AADHIKARonline contextual and evidential updater commentary on the ROLE of Michael Foot -1

2335 Hrs GMT 

London 

Wednesday 

03 March 2010: 

By © Muhammad Haque.  

Michael Foot: in their coverage of the news of the demise of Michael Foot, says the London newspaper the Times, the ‘world of politics’ has ‘united’ to pay tribute to the former leader of the former Labour Party. 

Not only has the ‘world of politics’…... 


The ‘world’ [such that it is] of the ’media’ too has ‘united’ to pay generous tributes to Michael Foot.. All of which is utterly predictable. As was the staged utterances by UK G Brown [‘flanked’] [as described by Huw Edwards presenting the 1700 GMT BBC News Channel Bulletin] [on his right, by Harriet Harman] sounding like a robot as he uttered the various ‘achievements and qualities’. 


As compared to UK G Brown, the performances [such as they must have been] as shown on the BBC News in the evening by Tony Bliar and UK Con leader David ‘Dave’ Cameron came across as visually and thus in zombifying terms, ‘more credible’! 


The MISSING core of the evidence was and is most certainly likely to remain the truth of Michael Foot’s role. 


And his role was in essence far less laudable even from a ‘left’ standpoint than the tributes and obits are showing it to have been. 


I observed Michael Foot during the 1970s and I observed him right up to 2 May 1997. 


I was not at all impressed by the role he was playing. 


Contrary to the 'package' as uttered by  George Jones, who has just enjoyed another platform on the BBC News Channel in the ‘press front pages’ slot. George Jones failed to tell the truth about Michael Foot. As did G Brown, T Blair and D Cameron. And that truth is that Michael Foot was  contextually culturally and historically parochial. He was so because he was in a prison of parochial ‘politics’ in Britain. Even in the 1970s, Michael Foot was a prisoner of parochial politics. Had he been active and had he been in post as a fronter for any of the ‘mainstream’ Political outfits, wrongly still called Political parties today, on 3 March 2010, he would have been even more so. 


[To be continued] 

Twitter, to End POVERTY

follow me on Twitter

KHOODEELAAR! action update diagnostics: What is the Big Business agenda-touting CLIQUE that controls the ‘formal decision-making and the actual policies of the most deprived inner city borough in all England, Tower Hamlets Borough Council’ doing today, Wednesday 03 March 2010? NOTHING. NOTHING, that is, to oppose poverty in all its dimensions. In fact all that the same clique would be doing today would INCREASE poverty, inequality, discrimination and violation…. The battle continues against all of that., And we update today what took place in the campaign and how we opposed them four years ago today

2200 Hrs GMT 

London 

Wednesday 

03 March 2010. 

Editor © Muhammad Haque.   

What is the Big Business agenda-touting CLIQUE that controls the ‘formal decision-making and the actual policies of the most deprived inner city borough in all England, Tower Hamlets Borough Council’  doing today, Wednesday 03 March 2010? NOTHING.   NOTHING, that is, to oppose poverty in all its dimensions. In fact all that the same clique would be doing today would INCREASE poverty, inequality, discrimination and violation…. The battle continues against all of that., And we update today what took place in the campaign and how we opposed them four years ago today…On Wednesday 01 March 2006 - exactly four years ago TODAY Wednesday [2 days of difference in calendar dates that is, Wednesday 01 March 2006 and Wednesday 03 March 2010] KHOODEELAAR! the campaign saying No to the corrupt clique in control of Tower Hamlets Council that had INVITED the Big Business agenda Crossrail hole attacks on the East End of London held a demonstration against that clique. The rally was outside the ‘Mulberry Place’ HQ of Tower Hamlets Council. The event was conducted, as usual, by the Khoodeelaar! campaign Organiser  Muhammad Haque who updated the rally on the campaign so far. Several speakers were invited to share their thoughts. They included a number of sitting councillors, all on the OPPOSITION benches. The Tories were not there. They did not constitute a group, having less than a group on the Council at that date. The numerical opposition was the Liberal democrats. Muhammad Haque invited three of their councillors to address the rally. The first one from the Lib Dem group invited by Muhammad Haque to speak was Janet Ludlow. She was still the official [and numerically accurately] leader of the Opposition on Tower Hamlets Council. Janet Ludlow spoke briefly. Two others who also spoke were Akikur Rahman and Louise Alexander. They too spoke briefly. However, the brief speech by Louise Alexander contained the significantly original [in the context of the actual position on Crossrail, hole attacks as being portrayed by the Group leadership in Tower Hamke4ts and also ‘centrally’ by the likes of Tom Brake MP and regionally as had been exhibited by Lynne Featherstone at the London Assembly] the Lib Dems] factors about the Crossrail hole attacks being unnecessary. She also said that the [controlling clique – these are Khoodeelaar! words] on the Tower Hamlets Council had been putting about propaganda denying the4 truth of the Crossrail attacks and their impact on the East End community. This was not surprising given that Louise Alexander then went on [in the same evening] to speak at the ‘full council’ [held that same evening] to the motion she had formally tabled AGAINST the Tower Hamlets Council role in the Crossrail hole attacks being mounted on the East End of London. As we have reported on dozens of occasions since that date, the motion that Louise Alexander tabled and spoke to on 01 March 2006 was the closest that any motion by any sitting or even would-be Tower Hamlets Councillor came to the contents of the Khoodeelaar! Campaign demands and statements. [To be continued]

Twitter, to End POVERTY

follow me on Twitter

On Wednesday 01 March 2006 - exactly four years ago TODAY Wednesday [2 days of difference in calendar dates that is, Wednesday 01 March 2006 and Wednesday 03 March 2010] KHOODEELAAR! the campaign saying No to the corrupt clique in control of Tower Hamlets Council that had INVITED the Big Business agenda Crossrail hole attacks on the East End of London held a demonstration against that clique. The rally was outside the ‘Mulberry Place’ HQ of Tower Hamlets Council. The event was conducted, as usual, by the Khoodeelaar! campaign Organiser Muhammad Haque who updated the rally on the campaign so far. Several speakers were invited to share their thoughts. They included a number of sitting councillors, all on the OPPOSITION benches. The Tories were not there. They did not constitute a group, having less than a group on the Council at that date. The numerical opposition was the Liberal democrats. Muhammad Haque invited three of their councillors to address the rally. The first one from the Lib Dem group invited by Muhammad Haque to speak was Janet Ludlow. She was still the official [and numerically accurately] leader of the Opposition on Tower Hamlets Council. Janet Ludlow spoke briefly. Two others who also spoke were Akikur Rahman and Louise Alexander. They too spoke briefly. However, the brief speech by Louise Alexander contained the significantly original [in the context of the actual position on Crossrail, hole attacks as being portrayed by the Group leadership in Tower Hamke4ts and also ‘centrally’ by the likes of Tom Brake MP and regionally as had been exhibited by Lynne Featherstone at the London Assembly] the Lib Dems] factors about the Crossrail hole attacks being unnecessary. She also said that the [controlling clique – these are Khoodeelaar! words] on the Tower Hamlets Council had been putting about propaganda denying the4 truth of the Crossrail attacks and their impact on the East End community. This was not surprising given that Louise Alexander then went on [in the same evening] to speak at the ‘full council’ [held that same evening] to the motion she had formally tabled AGAINST the Tower Hamlets Council role in the Crossrail hole attacks being mounted on the East End of London. As we have reported on dozens of occasions since that date, the motion that Louise Alexander tabled and spoke to on 01 March 2006 was the closest that any motion by any sitting or even would-be Tower Hamlets Councillor came to the contents of the Khoodeelaar! Campaign demands and statements.

