Author Topic: Politicians & proving you meet a standard  (Read 1716 times)

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« on: December 29, 2017, 02:33:25 PM »
I've been musing on something.

It started out with some depressive doom and gloom about how now Christmas is over, I need to return to my PIP battle, and then considering how even over Christmas I've had conversations online where I was being confronted with my limitations.

Then I thought of something to do with what politicians map benefits assessments onto.  Let's leave aside the particularly intelligent, well-read and vicious MPs.  I think most don't fit into all three categories.

Ok, so what's a benefits assessment?  Being tested to see whether you meet a standard.

Let's suppose you've never needed any sort of sickness/disability benefit except maybe a small amount of statutory sick pay whilst off sick with a nasty but time-limited lurgy or having minor surgery.  A sick note for that isn't, for you, an assessment.

So what's an assessment?  It's school exams, be that school entrance/selection exams, school leaving exams.  It's university or college entrance exams.   It's job applications.  It's membership applications.  It's application for selection as a political candidate and standing for election for parliament or the local council.

What have all those things got in common if you're a successful person like an MP?  They're processes whereby you are reminded over, and over, and over about your strengths.  Even if you don't get elected, you've still got close enough to have examined your strengths, to be reminded of your strengths.

In all seriousness, how does an MP relate to what it feels like to fill out applications and go through assessment/eligibility processes that are all about your weaknesses?

How does someone for whom this sort of thing means reminding themselves and proving to others 'I can, I am able, I'm better than others' even begin to take on board that applications for benefits like PIP, ESA etc. are about reminding oneself and proving to others that 'I can't, I'm not able, I'm worse than others'?

And now I've said that, why haven't I heard any of the DPOs or benefits lobbies or whatever making mention of it?  Is it that it's just too obvious to us how awful it is for us to go through this that it's a rare person that would stop to think about the fact that for lots of politicians they probably genuinely don't get it?  Or is it that those organisations are scared of putting disabled people in a bad light  by stressing the 'I can't' aspect of it?

This is why for all that I think IDS is a revolting man, my disgust for him was that he cared so little about what he did that he didn't do his homework and that when it all started to go wrong, he didn't have the decency to sort it out, but just denied the problems and found an excuse to get out when he could.

Why do I mention him?  Because he was an army officer.  As I've mentioned elsethread, if your army pay doesn't come through, you won't get thrown out of the mess and you'll still get fed (unlike, now, army other ranks with the Pay as You Eat system.)  I believe it genuinely didn't occur to him that people would end up homeless and hungry, so my anger was that he did nothing when he found out, not for what he originally set up UC etc.

So in all fairness, I don't feel angry with politicians that genuinely don't get how traumatic sickness and disability application and assessment processes have become, but I feel angry with those that see the outcome and refuse to see it, plus those that do know how traumatic they are but don't care or even think it's good.

I think sometimes people here may think I make too many excuses for politicians, but I don't think I do that, I just see where the nastiness starts, which isn't always at the beginning of a process.  I think I'm one of the few people that detected a very significant shift in attitude towards disabled people on the part of David Cameron when Ivan died.

I think he already took a line of thinking that people not as disabled as Ivan weren't 'really' disabled, but when Ivan died, he also said something about his being better off dead.  I think he started thinking about that in relation to a lot of other disabled people and reinforced his modern Tory 'let them sink or swim' attitude.  If people can't surive modern global neoliberal whatever, then they'll be better off dead like Ivan, would be the attitude, maybe mostly subconscious.

Anyway, I think what's needed is some awareness raising.  I'm going to see who else I know (in real life) that may be interested.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2017, 09:15:57 PM »
''I think I'm one of the few people that detected a very significant shift in attitude towards disabled people on the part of David Cameron when Ivan died.''

I'm sorry Sunny but the only change in Cameron's attitude, following Ivan's death, came in the form of his hardening of his attitude to all disabled. He simply couldn't care less, one could be forgiven for thinking he felt if someone claimed to be disabled and were not dead in a week they were faking it. Cameron saw to it he claimed every penny available (not means tested)  from the state on Ivan's behalf in a way he behaved despicably just as fellow Tory Cecil Parkinson did when he had found his mistress had borne him a disabled child and went on to promise he would never see the child, one promise a Tory did keep. Yes Cameron never denied Ivan was his child but his actions were typical of a Tory and in Parkinson we were witness to just how a 'caring Tory' behaves. Cameron only cared for Ivan so long as the money (Welfare benefit monies)  were going into his generous bank account, once the money stopped so did Cameron's interest in the lives of any disabled people without 1m+ in their own name.

