Grace Blakeley, an economics commentator for New Statesman magazine, told ITV’s Good Morning Britain: ‘This is all because of the way in which the council has to cut things out. Very, very vulnerable children with severe mental health problems just don’t get provided for. It’s another story you can trace back to austerity.’
Her fellow left-winger at least had the sense to hedge his bets:
Another guest, BBC Radio 5 Live presenter Nihal Arthanayake, added: ‘He went out on his own presumably because there wasn’t somebody who could accompany him. There wasn’t the resources.’
Except…no. Not at all:
…the Mail has seen records suggesting that £150,000 a year was spent on Bravery’s round-the-clock care. He had a team of up to six carers and was housed by Hammersmith and Fulham Council in a private two-bedroom flat where the rent was about £650 a month.
But maybe they couldn’t accompany him because of a sudden outbreak of ‘austerity’? Again, no:
Bravery’s care was outsourced to a private firm, Spencer and Arlington. It meant he had two carers all day and all night, working in shifts. They helped him with domestic chores and kept him company at his flat in Northolt, west London. One of the carers claimed to the Mail that on the day Bravery was allowed to visit the Tate unsupervised he did have staff assigned but they were permitted to stay at the flat while he went out alone.
Why did no-one challenge these morons? Why did the one who could just walk off? If you leave the field without scoring a goal, who wins?