2150 [2120] Hrs GMT

London

Wednesday

03 March 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

  On Wednesday 01 March 2006 - exactly four years ago TODAY Wednesday [2 days of difference in calendar dates that is, Wednesday 01 March 2006 and Wednesday 03 March 2010] KHOODEELAAR! the campaign saying No to the corrupt clique in control of Tower Hamlets Council that had INVITED the Big Business agenda Crossrail hole attacks on the East End of London held a demonstration against that clique. The rally was outside the ‘Mulberry Place’ HQ of Tower Hamlets Council. The event was conducted, as usual, by the Khoodeelaar! campaign Organiser  Muhammad Haque who updated the rally on the campaign so far. Several speakers were invited to share their thoughts. They included a number of sitting councillors, all on the OPPOSITION benches. The Tories were not there. They did not constitute a group, having less than a group on the Council at that date. The numerical opposition was the Liberal democrats. Muhammad Haque invited three of their councillors to address the rally. The first one from the Lib Dem group invited by Muhammad Haque to speak was Janet Ludlow. She was still the official [and numerically accurately] leader of the Opposition on Tower Hamlets Council. Janet Ludlow spoke briefly. Two others who also spoke were Akikur Rahman and Louise Alexander. They too spoke briefly. However, the brief speech by Louise Alexander contained the significantly original [in the context of the actual position on Crossrail, hole attacks as being portrayed by the Group leadership in Tower Hamke4ts and also ‘centrally’ by the likes of Tom Brake MP and regionally as had been exhibited by Lynne Featherstone at the London Assembly] the Lib Dems] factors about the Crossrail hole attacks being unnecessary. She also said that the [controlling clique – these are Khoodeelaar! words] on the Tower Hamlets Council had been putting about propaganda denying the4 truth of the Crossrail attacks and their impact on the East End community. This was not surprising given that Louise Alexander then went on [in the same evening] to speak at the ‘full council’ [held that same evening] to the motion she had formally tabled AGAINST the Tower Hamlets Council role in the Crossrail hole attacks being mounted on the East End of London. As we have reported on dozens of occasions since that date, the motion that Louise Alexander tabled and spoke to on 01 March 2006 was the closest that any motion by any sitting or even would-be Tower Hamlets Councillor came to the contents of the Khoodeelaar! Campaign demands and statements.

[To be continued]

____________________________

"Crossrail shall not pass through Brick Lane Area"

Khoodeelaaronline

02.03.2006 01:55

Analysis

Indymedia

Social Struggles

London

World

The Khoodeelaar! Brick Lane London E1 area campaign against Tower Hamlets Council’s role in the Crossrail hole

Held a robust demonstration against the Council at 6PM on Wednesday 1 March 2006. It was joined by George Galloway MP who compared the Crossrail hole attack with the Mosley Black Shirts attack on the East End Jews in the 1930s. 'They shall not pass'

http://www.photogenicstudio.co.uk/khoodeelaardemo/

Khoodeelaaronline

e-mail: lawmedia@hotmail.com

Homepage: http://www.khoodeelaar.com

Download this article in pdf format >>

Email this article to someone >>

Submit an addition or make a quick comment on this article >>

Comments

Hide the following 3 comments

Crossrail shall not pass through Brick Lane

03.03.2006 11:43

Me and my mates with you all the way.

We are ready to back you 100 percent and we are going to stop that Crossrail digging or vandalising our area.

I have mates in Stepney that are keen to come and join the fight against Crossrail

I have mates in Whitechapel that are getting organised to stop Crossrail attacking our east end.

Good luck to you brothers and sisters well done for this fight keep it up and we are with you all the way.

Solidarity and as Salaam to you all

East End Youth

George Galloway MP - summary of speech against Crossrail hole Bill

03.03.2006 16:52

This Edition of Khoodeelaaronline has been updated [3rd Edition of the day] at 1630 Hrs GMT on Friday 3 March 2006 from London United Kingdom

Key points from the speech against Crossrail hole delivered by George Galloway MP at the Khoodeelaar! Demonstration on 1 March 2006:-

1. George Galloway MP for Bethnal Green and Bow spoke at the Khoodeelaar! Demonstration against Tower Hamlets Council over that Council’s role on Crossrail hole Bill, on Wednesday 1 March 2006 outside the ‘Town hall’ Mulberry Place in London E 14.

2. His first point was that he had just been to a meeting at the Home Office in London. He said that Tony McNulty, a Home Office minister, was about to publish new rules that would adversely affect the people in the Brick Lane London E1 area.

3. Galloway then stated factual links that explained the real agenda of the Blaired UK Government in its push for the Crossrail hole across the East End Borough of Tower Hamlets – to dispossess the people, to devastate the area and to make the area ready for takeover by the Big Business interests and Big capital

4. Galloway also recalled that the way that the Crossrail hole plan was being pushed  had telling similarities with the way that the British Union of Fascists fronted by Oswald Mosley had targeted the then mainly-Jewish inhabited parts of the same East End of London. Galloway paid tributes to the fighters against Mosley’s Fascists and reiterated the determination of today’s. East End campaigners against the Crossrail hole attacks to stop the Crossrail passing through our area. “They shall not pass” said George Galloway, evoking the spirit of the 1930s East End anti-fascists. “They shall not pass” echoed the demonstrators. “Crossrail shall not pass” said demonstration leader Muhammad Haque., “Crossrail shall not pass” said the demonstrators.

[These Khoodeelaar! news and events reports are to continue]

http://www.khoodeelaar.com

Khoodeelaaronline

e-mail: lawmedia@hotmail.com

Homepage: http://www.khoodeelaar.com

Tower Hamlets Crossrail-hole councillors behaved as bullies

04.03.2006 12:37

Khoodeelaaronline received [on Thursday 2 March 2006] comments from one of the speakers at the Khoodeelaar! demonstration against Crossrail-hole Council - outside the Tower Hamlets 'Town Hall' on 1 March 2006.

Speaking to khoodeelaaronline, Kay Jordan, the director of the Spitalfields Small Business Association [SSBA] said,

“I am disgusted with the behaviour of those individuals who insulted a woman councillor and tried to undermine her confidence as she spoke in support of her motion.