IDS?  If there was anyone more deserving a disabling illness I have yet to hear of them. A couple of things I would love to hear, either his wife is seeking a divorce or sadly had passed away but not before her father whom I would like to learn had thrown IDS off the family estate. IDS has through his zealous pursuit of UC and his other welfare reforms, in my opinion, the responsibility for thousands of premature deaths across the whole of Britain. The gutter is too good for IDS.

































































Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2017, 11:03:54 PM »
Well, you take your approach, and I'll take mine.

I still think a lot of MPs don't stop to think how it is from our perspective, and I think that that's the majority, and that therefore it's a battle worth fighting, a battle not completely lost.

(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2017, 07:45:04 AM »
''I still think a lot of MPs don't stop to think how it is from our perspective, and I think that that's the majority, and that therefore it's a battle worth fighting, a battle not completely lost.''

I am in complete agreement with you on that Sunny.

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2017, 03:07:53 PM »
I wonder whether maybe as regards Cameron & IDS, we are not totally at odds, simply considering different aspects of things and having slight differences that don't take away from our overall views?

However, I would say that where politics are concerned, an aspect of how I see people in general affects how I see politicians.  I see people as complex and very rarely all good or all bad.  I also think we have biases that we don't see.

So you see, when I look at someone like IDS, I don't expect clear-cut nastiness all the way through because I don't credit him with having that much intelligence or having thought things through properly.  That's what stopped him ever ending up as PM.  He comes up with what sounds like good ideas, but doesn't do his homework, tries to cover it up when it goes wrong etc.  So if we were to take UC, you and I might agree, I think, that IDS did things that are starving people, and are also causing much suffering short of that.  We would, I think, agree, that in relation to that and other benefits and help for disabled people, he did much that was evil.  However, I don't think the initial intent was evil, I think that what was evil was not fixing it and pretending all was well.

Likewise with Cameron.  I think he's a nasty piece of work, a liar, a person happy for people to die along the way as he pursues his career, a person happy for people to die to enrich himself and his friends.  All I say is that I think that at the point when Ivan died, he moved on from thinking less disabled people were faking it to thinking that severely disabled people were better off dead.

But in practical terms, it probably doesn't matter a great deal, because it's still about greed for money and power and status being considered more important than whether people they don't need to influence have any quality of life, or indeed simply life rather than death.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2017, 09:35:58 AM »
Good morning Sunny.

''So you see, when I look at someone like IDS, I don't expect clear-cut nastiness all the way through because I don't credit him with having that much intelligence or having thought things through properly.  That's what stopped him ever ending up as PM.  He comes up with what sounds like good ideas, but doesn't do his homework, tries to cover it up when it goes wrong etc.''

I think the lack of honest and real belief in IDS within the Tory party had a part in his never being seen as a realistic PM. His apparent inability to admit things were not going as he had intended with his welfare reforms whilst hoping it made him look strong, and clever as he did what he could to frustrate such as the HoC welfare committee's questions,  to his fellow Tories had in effect the opposite result.

''So if we were to take UC, you and I might agree, I think, that IDS did things that are starving people, and are also causing much suffering short of that.  We would, I think, agree, that in relation to that and other benefits and help for disabled people, he did much that was evil.''

In some senses IDS was trying to make the changes/reforms he hoped to make with one hand tied behind his back as Osborne cut the DWP's budget to the point where there was not a lot IDS could really do without openly attacking Osborne and that in the eyes of the top reaches of the Conservative Party would be looked on as treasonous.

''However, I don't think the initial intent was evil, I think that what was evil was not fixing it and pretending all was well.''

His intent at the outset was good and I have to admit even I can understand the purpose of his idea but just as IDS was frustrated by Osborne every Secretary of State at the DWP since IDS has found themselves hamstrung by the occupier of No11 Downing Street as they too find themselves compelled to pretend the roll out of UC and PiP can continue without further hindrance.

