluntary or involuntary – could take place. Even in cases of dementia or other forms of mental incapacity where the sufferer had not themselves given reasoned and appropriate consent.

Regrettably, whether the Bill currently working its way through the Legislative system was as well intended as it arguably should have been or not, the reality is that like most things this political class touches, it is anything and everything else that sits beyond the real purpose and outcomes for the genuine beneficiaries of a successful process, that seem to be getting prioritised first.

Useful Contacts:

If you have been affected by any of the issues that have been discussed in this Essay, and are not already in touch with them, you can reach The Samaritans on the phone by calling 116 123 or Mind by calling 0300 102 1234.