That motion had more sense in it than the contents of the motions put forward by the whole lot of them on the subject over the past three years.

They are forcing the community to have no tolerance towards them. If they will not even show respect to a woman speaking in support of the community, which is what that motion was then what is the point of our having a so-called elected council?

Are they saying that they will bully us because they can do so in the safety of the council chamber?

Do they think we are stupid and won’t notice how they are treating this one councillor who had the guts to stand up and speak out against the wrong polices of this Council?

Twitter, to End POVERTY

follow me on Twitter

KHOODEELAAR! Noting the 2nd of the series on 'the dispossessed' being run by the Crossrail scam-peddling, Big Business agenda-promoting monopoly London evening ‘newspaper’ [now ‘free’!] the EVENING STANDARTD. Our commentary follows shortly

2358 GMT
London
Tuesday
02 March 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000008955 StartFragment:0000002101 EndFragment:0000008919

Michael Heseltine is exposed as an idiot for plugging Ken Livingstone's lies

AADHIKARonline in association with Khoodeelaar! No to Crossrail hole Bill

1010 Hrs GMT London Friday 15.06.2007

The BBC Radio 4 Today programme broadcast a solemnly pronounced news item about Margaret Thatcher’s 'deputy Prime Minister' Michael Heseltine calling for a system of local government in Britain that can only be described as the mass mayorisation of big cities. Heseltine made a particular point of calling for British cities to ape the USA and get a mayor in every excusable place

By© Muhammad Haque

1010 Hrs GMT

London Friday 15 June 2007

What a desperate man Michael Heseltine must be!

And what an ignorant and backward seeker of the minute’s media glory he must be.

He is also definitely a Ca-moroned Conservative!

The Ca-morons’ motto seems to be:

“Get rid of whatever sense you once might have claimed to possess!”

Is it the proverbial dotage that has caught up with the opportunist at last? He was one of the most irrational opponents of local democracy and accountability when he held power as a Minister in Thatcher’s cabinet.

Heseltine is often overrated in the media, mainly because the ignorant and the immoral media 'pundits' themselves don’t have the record of opposing authoritarians themselves.

So they used Heseltine as a sort of default opponent of Thatcher. And in doing so, they inflated the ego of the man who needed no inflating. He was the most accomplished inflater of his ego himself.

His intervention as relayed by the BBC today, in calling for the further powers to be given to authoritarian self-seekers is in total conflict with any image Heseltine might wish to promote of himself as a backer of a democratic say by local people in the peoples'' affairs.

Heseltine was wrong in 1981 sand Heseltine is wrong again over this mayorisation in 2007.

Scrap his call and with it scrap the powers that are already given to the likes of the mayor in London.

The Greater London Assembly is a joke. It was intended to be a joke. It must have been intended to be a joke. Given its records, it could not have been intended to act as a demander of accountability from the holder of the office of mayor in the name of London. And it has lived [!] up to that agenda.

What is needed is an Assembly without a mayor. The Assembly should have the elected titular head for a year and election to the title should be held annually. That is the nearest way we can have some say for the people of London on what goes on in our name. In every part. On every key issue that affects us.

The word mayor is an egomaniac’s recipe. Scrap it now. And save ourselves a great deal of waste and division and damage.

AADHIKARonline in association with Khoodeelaar! No to Crossrail hole Bill

_____________________________________________ 

Twitter, to End POVERTY

The Dispossessed: Mother of 11 lives on just £7 a day per child

David Cohen 
02.03.10

• Special report: The Dispossessed
• How Whitehall targets have failed London's poor
• Prince William and Londoners unite to fight poverty
• Sink school transformed with great expectations
• Poverty in the capital is an election issue
• What should be done? Have your say

Ads by Google

Sponsor a Child

For just £15/month you can change a child's life. Please help today!

London Cooking Classes

A Fabulous Cooking Experience With Professional Chefs From Just £18

Children's Beds

UK's widest selection of children's beds. Shop by style, price, size.

2010 Cutekid Contest

Cute Baby Photo Contest Submit Your Cute Kids Photos to Win

Having a baby made Barbara feel she mattered. She didn't plan so many but her devotion means they can break the cycle of dependency...

The movies? Have I ever taken my kids to the movies?” Barbara Harriott repeats my question with a sense of incredulity and by way of reply flings open the door of her musty living room where six of her youngest children sleep. “Three of them share this double bunk, two are on single beds and one uses that pull-out settee,” she says, beginning the grand tour, her baby on her hip.

“The two older boys sleep up here” — she heads up the uncarpeted wooden stairway — “and I sleep with the baby across the hall from my oldest girl. Can you imagine,” she says, “how much it would cost if I took all of my kids to the movies? I'd have to save for a year!”

Ms Harriott, 44, has 11 children, nine boys and two girls, ranging in age from 25 years to six months. They all live, bar the oldest, in an overcrowded house in Lewisham with four bedrooms, two lavatories, one bath and a small kitchen where they eat in shifts.

Their home is a picture of poverty: peeling walls, damp mouldy ceilings, bare bulbs, heating turned down to save on gas bills, and clothes stuffed into plastic bags and piled on landings like the back room of a charity shop. This week the Evening Standard is publishing a series of articles highlighting the plight of London's dispossessed, the 41 per cent of the capital's children who live below the poverty line, and today we focus on a type of family often stigmatised as “spongers”.

Of course, not all large families are negatively viewed. When Cambridge-educated Helena Morrissey, also 44, gave birth to the eighth of her nine children she was dubbed a “City supermum”. Mrs Morrissey, who lives in Chelsea, said she “didn't plan to have so many children”, a sentiment echoed by Ms Harriott, but in all other respects our response to the two women could not be more different.

The reason is that as CEO of a City investment management firm with more than £40 billion of assets under her control, Mrs Morrissey can afford her brood. Crucially, she also has a husband, Richard, a former publishing executive, who has fathered all of her children. We often take a critical view of women such as Ms Harriott whose children have been fathered by five different men, none of whom married her or stuck around to help. In her case, it's costing the taxpayer a small fortune, the state funding her housing costs, council tax, and daily living expenses to the tune of £38,844 a year. Yet seen from her children's point of view, after housing costs, the family are left with £543 a week to live on, the equivalent of just £7 a child per day, and well below the poverty line for a family like theirs of £689 per week. The story of the Harriott family is double-edged in that it illustrates why beating poverty is not simply about money and getting the state to pay more, but also has to address the life choices that individuals, themselves often damaged by the poverty of their childhood, go on to make. Born in south London, Ms Harriott never knew her father and was brought up by her Caribbean mother who worked on the production line of a toy factory. “I lived with my mother and younger brother in the spare room of my aunt's house, and my aunt looked after us while my mother was at work,” she begins. “For a while we were a happy family but my childhood ended when I was six and my aunt, who had her own husband and children, threw us out and we ended up on the street.