I noticed as I was typing away there was a news item on the BBC News where the S of S for the DWP was telling of how the department intends to do more to crackdown on Benefit fraud, from what I could catch it has to do with the way so much of welfare benefit claiming is being driven on-line and in doing this the government has begun using software to scan all claims looking for suspicious claims, things like 'same phrases used in claims' to 'same phone number/addresses used for different claimants'  I just wonder if this might be the reason behind the move to more or less force claimants to make any benefit claim on-line. I also wonder if the IT company supplying the software has any connection to Atos as I'm fairly sure Atos are a large IT based company. I would also be very wary of ever contacting the DWP through my own notebook or desktop computer, for one thing I would not want the DWP to monitor my web or computer usage, things such as email traffic, and for another till  such times as the DWP pay for my computer's security and my web access they can go hang so far as my using it to contact the DWP goes.

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2017, 01:10:52 PM »
I'm glad you mentioned what else they might gain access to via a claimant's computer because I hadn't thought of it.

As for 'same phrases used in claims',  I wonder how taking that as an indicator of possible fraud ties in with people using standard guides to filling in forms, or with the same adviser helping multiple people.

I worry about how technology's being used.  There are countries where the level of personal biometric storage on state computer systems is scary.  But something I've been increasingly aware of as a personal fear, and I don't know how prevalent this is, is that on the one hand with all the changes and cuts etc. with benefit, there's an increasing need for me to prove just how dysfunctional I am, whereas on the other hand, where does that leave me in the future if I'm trying to get back on my feet in a society where the government's telling people that employing more disabled people is damaging the economy?  That's leaving aside any of my personal doom-mongering of "what if it turns nasty?"  (What do you mean, it's already turned nasty?  I never rule out the possibility of anything from fascism to war.)
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2017, 02:23:34 PM »
''I wonder how taking that as an indicator of possible fraud ties in with people using standard guides to filling in forms, or with the same adviser helping multiple people.''

Sunny, I doubt very much if that has crossed the SoS's mind, it's just as you were saying in your earlier postings about how ministers simply don't think things through properly.

The way technology is being used by the likes of Google/Amazon (UK/COM)  to watch whichever web pages individuals visit or browse (even individuals searches are being noted) for example if I were to type in to Google's search engine a search for a new bed/microwave oven I would quickly find there are numerous adverts appearing on my screens for these items. I might be on the Guardian's web pages or any other advert carrying web page and the same adverts will appear. If, just for talking sake, I were to search for a pair of expensive training/running shoes and the DWP were, through their IT partners, monitoring my web usage I might find myself being called into either their offices (a JC+)  or a very short notice WCA. I'm sure you will have seen stories of claimants who have found themselves being interviewed by the DWP's fraud team following their, the DWP, having studied the claimant's Facebook entries, especially where there have been photos up loaded to the claimant's pages. If I were to suddenly start telling everyone who'd listen all about my solo sky-diving experience the same week as I completed my third New York marathon, how long do you think it would take the DWP to notice?

Presently the DWP, as I understand things, relies to a great extent on folk letting them know of benefit claimants whom they suspect are defrauding the system, if the DWP gains access to claimant's computer's I think their, the DWP's, reliance on members of the public reporting claimants would diminish as the DWP up-scaled its own software system to actually track any benefit claimants computer usage. I believe it is not beyond the capabilities of any government be it Labour or Conservative to be doing this.

Currently the intelligence services have systems in place which screen millions+ of emails being sent all over the UK, in the main these are concerned with anti-terrorism, if the government's DWP can persuade the treasury to give the DWP the monies to either extend the intelligence agencies work to include the monitoring of all benefit claimants or to give the DWP the capacity to do this themselves we will see the move from any form of paper based Welfare benefits to on-line or no access at all to any would be welfare benefit claimant. The DWP will need all claimants to be on-line in the future to allow such a system of monitoring to be as effective as possible.

I think years back I asked about how Sunshine managed to be running Ouch-Too without running foul of the DWP's rules as I suspected the DWP would look to declare Sunshine as being fit to work as in regular working. I mentioned that as in chatting about what the DWP might see as worth looking into, should it ever be granted legal access to any claimant's own computer system, as they could possible start noting how many hours a claimant might spend at their computer or examine a claimant's speed of typing or even how good/bad their written/typed English is. The first few things the DWP would be looking for is any thing that has given them pause to look again at something in a claimant's web activity after this it'd be much like the old paper based system where once a claimant's file is taken down from that dusty shelf and cleared of dust it is not returned to the shelf till the DWP has examined the claimant's claim forensically for any sign that no t has been left uncrossed and no i un-dotted.

