Government gagging clauses attempt to silence critics

“I don’t believe it” was the catchphrase of Victor Meldrew (pictured right) in the BBCtv sit-com One foot in the grave. It signaled his frustration with elements of life today. However, although feeling equally exasperated as actor Richard Wilson’s character, I really DO believe it.

It is another example of overreach, so typical of UK Conservative governments. But believing it is a long way from accepting it.

It is clearly not acceptable that some 22 charities and companies, that are paid government cash, to have had to sign so-called “gagging clauses”. These are said to prevent them from criticizing the government’s Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), its political bosses, and the new Universal Credit (UC) benefit.

The much-criticised UC is being rolled out across the country to replace six means-tested benefits and tax credits paid to working-age claimants. These are: income-based Employment and Support Allowance, Income Support, income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance, Housing Benefit, Working Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. These are typically paid to people with disabilities and others who are often seen as vulnerable.

News of the gagging clauses were revealed by investigative journalists at The Times national newspaper, in a report last week. Since then, the remainder of the Press has followed suit.

The gagging clauses amount to a disgraceful and repugnant act of censorship that has no place is a democratic society. And the Press’s calls for the clauses to be removed have now led to a similar demand from the main opposition, the Labour party.

Gagging: Call for Commons statement

Shadow work and pensions secretary Margaret Greenwood.

Labour’s shadow works and pensions secretary Margaret Greenwood has critcised the clauses – and called for them to be removed.

In a letter to the Conservative government work and pension secretary Esther McVey,Ms Greenwood has requested (really, demanded) a statement be made to the House of Commons. A statement that, she says, should explain the reasons for the gagging clauses, as well as announce their immediate removal.

She wrote: “I am asking that you come to the House of Commons to explain the original rationale behind these gagging clauses and to publicly announce that they will be removed by the Government.” The full text of Ms Greenwood’s letter can be read here.

I delayed writing about this, in the hope that the government would make a statement and remove the gagging clauses. But now, it’s halfway through the following week and there has been no response to this demand.

Earlier, the DWP had denied that the organisations were banned from criticising UC and said the clauses protected commercially sensitive information.

At that time, a spokeswoman said: “As with all arrangements like this, they include a reference which enables both parties to understand how to interact with each other and protect their best interests.”

 Yeah, right. That response to media  enquiries fails to address the facts, and ignores the issues involved. As if we accept that. Certainly, the Press and Labour’s Ms Greenwood don’t – and nor should they.

* * * * * is the personal site of Ian Franks, a digital journalist and former writer and editor for various health information sites. He enjoyed a successful career as a journalist, from reporter to editor in the print media. He gained a Journalist of the Year award in his native UK. Ian received a diagnosis of MS in 2002 and now lives in the south of Spain. He uses a wheelchair and advocates on mobility and accessibility issues.

* * * * *

Note: Health-related information available on 50shadesofsun website is for your general knowledge only. It is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for specific medical conditions. I am not a doctor, so cannot and do not give you medical advice. You should seek prompt medical care for any specific health issues. Also, consult a doctor before starting a new diet or exercise programme. Any opinions expressed are purely my own unless otherwise stated.

Excuse me, which charity does your ribbon represent?

There are only a limited number of colours, and combinations of them, but there are many health and disability causes. That’s the reason why, for each color, there are a number of charities that use it for their publicity and fundraising activities.

Just take the orange ribbon as an example. We know that it is the colour adopted for multiple sclerosis in many countries. Additionally, orange is also used by these causes:

Confusing, isn’t it? Including MS, that’s 14 separate causes to have chosen the orange as the colour of their official ribbon.

Colours started with red

It started more than 25 years ago. The red awareness ribbon for HIV/AIDS was launched by the AIDS Ribbon Project at the 45th Annual Tony Awards ceremony on June 2, 1991.

Yes, the red ribbon was, apparently, the first ever ribbon symbol. And that led to all the rest, including the orange ribbon for MS and the renowned pink one for breast cancer awareness.

Mind you, there s nothing new about wearing coloured symbols. For example, each political party has its own colour. Parties use their colours for promotional material and election rosettes worn by party workers. What’s more, William Shakespeare wrote about coloured symbols that people wore.

In the famous English playwright’s classic Othello (Act iv, scene 3), Desdemona refer to an early version of the song “All round my hat, I wears a green willow”. The lyrics say: “If anyone should ask, the reason why I wears it, tell them that my true love is far, far away”.

Today, we have so many charities, and other causes, all trying to raise money and awareness. And there are too few colours to go round.

* * * * *

Affiliate disclaimer: This affiliate disclosure details the affiliate relationships of MS, Health & Disability at with other companies and products. Read more.

* * * * * is the personal website of Ian Franks, a Features Writer with Medical News Today. He enjoyed a successful career as a journalist, from reporter to editor in the print media. He gained a Journalist of the Year award in his native UK. Ian received a diagnosis of MS in 2002 and now lives in the south of Spain. He uses a wheelchair and advocates on mobility and accessibility issues.