“I can never forget that time, my mother lugging all our possessions, and me, in tears, carrying my two-year-old brother on my back and walking aimlessly up and down the street. At night we slept in bushes in the parks. It was cold and dark and I was so terrified that someone would attack us. To this day, I can't say whether this went on for a few days or a few weeks. Eventually somebody from social services saw us and put us in a hostel.”

The family was re-housed on a council estate in Deptford and Ms Harriott was enrolled at Deptford Green School, the same school her children attend now, and for a while things went relatively smoothly. But at 13, her mother had a “stress-induced nervous breakdown”, and despite a recuperative spell in hospital was never the same again. “She lost her job, her confidence and became depressed. We had no money and it was left to me to keep our household functioning but my interest in schooling suffered and I fell behind. At school my teachers told me I'd never amount to anything. At home my mum just stared into space not caring if I existed or not. I remember sitting in my room in darkness, tears running down my face, just wanting my miserable life to be over.”

But at 19 she had an experience that made her feel positive about herself for the first time in years. She fell pregnant. “I felt like I was creating something,” she says. “And then, when I gave birth to Aaron, being able to make my baby laugh and smile made me feel good. I discovered that I was rather good at being a mother. I felt I'd proved my teachers wrong, that I was a somebody, that by becoming a mother, my existence finally mattered.” It proved such an intoxicating feeling that she went on to have another 10 children. At one point she became a teaching assistant, but she soon became pregnant again and the job didn't last. In retrospect, she says, there was nobody to intervene and help her plan her life — no responsible parent, no husband, no social worker.

“Nobody made me question what I was doing. Maybe, with the right support, I could have diverted my creative energy into things other than having children. I certainly hadn't planned to have so many.” She pauses and adds: “You know, mistakes happen and I don't believe in abortion.

“But you also have to give me some credit because despite my shortcomings, I have created a happy household and I am a very good mother. My eldest has a solid job working for a clothing company, the next two are in college, none are in jail, none are on drugs, and none are on the child protection register. I also realise that ending up like me, living off the state, is no example, and so I tell my children, do well at school, have goals, have a career before you have children'. They are loved and encouraged to build themselves a life in a way I never was. I feel very proud of that.”

She begins to cry and says: “I love this country, I owe everything to this country, but it's so difficult in London living off £7 per child per day. I don't drink, I don't smoke, everything goes on essentials and yet by the end of the week, the cupboard's bare.” She opens her fridge to reveal a bunch of carrots, some celery, and a loaf of bread.

She points to the kitchen units falling off their hinges. “Every piece of furniture in this house is second-hand or donated. It's impossible to save. We still don't have a computer. The children haven't had Christmas presents or a meal out for years. The only time we go out as a family is to church on Sunday. Recently my 14-year-old Asher needed new school shoes, but I couldn't afford them. His teachers had a whip round to raise the 50 quid.”

She outlines her weekly budget: £95 for utilities, £17 for a bus pass, £20 for telephones, £3 for her TV licence, £10 for Sky (“our only luxury”), £350 on groceries (“strictly no-name brands from Iceland or Tesco”), and £30 for debt repayments.

It leaves her less than £20 for essential clothing and, crucially, nothing to cope with emergencies like last year when Lewisham council mistakenly cut off her housing benefit for four months. She found herself unable to pay the rent and facing eviction. “It took a godsend in the form of council family support worker Diane Wade to get my benefits reinstated, but for months we were living off tins of soup and I was a wreck at the thought of being homeless again.” While we are talking, we are joined by her oldest daughter Sherrie, 20, her mother's pride and joy for getting eight As and Bs in her GCSEs and who has applied to study midwifery at Thames Valley University.

Does she blame her mother for their predicament? She gives her a big hug. “Noo, if anything I blame the dads. Mum is a gifted parent and she has done her best for us. Her life, morning to night, is totally dedicated to us children. Like my mother, I love babies, but I want to turn my passion into something productive that earns me a good living.

“I want to become a midwife. Only when I've got my career will I think of marrying and having children. My childhood has taught me one thing: living in poverty grinds you down. It's no fun for anyone.”

Ms Harriott is raising children who will hopefully break the cycle, but what's next for her? “I'd love to become a teacher,” she beams. “You know, if I can inspire my own children, maybe I can do something good for others.” But as she talks, she visibly slumps. “I'm probably too old to start now. I've lost my way. I don't know how to get started.”

It's as if all the doubting voices of her past are rising up to cut her down. She lets out a long, world-weary sigh. “People think that people like me want to live on benefits, that we're on it because we're lazy and can't do nothing. But at the end of the day,” she says, “nobody likes to feel they can't cut it, nobody likes to feel useless.”

What should be done? Have your say

 

Also on this topic

How politics turned its back on the dispossessed The dispossessed: Babies buried four to a grave - not Dickens but London today The Dispossessed: Destitution in the heart of our city Alistair Darling hails growth but says: This is no time for complacency Teenagers trapped in London's poor estates have never been on Tube

Ads by Google

2010 Cutekid Contest

Cute Baby Photo Contest Submit Your Cute Kids Photos to Win

TheCuteKid.com

ERGObaby Carrier

For the babywearing revolution. Official European website.

ERGObaby.eu

Teach Autistic Toddlers

Language Learning Tools for your Autistic or language delayed child

www.BabyBumbleBee.com

Cute Kids Bedding

Save on Kids Bedding Today. Buy Kidswear & Nursery for Less!

www.littlewoods.com

Reader views (80)

 Add your view

I wish you would not print this type of article, my blood pressure goes sky high.

- Ted, London

I sympathize with this woman as it seems that she didn't get the best start in life. This woman obviously missed out on a lot of love when she was growing up and probably threw herself at these absent fathers thinking they would provide her with the love & security she craved. Unfortunatley she is not entirely blameless, surely after the third father had done a bunk you would perhaps revaluate the choices you've made with regards to relationships, sex and having children. It saddens me to see that a lot of woman are still falling into this trap. The children are here now so someone has to foot the bill so it makes no sense to begrudge her welfare. I believe educating vunerable young woman would probably prevent them from making the same mistakes! Perhaps the lady in question could impart her own experience to young woman who may be likely to follow the same path. Prevention is better than cure!

- Ray, London UK

£10 weekly spent on Sky could go towards kid's shoes rather than waiting for schools donation/charity....what is wrong with regular TV?....a lot of working people can not afford Sky so how come this family can?!...no sympathy but we all have to bear in mind that is not this woman who abuses the system but it is the social system that abuses all of us who pay into it to support such hopeless individuals.

- Ellie, London UK

No sympathy for her but how come the foreign woman got a nice plush house while this lady got a dump.

- Ben Arnold, Walthamstow

Q. Why did she choose to have so many children, or even any children, knowing beforehand that she had no means to support them? A. Because she knew taxpayers would do her job for her. She may not have taken her children to the movies, but she doesn't know what it's like to pay tax either. I am happy to support responsible people who have bad luck, and because they have been responsible have the ability to work their way out of trouble, but this woman's attitude and her actions are an outrage. She decided to make herself dependent on others and she and her children deserve nothing.