Just remembered something I meant to add earlier, over recent years we have learnt about the undercover Police who were embedded into numerous protest groups, some of these undercover officers even going so far as fathering children with women they struck a relationship up with in order to maintain their cover, if the Police are prepared to go to such lengths I would not put anything past the DWP,  both the Police in their case and the DWP would share the one motto in any dodgy activity, ''Do not get caught''.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2017, 02:40:32 PM by JLR2 »

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #8 on: December 31, 2017, 03:21:23 PM »
Nothing to do with benefits, but I was used as cover by someone years ago.  The impact on me when I realised was immeasurable.  What hurt most was that if he'd asked, I'd have pretended  we were in a relationship to provide him cover. 

Something else comes to mind about online activity.  It relates to offline activity as well and people's assumptions.

One thing that many disabled people face is cominations of conditions being variable and the face we put on them.

Bipolar disorder is as near the perfect example as you can get on this one.  When depressed, you may either be the sort of person that hides away or the sort of person that follows society's conventions and puts a face on.  So people may well not see the depressed side.  When hypomanic, or, in quite a few cases, when manic, someone may seem very well indeed.  Bright, chatty, sociable.  They may be anything from optimistic to delusional.  Thus people that know them but not the details may think that they're very functional indeed.

I saw a documentary in which different angles on this were explored.  One man who happens to be a bipolar millionnaire found that when people realised he was ill, they refused to believe that he was a millionnaire.  Yet others, deluded that they are millionnaires when they're not, but not known to be bipolar, may be thought to be genuinely millionnaires.

I knew someone who'd made some mention of being bipolar or something but said he was on no meds, and he'd had a spliff and a few pints when he said it, so I thought he was just saying it in a 'you're not alone,  I'm also bonkers' way, especially when he said he wasn't on meds and had never been referred to a psychiatrist.

He then embarked on a jet-setting international music career.  He showed photos of the gigs he'd performed.  This was a man who also had, supposedly, crippling osteoarthritis arising from work.  I thought he was cheating. I then met his new partner who was tearing her hair out, having realised he was delusional.  Those pictures of gigs?  Actually just pictures from a couple of them from several angles, and you couldn't see the audience to realise they were just in a little bar/hotel.  I'm bipolar and I didn't spot he was experiencing manic delusions of grandeur.  He wasn't a terribly close friend, but I thought I knew him.

(The reason he wasn't seeing a psychiatrist was that his GP was dual-qualified, i.e. from his perspective he was seeing his GP not a psychiatrist, and given that I've had two dual-qualified psychiatrist-GPs in my life, again I should have thought of that.)

Which brings me on to the sticky bit - if you're delusional that you're functioning and tell everyone you are, then what?  If you know you're not, but put a brave face on, then what?

True story told me by someone who lived nearby a couple of years back when he discovered how vulnerable I felt.  He told me of a close relative of his who said he was depressed.  But, I was told, everyone knew he was faking it.  Oh, here we go, I thought.  No, I was told, listen to the rest.

The man's family, friends, neighbour's, GP all knew he was faking it, so it was no suprise the DWP found out he was.  So he lost his ESA, went on JSA and got a job.  Two weeks later, he hanged himself.  Oh, but of course he wasn't depressed, everyone knew he wasn't depressed...er, didn't they?

That's why male suicide rates are so hideously difficult to bring down.  Men caught in a horrible catch-22 position whereby they're not supposed to show weakness or emotion so then how do they get help with it?

But in an era when there is so much hostility towards disabled people, you don't have to be putting a brave face on it or delusional to put out an image in social media or in the street of being ok or whatever.  Who's to know if your facebook page says you're running a successful business and going skiing each year, that actually you're bedridden most of the time and the nearest you get to skiing is falling downstairs?

So this sort of thing is another expletive catch-22 for us.

Oh well, there's got to be a way round it.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #9 on: December 31, 2017, 04:17:50 PM »
Sunny, I'm unsure quite how this will come over so sorry if it sounds odd or anything like that. I'm not entirely sure exactly how depression is defined as there are times where for no apparent reason I will find myself thinking about calling a halt to everything. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it but when I do I find it unsettling. I have much to be sort of content about but know just how quickly my world can be turned completely upside down. Because of my reactions to various events in my past I'm well aware of just how quickly I can go from high to deeper than.....well deep. I had a wee while back, a couple of months back, some meetings with a doctor, ah canny spell the psyh... name, and she gave me good advice as to what I should do when I feel I'm heading off track.

