Baroness Murphy Describing 12 Welfare Reform Deaths As Nasty & Inaccurate Tosh

The Freedom of Information Officer
The House of Lords
Westminster
London

Dear House of Lords,

Freedom of Information Act 2000
Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002

Many I enquire of the noble Lords a reply to questions in terms of
statute and the above legislation?

Question 1. During a well intentioned and genuine effort to help,
the Baroness Murphy, whom I also understand is also a medical
doctor and esteemed professor, described the reports of
Welfare-Reform-Deaths by 12 different journalists in different
articles of the deaths of 12 people by suicide, Work Capability
Assessment induced heart attack, and in the case of one tragedy the
collateral homicide of a five month old child and unborn baby being
taken to their death by the pregnant mother as.............

"NASTY AND INACCURATE TOSH"

This on the official House of Lords website...

Source:
http://lordsoftheblog.net/2011/09/24/do-...

I can empathise with the Baroness Murphy that one of the other
related websites reporting the many Welfare-Reform deaths is
shocking. How can it be otherwise? It was created by the friends of
another Welfare-Reform-Death victim. In memory of the late Paul
Reekie from Edinburgh who committed suicide when notified his
Housing Benefit was to be removed. The Baroness writes, and I
quote...

"newspaper reports are notoriously inaccurate, they tend to report
what others attribute the cause to but obviously do not record what
the individual was thinking or feeling or the full circumstance".

My apologies to the Baroness, but she is wrong on so many levels.

My question is this. With all due respect the Baroness has failed
to conduct proper due diligence and fallen into a trap of
unscientific generalisation. In order for the Baroness Murphy and
other Lords and Ladies within the House of Lords to understand the
FACTS as opposed to the dismissal of 12 deaths, including unborn
children as "Nasty and Inaccurate Tosh"" would the Baroness and the
noble members of the House of Lords like me to send the Copy of HM
Coroners hearing? This is evidence and FACT of the highest calibre.
Even with Parliamentary Privilege, I would be most disappointed
were an honourable member of the House of Lords to describe a
Coroner of Her Majesty as "Nasty" or "Inaccurate"?

Said Coroner was kind enough to supply me with an official verbatim
CD of the Inquest so that I could conduct the due diligence, which
sadly the Baroness Murphy was unwilling to do.

Question 2: Given the FACT that Baroness Murphy has written off the
deaths of 12 people due to Welfare-Reform problems as "Nasty and
Inaccurate Tosh" would the Baroness and the noble Lords like me to
supply copies of the actual suicide notes, for example from the
late Richard Sanderson.......

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/...

There can be NO ambiguity, nor libelling of the press and media as
before his death, Mr Sanderson left a carefully worded suicide note
to his wife and child. I quote HM Coroner, Dr Fiona Wilcox (not the
"Nasty Inaccurate Tosh" press/memorial websites) in the case of
this Welfare-Reform-Suicide.....

"After returning a verdict of suicide at Westminster Coroner's
Court on Tuesday, 23 August 2011, Dr Fiona Wilcox said: 'What I
find particularly tragic in this case is this act appears to be
pursued by a man who was not suffering from an illness and appears
to have made a considered act in response to his inability to find
employment. The FACT his housing benefit was about to be cut and
the family would be at risk of having nowhere to live, and being
ordered to give up his training course because of the Job Centre's
rules, would appear to be especially poignant and tragic.'

The late Mr Sanderson was already a highly qualified, but
temporarily unemployed helicopter pilot seeking training in another
occupation due to job shortages in his specified profession.

Eventually, Mr Sanderson was pushed over the edge to suicide by the
Department of Work and Pensions, via their housing benefit
administrators at local authority level looking to save £30 per
week in housing benefit and threatening the Sanderson family with
homelessness.

Given that the suicide letters are the written words of a father
and husband driven to death and recorded indelibly - that these
last missives from Mr Sanderson were examined by the police and
held as genuine by them and HM Coroner, does the Baroness Murphy
REGRET calling such deaths or the recording of such tragedies due
to Welfare Reform problems on a memorial website "Nasty and
Inaccurate Tosh" ?

Question 3: In light of the above initial examples where it is HM
Coroner and NOT press, media or internet driven recording or
Welfare Reform Deaths, will the Baroness Murphy APOLOGISE in the
Chamber of the House of Lords for misrepresenting the memorial of
such tragic deaths as "Nasty and Inaccurate Tosh"?

Question 4: The noble Baroness Murphy should be forgiven for her
shock. Most right minded and decent people would be appalled and
naturally question the veracity of the 12 reported deaths and 8
other alleged deaths totalling a possible 20 Welfare Reform driven
deaths so far under scrutiny.

In order not to offend the Baroness further, I have distilled the
initial 12 deaths to be listed on a 'neutral' and generally
non-offensive website...

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1...

My final question for now is given there ARE, by the authority and
account of HM Coroner, deaths where culpability can be traced to
the Department of Work & Pensions and defective Welfare Reform,
along with already BADLY FRAMED and evidently DANGEROUS
legislation, will the noble Lords and Ladies now establish a
'Formal Committee of Inquiry' within and hosted by the most
honourable Chamber of the House of Lords to do the very thing
required by the Baroness Murphy? That is to properly, fully, and
openly examine, research, study and take evidence in the matter of
the past Welfare Reform Deaths, and the ongoing risk, given the
evidently defective Welfare Reform system, of there being more
deaths due to the way the current Welfare Reform legislation is
being framed, and passed without any understanding or input of the
families of the many bereaved?

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Calum McLean.
7th October 2011

Dear House of Lords,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information INTERNAL REVIEWS.

I am writing to request an INTERNAL REVIEW of the House of Lords's
handling of my FOI request 'Baroness Murphy Describing 12 Welfare
Reform Deaths As Nasty & Inaccurate Tosh'.

I would like you to clarify EXACTLY and DEFINITIVELY what parts of
your public authority (the House of Lords) 'ARE' and 'ARE NOT' not
subject to the Freedom of Information legislation?

You will forgive me if I apply the metaphor that "you cannot get a
little bit pregnant". It is bewildering to citizens of the United
Kingdom that some selective bits of a public authority are covered
by the Freedom of Information legislation, whilst other,
potentially embarrassing bits have exempted themselves.

For example, if the ENTIRE chamber of the House of Lords, acting IN
CONCERT in debate discuss an item as a COLLEGIATE GROUP, I suggest
this entity is a de facto public authority, and as such IS subject
to the Freedom of Information Act?

Yes? No?

I look forward to receiving the detail of this INTERNAL APPEAL ?

Thank you.

Calum McLean
8th November 2011.

Original FOI Request:-

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ba...