- David, London, UK

I cant feesory for someone with no job not stopping having children at 2 max

how dare she produce all these children and not pay for them welfare is so ridiculously avaialable

get a job and pay for your own kids


- Anon, London

I have no sympathy for people who willingly put children in that condition. What gets me is the article writes as if children just dropped out of the sky. She had a lot of responsibility in getting herself into this predicament.

It's surprising to see so many English who agree with me. My impression is that you were all into this socialist crap..my opinion. Sadly too many Americans are also in the toilet with this "poor me" mentality.

- Joyce, USA

"It is interesting that most of the articles are a litany of complaint about this women, and yet non appear to offer her any help or encouragement only to criticise."
Simon Bucharest, Bucharest Romania

What help and encouragement do you suggest, she certainly doesn't need any dropping her pants!
If you want to pay her way, then crack on, mate!
The rest of us have had our fill of NuLiebour's benefit dependent underclass.
I work my butt off for the benefit of ME and MY kids, not for the benefit of parasites like this.

- Keith Lonsdale, Doncaster

I suspect we'll be paying for these 11 forever, children and adults.

- Peter, London

How does this woman find time to find men to have sex with when she has all these kids? I do not feel at all sorry for her, at 44 she is still young enough to train for a career but why should she do that when the state is providing for her. I know a young woman from S Korea who became pregnant in her long term relationship. The boyfriend deserted her and her family disowned her because in their culture it is shameful to be an unmarried mother. She has to work full time, long hours in a menial job, having had to give up her degree course, in order to provide for herself and her child. The baby was born in England but because the mother is from S Korea they are not entitled to ONE PENNY in benefits from our country, even though she has worked and paid NI and tax, not even child benefit. This girl is an example to the rest of the single mothers who do nothing but scrounge off our country. If they all had to work as hard as she does they would be more careful not to get pregnant again. It makes me sick that this woman in the programme has all those kids and gets a fortune in benefits, yet this Korean girl gets nothing even though her baby was born here. Is that fair??? Seven pounds may not be a lot to the woman in the programme but to the Korean girl it represents more than she earns for working for an hour, a lot of money to her in other words. These baby machine women will carry on having kids while ever our government gives them handouts.

- Lucygee, Leeds

Surely the point is this: if it is contrary to a person's human rights to proscribe the number of children she has [as in China] or enforce sterilisation after "x" number of children, then the only moan we can have is that there should not be a welfare system, or one that is so accomodating. As we do, it is academic that she receives benefits because those children are the innocents in all of this.

- Barney Flintstone, London

This cant be right, even in third world african countries , people dont breed like this anymore, i bet she would have stopped at two if the state benefits wasnt paying for her brood.

- Kevin`, london,uk

Sorry, no sympathy whatsoever for this woman. Whether she planned them or not, she chose to have these kids, knowing full well that someone else would have to pay for them.
She is a sponger, and I am sick to the back teeth of picking up the tab fro the likes of her.

- Keith Lonsdale, Doncaster

Like many people in this country, my wife and I decided the most children we could afford was two, and stopped there. With 24/7 access to contraception, its not like its that difficult, is it? Why should I go to work to feed this or any other woman's seemingly insatiable appetite to gorge on whatever benefits that they can leech, and then they STILL complain about it?

- Tom_G, west london

It is interesting that most of the articles are a litany of complaint about this women, and yet non appear to offer her any help or encouragement only to criticise. If someone had helped her earlier she might not be in this predicament. Did no one read that despite all of this she still hopes one day to teach. We used to be a caring society not one that complained about others. Perhaps the fault is the society, comprised of your readers, who allowed her to get where she is. Good luck to her and her seemingly well adjusted children.

- Simon Bucharest, Bucharest Romania

I feel sorry for the kids, doomed to a life of poverty, why because the adult thinks that she can keep knocking out kids like a production line.

This is where we have lost the plot, the more they have the more the state gives thems. She tells us she does not believe in abortion, has she never heard of contreception, or even abstinance, is is this her human right.

Lots of couples hold back from having kids, or have less than they would like because they cannot afford them.

- Steve M, London

Even with 12 mouths to feed, you can eat very well on £543 a week. And given that some of these children are adults themselves, there is no reason for the mother to bear the financial burden for them all by herself.

- Anon, England

She did'nt plan them !!! well who did,does this deserve an entry in the Bible somewhere,next you will tell me she was living in a stable.

- Davey_Bouy, Chertsey

Why is our society always about 'me, me, me?'

To keep popping out children because you feel like 'a somebody' and that by 'becoming a mother, my existence finally mattered' is unbelievably selfish.

What about the child? Does it not have rights to a stable loving family and being adequately provided for?

Parents can be so selfish, and that is the problem with child proverty. If you cannot give a child a decent standard of life, don't have one or two, or eleven. Use contraception, it's free.

I want a big family, but we cannot afford to support a child yet. If everyone thought like this woman and had as many children as they liked, this country would sink.

- Annie, UK

Why can't people take resopnsibility for their own actions, always passing the buck and moaning. No one told you to have so many children. You should have become a surrogate, at least you would have earned some money!! You had 11 children by 5 different men, didn't it occur to you to stop at about 2? You say you don't believe in abortion. Do you know how to spell NO.

- Barbara Stanislas, Plaistow

Nigel, London - As a nation we are not producing enough children to replace the elderly people who die.

Good. One of the reasons the NHS is failing & there are many delays, not enough beds/doctots/nurses...etc, is because the human race is always trying to ensure we live longer. Drugs for this, drugs for that. Can't die now, even though your qualtiy of life may be rotten, we must keep you alive as long as possible. And because of this, there are now many more older people, who through no fault of there own, require constant/regular medical attention. This put an extreme burden on the NHS.

- Over Populated, London

I would echo Paddy in saying that as outrageous as the woman is, if she has produced 11 responsible workers then it is not the disaster it appears to be. This woman is actually the elite of the underclass in that she and her kids have morals. It's the nihlistic wasters who just know aggression and are like babies in their own little bubble that are the problem.

I once read that the amount sponged by the slick 'movers and shakers' we are all supposed to look up to in tax dodging was 260 billion or the like e.g a far more outrageous insult to the masses than the underclass.

I would also ask why a British citizen has children living in squalor while a recent arrival has a luxury home with a room for each child.

A simple law to halt irresponsibility would be no further benefits after the first child and if that means the money is insufficient to cover 2 then the state will reduce the number to 1 again. Those taken into care would in most cases have better lives anyway even if seperated from the biological mother. It's the insistence on keeping children with the biological mother even if she is a wrong un that is the root of the problem.

- Dan, London

Nigel, London _"To put an alternative point of view: the eleven children will be tomorrow's tax-payers, and anyone approaching retirement needs to be aware who will be paying their pension!"