Many here where I live will see me as I get about on my elbow crutches, I've had more than a few both here and in Berlin compliment me on the adaptions I've made to the elbow crutches my adding the cold water bottle, flask, torch and rolled up canvas seat, but they will not see or know of the agony I go through when I lie down such as every night when I go to bed. I might have spoke before of how following my car crash and the operations on my ankle the hospital had my leg/ankle stretched over the end of the bed with weights attached to help lengthen my leg again. I have nothing against the hospital for doing this but one unforeseen result of this is that I cannot sleep in the regular or traditional foetal position normally adopted by folk as they head off to sleep. My right foot from the point where the operation was done drops to the floor and anything that so much as brushes against it sends pain shooting through my entire being.

Another problem with my ankle/foot that was man made came about because of a mate I once had in Glasgow who visited me at the time I was in hospital. This mate was trying to impress the woman who was sitting on the other side of my bed during the visiting times, the woman was actually the girlfriend I had been seeing at the time of my car crash, the mate was raising the hospital bed using the foot-pedal before stepping on the quick release pedal sending the bed to the lowest setting with the resulting jolt snapping my ankle time and time again. Each time he did this I could not help but scream in agony yelling at the idiot to pack in his carry on. Eventually I had to do my best to punch the clown. The damage he inflicted on my damaged ankle saw it left permanently twisting to the right and this makes trying to sleep near impossible without near overdosing on painkilling tablets every night. Like those you were saying Sunny who suffer bi-polar folks disabilities are not always as obvious as joe public might expect.

A simple thing such as my sitting at the wrong angle to view my computer's screen can just as when I crane my neck to look upwards for more than a few moments bring a crushing headache which sees me having to get hold of my naproxen pdq, I've had it explained to me by my doctor that again due to my car crash there is damage to the bones in my neck and there's nothing beyond the naproxen that he can do to help me.

Living as we do with our various disabilities Sunny is hard enough but to know that we will have at some point another assessment where from the off we are being viewed with suspicion and to know in ourselves what we are going through it is hard. For me I find it hellish being afraid to ever let myself feel too happy, yes I can chuckle at something funny on the telly but as each day nears its end I think about what the next day's post will bring, as the phone rings I find myself looking desperately to see if I recognise the  number for fear it could be the DWP's call to invite me to apply for PiP or UC. The nightmare goes on and as it does I find myself wishing my life away as I want to reach pension age sooner than nature intends just to be free of the reassessment regime we are all facing just now.

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2017, 08:28:11 PM »
 >bighugs<

Yes, we can see someone on crutches and think it's a balance problem or a basic functional thing like a weak leg or a joint that doesn't bend fully, and not see the pain or dysfunction that isn't immediately visible to us.

So you can walk around on your crutches in a society that expects men to put a face on it, and who'd guess that you'd go home and be in horrible pain?

As for depression, personally I think the psychiatrists have got it all wrong trying to cluster ity together the way they do anyway, because it varies so much.  Some people get very slowed down and some people get very agitated.  Personally as a 'mental' person, I don't give a toss whether you meet any diagnostic criteria.  If you feel ghastly and don't feel you can go on, then depression's as good a word as any, although other words like despair will do.

One of the best things that's happened to me for years was when earlier this year I was feeling very rough and a bipolar friend pointed out to me very firmly that something had just happened that would leave anyone feeling that way, so don't let anyone say it was  because of my bipolar moods.  It was a wonderful reminder for me that feeling ghastly isn't just about a label, it's a normal response to horrible things happening.  But just as running a fever and directing all your body's energy to fighting an infection, leaving you weak, is a normal reaction to an infection but is still not being ok, then feeling depressed or whatever when life is horrible is a normal reaction but is still not being  ok.

As for me when heading off track, well I generally turn to other people.  I'm not sure what else to do.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #11 on: December 31, 2017, 09:49:43 PM »
'psychiatrist' ah that's how to spell it, thanks  :-) 

A while back, years ago I suppose, many felt the only sign of someone being disabled was through their either being in a wheelchair or reliant on a white stick and even then the person had to be either old or very young, school kid ages. Since the days of what was then New Labour's welfare reforms and their hardening by first the coalition government and then the current government the media printed and televised has seen many abled bodied, who themselves have been struggling under recent governments, looking on anyone who appears too young, as against the old stereotype old age pensioner in a wheelchair, with distrust first before any other thought is given to the chances of the wheelchair user actually being disabled. I'm not entirely sure but I think I remember there being a report years back of a younger man in a manual wheelchair being tipped out of it by some punters leaving their local pub and being ordered to stop faking his disability.