Or, alternativley: These could grow up to be complete reflections of their mother; no work, but sponging of the state. 11 of them! Ouch! Starting their own families they cannot afford. Ouch again! That'll help with all those retirement pensions, not.

- Dom, London

If we are meant to feel sorry for these people, then this "Dispossessed' series has seriously back-fired. Or maybe it was a method to allow peoples true opinions to finally be let out in the open.

- Mn, london

Please pull the other one.
I came from a family of 8 my mum and dad worked.
We topped and tailed in bed.
In this day and age there is no need to have so many children.

- Dennis, Chigwell Essex

I have no sympathy whatsoever for this selfish and feckless woman. I am sick to death of having to work to enable these baby making machines make multiple child benefit & tax credit claims.

The best way to tackle this syndrome is to give them the equivilent of 35hr minimum wage, allow child benefit for 1st 2 chuldren, make them pay full council rent, full council tax, as us taxpayers have to do. Until people have to take responsbility for their actions this will continue and multiply.

This may appear harsh, but something has to be done to stop this dependancy culture.

- Danny'S Nan, London, England

I absolutely agree with Kay. I am in the same situation, and this family's 'plight' makes me sick. I get comparitively little back from the state compared to what I put in, but women like her expect everything back. Eleven kids! And with a baby on her knee, she complains how hard life is! Why have another one, then? I'm delighted that her children are doing well, but they've done well on my back, and because of what I've contributed. I had to laugh when her daughter said she didn't blame her mum, but the five dads of her children - did mum not have a chance to use contraception, then? Standard, I think you've really picked the wrong family to represent the disposessed. There are surely more families with two or three children, who have been working hard on several jobs per parent, who have lost these jobs and found themselves on hard times - wouldn't they be more worthy to be written about? And as for comparing Ms Harriott with a City Supermum, at least Mrs Morrissey can afford to pay for her children. Have as many as you like, but, as an earlier correspondent said, 'if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em'.
The political party that bites the bullet and says to people who keep fecklessly breeding that their children will be removed from them if they can't afford to have them, will have my vote. Frankly, families like this are already in the care of the state, so putting these children up for adoption isn't much of a giant leap.

- Louise, London UK

I wish I had £7 per day handout to look after my kids. Unfortunately I work for a living and have to pay tax. i don't mind paying tax as long as it distributed fairly, however, this woman has just dropped her knickers to five diffeent men (at least i should think), none of whom are paying for her children. Take her young children into care, pursue the absent fathers and make the dreadful woman work for a living.
I have been a socialist all my life and will always remain one, however, that doesn't mean the social welfare system should pay for feckless workshy people such as this woman and her various partners. I am seething with anger.

- Kerry, Purley

The failure here is too obvious to mention. What we must do is hope and pray that she raises them well and they go on to lead productive lives, not repeating similar mistakes.

- Jules_London, london

This woman had eleven pregnancies by five different men (all deadbeats) in order to feel she was creating something, that she was worth something ? Yet after eleven kids, all she's managed is... to feel worthless and helpless. You'd think the penny would have dropped by now - but look how young that baby is. Unless and until she starts using contraception (or self-control), things will only get worse for her - and for her children. What is she teaching them by the way she lives her life - contradicting everything she's telling them ?

- Anne Thackray, Toronto, Canada

eleven children? ELEVEN? Just what is this woman contibuting to society? she says none of them are in gangs or in prison - this isn't much of a boast. Breeding indiscriminately without the money to support your family is NOT responsible or laudable. this was her choice. she must have known money would be seriously short wiht this number of childen and no support. I am beginnig to feel a complete mug, having worked full time since I was 17 and never claimed a penny in benefits. I was brought up by my parents to earn everything I spent.

- Susan, London

I have no sympathy for anyone receiving £40,000 a year (TAX FREE) from the state who had the choice not to have any of these children. Given she can still afford to have Sky TV and spend £80 a month on 'telephones' she is far from 'dispossessed'.

- Ben, London

What on earth is this woman whinging about?...I'm a lone parent with two children..I work full time and after I've paid rent,c.t., budget leb and gas, paid my fares to work, internet charge I am left with approx £102 a week to look after my boys...oh yes my luxury is my mobile...no not sky tv...so sad to see the standard not print about real people in poverty...what a disappointment

- Sarah, London

Theoretically a Man supporting a non-working wife and nine children earning 52000 a year with the additional tax credit entitlement would have a net income of £37, 704( calculation done by entering figures at HMRC credit calculator. He would have paid over ten thousand in taxes. Given the incentive to rely on the state, who would work?

- Trevor, Wembley

What a very stupid woman.
Wouldn't it be great if she was expected to name the probable fathers, who could be DNA tested and expected to provide. I know it's a fantasy, but the longer we allow these people to leech of society without any sense of responsibility, the worse things will get.
It's time to stop saying it's OK and rewarding these fools.

- Mm, hackney

Not being a breeder myself, I just don't understand the need to produce so many children in this day and age. What about optimum population, please think before you breed!

- Patricia, London

Pet owners have their animals neutered to stop them endlessly reproducing (at least the responsible ones do). Strikes me women like this are worse than animals because they know full well they have options. They are nothing but a drain on the taxpayer and giving their kids rotten lives so maybe it is time to start thinking about compulsory sterilization if they won't take responsibility for their own lives?

- Sarah Bradshaw, Enfield, Middx

I note the crowded sleeping arrangements. And I wonder why that Somali mother of a number of children qualified for a millionaire's mansion on the council's rule that each child must have its own bedroom. Why is the Somali family - and others in the same boat - compelled to share as this family does? Can someone in authority explain?

- Parky, london

You're kidding, put a plug in it and then you won't be a burden to the taxpayer. You reap what you sow. No sympathy here. Can we have a real hard luck story please, not one self inflicted.

- Dominique, london

While its a credit to her to hear she's managed to keep her kids on the straight and narrow, Barbara is just another example of 'Welfare Britain' under Labour where the feckless and workshy can breed without concern for the consequences of their actions. There is always someone else to pick up the tab.

- Dave, Department of Social Irresponsibility, London.

Did not plan? Use the pill!!

£7 per child each day! Tax free! That is too much!! Plusshe gets free accomodation tax free etc etc.

If she had not got so much maybe she would have started using contraception!!

- Paul, London

is this the point: "Mrs Morrissey can afford her brood".

of course the subject is more emotive, more sensitive because it involves children but in reality its a simple matter of having what you cannot afford.

Mrs Morrissey had a large family knowing she could afford to raise them, whereas Ms Harriott was also equally well aware that she could not. Why did she keep having children she could not afford?

not sure I see the comparisons or the point of the story. Of course its sad, and there is a human interest angle in there - but to compare 2 women, whose circumstances are so different, and pretend there is a corollary is a little misleading.

- Scotty, london

"the eleven children will be tomorrow's tax-payers" .... I stand second to no one in admiring your optimism, Nigel!

- Paul, London

Will the Standard please stop going on and on trying to make us feel sorry for these baby-producing machines. If this woman chooses to produce 11 children, it is HER problem how to feed them, not the taxpayer's. Next time, buy a condom or better yet, keep your pants zipped.

- Alex, London

"!This country is short of children. "
- Nigel, London

yes BUT preferably children from two parent families and were not brought up dependant on state benefits.

- Richard, London

Is the Standard trying to garner some sort of sympathy from everyone else who has to pay for her 11 children and all the other social problems that will come because of them?

".. my creative energy .." ~ Jesus give me a break.

Single mother? Jump the housing queue and get the State to pay for it all. A common mistake made time and time again and facilitated by the current government.

- Frank, Home Counties, England.

Wait a minute everybody!!!....before you all start going off on one about this woman having 11 kids (too late - you all are spitting venom over her 11 kids). Why dont you all have a think about the bigger picture?

Yes she has had 11 kids and it has had a negative effect on her life and on her kids' life - but has she really cost you, the indignant tax payer that much?

£525 a week to bring these kids up. She seems like she is doing a very good job, none of them are in trouble, a number of them are succeeding at school and in college. She doesnt spend her money on cigarettes, alcohol or other harmful substances and seems to spend the state aid on bringing up her kids and the kids seem to have a good future ahead of them.

Compare this with a not uncommon scenario of family or single parent with 2 kids, with both kids in trouble with the law or abusing alcohol and drugs with no real ambition in life, perhaps destined for a life on benefits too - the cost to the country for those two 'lost' kids will be a lot more than £525 a week in terms of burden on police time, prison time, NHS etc, future state benefits.

I'm a big believer in personal resposnibility - yes having 11 kids is pretty irresponsible - but everything else this woman appears to have done is admirable. You should think again before labelling her 'all that's wrong with this country' etc etc

- Paddy, London

11
ENOUGH SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Jonny, London

To put an alternative point of view: the eleven children will be tomorrow's tax-payers, and anyone approaching retirement needs to be aware who will be paying their pension!

This country is short of children. As a nation we are not producing enough children to replace the elderly people who die. Why is it wrong to pay a little more as child support? By raising this family out of poverty, it would make it more likely that these children grow up better able to return to the country much more in taxes than they cost it during their childhood.

I would not be against measures to make sure that child support really is for the children's benefit, because there are bad parents who neglect their children and spend it on themselves. This mother clearly is not one of them, even if you do call her irresponsible for having so many children.

- Nigel, London

7x11x365 makes £28105 a year, and that's well above average wage (and people on average wage pay tax). No mention here of what contribution the 25 year old makes I notice. What should be done about it?

- Paul, London

Typical career kiddy producer creaming of the state.

- Dom, London

She clearly has time and probably money to go out to meet all the different men (youngest child 6 months) I have no sympathy, I work full-time and pay a mortgage and when my husband (who is self-employed) had an accident and was off work for a year, we did not receive one penny from the Government. I had to support me, my husband and two children on my salary which is significantly less than the £38,844 this one receives. Get your eldest children out to work and take contraception (it's free)

- Natalie, London

I'm afraid this article has blown any credibility the Standard's laudable attempt to highlight the plight of London's underpriveleged. This story does massive damage to the chances of the REAL disposessed ever getting a fair deal. This lady has had 11 children by five different fathers, she receives a huge amount of benefits, none of which she has ever contributed towards, and yet she can still afford Sky TV and a £20 per week phone bill. I doubt whether anyone can have sympathy for someone who has brought all this so-called hardship on herself by making no effort to educate or better herself but is content to sit in her taxpayer funded four bedroom house and bemoan her lack of "luxuries". If she cannot manage on £543 per week, after housing costs,(the equivalent of £40,000 p.a.) perhaps she needs lessons in finance management as well as family planning.

- Malcolm, London

Maybe if she stopped reproducing by so many different men she could get herself a full time job and start actually contributing to the economy like I, and many others have to! This sort of story makes me sick. I'm really sorry, but its like those poor kids abroad. People are starving but they still manage to have the energy to keep on reproducing. They are just totally selfish and never think of the children they are bringing into the world.

- Sue, Kent

If you breed like a rabbit then don't complain if you have to live like one!

- Alan, Chigwell.

I can barely afford to raise one child and she has 12? It's stories like this that really make my blood boil with the state of things in the UK. I do not get any benefits, my wife and i both have to work full time and our son is in daycare, costing us more money. Why are the 5 fathers not supporting their children? No sympathy for her, only disgust.

- Dir Kdiggler, Soho, London

I can't be sympathetic. Ever heard of contraception?

- Sarah, Enfield

I am not sure what the point of this story is. She chose her life and now she is living. I can't quite find it within myself to be sympathic. Let us hope her children do not repeat the cycle.

- Beth, Wien

My parents came from the Caribbean as well in the 1960's. They arrived in Brixton before moving out to the sticks, where rented a house before they eventually bought it off the Landlord. It was drummed into us from an early age that you get nothing unless you work for it, and this is what is wrong with this country. She chose to have 11 children. No-one else told her to do so. There has been contraception in this country since the 1960s. I suggests this woman and her children go back to the Caribbean and see what state benefits and Council accommodation she would get over there. I know for a fact she would get diddly squat. Don't bleat about your hard life. You are the author of your own misfortune.

- Sonia M, St Albans, Herts

Nat is spot on. How dare Barbara act like a victim here, if you can't afford children then don't have them. Although the fathers are as much to blame more fool you Barbara for being so ignorant. Children by 5 DIFFERENT FATHERS...! Forget going to the cinema, try the family planning clinic.....

- Glyn Hopkins, London

7 quid each seems like a luxury life to me. This story says all that is wrong about the UK. My mother lived in a tenament with her 4 sisters and 3 brothers.Later my dad died very early after being wounded 8 times on three different occassion during WW2. I became a headmaster, my sister, a director of a national company and the third sister became VP of one of the biggest companies in the world.
This woman deserves no sympathy at all . Another example of what is destroying the UK and its economy - Maybe she will vote labour.

- Terry, Hennebont France

I can only echo some of the previous comments, if you can't afford to have children then don't have them! I'm personally fed up of hearing about stories like this, if you want a better standard of living then get out there and work for it like everybody else!

- Stuart, London

these are labour voters through and through england you only have yourself to blame you elect a socialist government which has its own agenda . now you complain like children get off your backside and vote in your election otherwise stop moaning your all giving me a headeache

- Philippe Antoine, france paris

Disgusting, to think she has had 11 children from 5 different men and supported by an annual benefit of nearly GBP40,000. That's at least four working people's taxes going to support her ignorance and stupidity. This should not be allowed. She and her family should have been deported a long time ago and social services should have put a stop to her breading. If you can't feed them, don't bread them. Chase down the fathers and get them to pay child allowance or deport them. It's people like her who are dragging the UK into the gutter.