I also have the belief that the welfare reforms begun by New Labour were really about trying to find another way to, in effect, massage the unemployment figures in a not too dissimilar way to the way Thatcher's government encouraged doctors to issue sick lines and benefit offices to put claimants on to disabled benefits rather than unemployment benefits and in doing so lower the unemployment rates at the time without repeating Thatcher's method of 'faking' the employment statistics. When the unemployment began to fall New Labour sought to move as many previously classed as disabled claimants onto unemployment benefits and in doing so their, New Labour's, hope was to see the welfare bill fall.

The advice I took away from my doctor dealing with my mental health was when I find myself becoming concerned about my doing anything serious so far as my sorting out, let's say future business, I should sit myself down with a particular old movie I have on DVD. The movie is French, in black and white and stars an actor called Jacques Tati. The French title is 'Les Vacances De M. Hulot' I know it as Mr Hulot's Holiday and whilst I do not speak French the sight gags/jokes are absolutely brilliant. The movie is set at a pace that really is wonderfully relaxing and gentle, telling of Mr Hulot's holiday by the seaside. The movie really takes me back to the days of my childhood when as a wee boy I would go down to Saltcoats on the firth of Clyde. I find watching the movie does help me settle that bit and think about other things rather than what was in my thoughts. I still know, as the doctor minded me, that should I find the movie has not helped me I've to phone the number given to me by another doctor, a psychiatrist, whom I spoke with prior to my last visit over to Berlin.

I'll away and open some short bread ready for the Bells, I have a can or two of beer and my Johnny Walker Black Label handy and because of the nature where I live and the fact that a driving licence is pretty much vital to getting around I won't be having too much of either the beer or Johnny Walker, I guess once a year isnae too bad eh? >biggrin<
« Last Edit: December 31, 2017, 09:59:44 PM by JLR2 »

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4745
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2017, 11:06:20 PM »
I've searched and searched for the film that's 'me', as it were.  My late father had a favourite film and I watched it with him at least three times before realising that for him it was pretty much autobiographical.

Having said that, I realise that the videos I most relate to are episodes of Dad's Army.  I was in the TA for a couple of decades.  There's a particular episode with a court of enquiry where Cpl Jones keeps marching in and out, slamming to attention and shouting "Sah!" and there are all the others there.  I've got the full boxed set of Dad's Army.

(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #13 on: December 31, 2017, 11:38:12 PM »
I think I've the episode of Dad's Army you mention Sunny on DVD which I copied over from a video I found in our local charity shop, isn't that the one where the guys use up their 5 rounds of ammunition trying to shoot down an aircraft?

My Army experience is not quite what I would like to have been, though I joined up back in 1974 going into the Royal Armoured Corps with the intention of serving with the 4th Royal Tank Regiment but a combination of things saw me leaving Bovington voluntarily very soon after arriving in the September. I'm happy now though that I've been reunited with my Attestation Bible but even though I had further spells in the TA I cannot claim in any way a record to be proud of. I can still mind things like the general purpose machine gun being referred to as the gimpy and the 'cock, hook and look' routine with the 7.62 SLR, oh and 'pokey drill' with the same rifle, pokey drill was a favourite exercise with the PT instructor we had at 15Para Yorkhill in Glasgow and it was murderous on the arms.

Believe it or not as I'm sitting here I'm in my NI issue combat trousers, my Army issue woolly jumper and a No2 dress issue shirt. I have a Parachute Regiment issue combat jacket hanging through in my wardrobe and both my combat boots and dress shoes are polished to parade ground standard. If I were ever asked my biggest regret in life it would have to be leaving the RAC and never having served any 'colour time' in my Regiment. One consolation I hold onto is my membership of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards Association which I joined at their invite after my having done the painting for their Sergeant's Mess in Fally, Fallingbostel.

I was just watching on my telly the New Year coming in in Germany through my German satellite box and now I'll wait to see the Bells coming in here before I toddle off to me kip. Just now I'll pop through the hoose and fill the two wee hot water bottles I bought recently as I've discovered they can help with the problems with my right foot. It also helps me make use of the hot water my open coal fire provides.

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Politicians & proving you meet a standard
« Reply #14 on: January 01, 2018, 12:05:34 AM »
Happy New Year Sunny   >biggrin< >hugs<