- Frank, Copenhagen, Denmark

Your article of yesterday was poignant. This article is pointless - why publish it. It's sheer foolishness to have 11 kids; especially in circumsatances such as this. I cannot imagine this article will reap any sympathy ... it anything, the opposite.

- Gr, London

I applaud David Cohen and the Evening Standard for undertaking the London Poor series this week. However, the methods and comparisons seem flawed. The above story does not exactly exude self management of any kind. Comparison's in yesterday's extract with a banker's pay are misguided. The banker trained and worked for years to get to that standard of pay.

We live, oh so sadly, in a country where Labour insist that education is brought down to the lowest common denominator. Everyone has to go to University although it is neither advisable nor necessary. We have had years of unmanaged immigration, with an influx of many unskilled people, who have to start again and often without the necessary language skills. Quite how you expect people to become successful and self sufficient under those circumstances beats me.

Britain also has a history of meddling in every one else's affairs instead of sorting out home grown problems.

Poverty, particularly child poverty, is indeed a problem that needs to be addressed. But as a single, working woman being taxed and taxed and taxed under labour, I'm finding it hard to have a penny's worth of sympathy right now.

- Annek, Hampshire, UK

I feel some sympathy for her children but no sympathy for her.We have far too many people who just take from our society and want us to feel sorry for them.

- Mike Melbourne, Bedford

This story appears under the title "The Dispossessd", but this hardly describes Barbara. In fact, such a word applies to ME, because people like her are "dispossessing" me of my country.

- Croyboy, Croydon

I really hope your next article is going to be about an elderly person like my former neighbour, who worked hard all her life, served in the armed forces during WWII and never lived beyond her means, and then found herself needing care after a stroke and not getting any because there was no money in the pot. I will feel sorry for her, because she DESERVES help. All the other people you have featured in your series so far could have avoided their problems by simply keeping their pants on. I am sickened at the amount of money we are paying out to support these people. And for every "Oh, but their children could be Einstein" comment, consider how many Einsteins could have been born to hard-working couples who can't afford to have any children because they have to pay so much tax and work all hours just to put a roof over their heads. I would hazard a guess that their children would stand a rather better chance of contributing something useful to society, but they didn't get that chance. Instead, today's subject says of her children "none are in jail, none are on drugs, and none are on the child protection register", as if that's some sort of achievement for which she should be congratulated. This series is a joke.

- Freya, London

This woman sickens me with her whining. I too am a single mother - the difference being is that I have always gone out to work to support my children and have never asked for benefits. I got myself into the situation of being pregnant, it was my decision to keep my babies therefore it is my responsibility to look after them. Yes, I have it tough, there is never any spare cash for luxuries like cinemas or birthday parties, but I clothe, feed and keep a roof over my childrens head and ensure they get a good education and discipline at home. Perhaps if this ridiculous government stopped handing out our tax payers cash so readily, women like her would take better precautions and wouldn't get pregnant so willy nilly, knowing they don't have to support their own kids. I get so angry at the amount of people who take advantage of our welfare system, then go on to say how much they "love this country". Of course they love this country, it's free handouts all the way, all you have to do is get pregnant.

- Tara, London

It the labour government stopped handing out benefits then people like Barbara would not have fewer children.

- R.F.York, Yorks, UK

Arghhhh I could scream at women like this! You choose to have children you know you can't afford, thus bringing them into a world that will never be fair to them. YOU might not believe in abortion, but what about adoption? Yes condoms can split but that's no reason not to use them. I'm glad that you enjoy being creative and you do well to keep your kids in school, out of gangs, off the child protection register etc. But all that does not change the fact that you chose to have children with men who I presume from this article, do not stick around. What message does that give each of your 11 children?! This is NOT the 19th century. Yet YOU chose to keep reproducing. Do not ask me, or others like me, who work to feel sorry for you when you can't be bothered to face your responsibilities.

- S-M Hearmon, London, UK

Are we supposed to feel sorry for her? Why should I pay for her inability to control herself.

If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have had them.

A cameo of everything that's wrong with this country, and it makes me sick.

- Tony The Trader, Canary Wharf

I was hoping the Standard would actually highlight the real Victims of Poverty in London.
How can anyone feel sorry this woman? The only people who I feel sorry for are her children who didn't ask for this.
Having 11 kids by 5 different men doesn't just happen, and its patronising to imply otherwise.

- Adam, Soho London

Whatever happened to personal responsibility in this country.
Not my fault I have multiple children with multiple fathers.
Not my fault I didn't go to school.
Not my fault I am uneducated.
Not my fault that I can't get a job.
Not my fault I pursue a criminal lifestyle.
Not my fault I vote labour because they are the idiots that pay me very well to continue on this path to so social breakdown.
Hello Gordon, can you hear us? the working poor? the taxpayer? the victim of crime?

- Jon, london

I don't drink or smoke, I am a single woman who works full time - yet after paying my council tax, mortgage, national insurance , income tax and my fares to work for the month, I am left with not much more than this woman to feed and clothe myself and I can't afford holidays or trips to the cinema either, and the reason I resent the likes of her so much is because it is my hard work and milions like me that are keeping her and her children in food, clothes and a roof over their heads while she sits on her behind all day looking after and producing, kids she can't afford to have. She is the same age as me so knows all about contraception even if she didn't have a fantastic education, yet she chose not to use it and expect the state and us tax payers to keep her and her children. I have no doubt she is a wonderful, loving mother who is raising her children to be respectful citizens of society, but instead of whinging about how hard done by they all are, she should have taken precautions when she realised she couldn't afford child number one, instead of going on to have 10 more. But as it's too late to turn back the clock, why doesn't she do what millions of other single mothers do - go back to work and earn your keep instead of sponging off people like me. I chose not to have children because I didn't want the responsibility, emotional or financial, so I resent having to support other people's children, particularly when they are too lazy to do it themselves.

- Kay, London

What a pointless story?! Don't have them if you can't afford them! 11 kids by 5 men???

- Sanjay, Hounslow, UK

Are you having a laugh ? Are we supposed to feel sympathy for the plight of this fecund feckless fool and her tribe ? Imagine how much this lot are going to cost from our taxes going forward ? Millions.

- Squiz, Islington

What a mess and if anyone is to blame it is the mother for having the babies in the first place without a support network in place ie the father/s! Oh, wait a moment she does have a support network it is us the tax payer, you and me. No wonder she says how much she "loves this country" but you may ask does this country love her?

- Gary, London

I don't have any sympathy for Barbara but, I do empathise with her children. If you can't afford children, don't have them. My husband and I work full-time and have 1 child. We'd love another one but, can't afford to. My taxes are helping to pay for Barbara to keep on having children - not fair!

- Nat, London, UK

Add your comment

Name:

Your email address will not be publishedEmail:

Town and country:

Your comment:Terms and conditionsmake text area biggerYou have 1500 characters left.

Remember me - this will save your name, location and email address for when you leave your next comment.

Email me a link to these comments.

follow me on Twitter