My last blog on the breakdown of the Usual Channels generated a torrent of comments on the Welfare Reform Bill. This is fine, indeed very welcome but as a result of organisations passing on my parliamentary e-mail address I have now received a torrent of messages to which I am simply unable to respond adequately and that jam up my e-mail in-box. I regret I have now put up a standard response on my e-mail site. So please, if you are thinking of commenting on the Welfare Reform Bill do it here on this site where everyone can see it. And please don’t tell me that Atos gets it wrong sometimes, I already know!
@Baroness Murphy:
Finally, the sleeping Dragon awakes from his eternal rest. We hope the fire of his breath remains a relentless, scorching fury.
How does the saying go? ‘The straw that broke the camels back.’
I continue to read the minutes and amendments being made to the Wefare Bill. I hope the Lorrds give as much attention to the section Part 4 on Personal Independance Payment, especially section 83 on persons receiving certain services. It is implied in this clause those who are disabled in live in a care will have access to transport if they remove the motability element (in my son’s case his access to a car) and loss of freedom.
I have already noticed reading the discussions on housing benefits the Lords are following the Govetnments approach and passing the problem to local councils, who are struggling to support the disabled locally, ie in Leeds Day Centres are being closed!
So I will really interested to see if as much time is spent discussing section 4 clause 83 and if anybody is prepared to stand up for those in care but based on comments from Maria Miller I don’t hold much hope, as she appears to very little understanding what is like to fight for every service and piece of equipment throughout a disabled persons life.
So if you already know that Atos get it wrong “sometimes”, although I have to disagree and say a lot of the time because in my experience they blatantly made things up on my report, then why have they not been gotten rid of? They’re so obviously not keeping up their end of the contract, unless that is, the contract is to ensure that many people going for work capability assessments are to be failed almost immediately?
If you are finding your email is being jammed up with people commenting on the welfare reform bill and you’re finding it very stressful, imagine having the stress of having the benefits you rely on daily being ripped away from you by a company who couldn’t care less one way or another and just as you get it reinstated after a sucessful appeal, you then have to worry about that brown envelope falling on your hallway carpet almost immediately to. Not to mention you have it hanging over your head that you know you’re going to fail even before you enter their doorway and have to do the appeals thing all over again!
Hear the cries for help for once before it’s to late and you have a whole other mess on your hands.
Ditto the above.
-Omission of additional difficulties
-Omission of primary difficulty’s symptoms
all observed, and commented upon, during assessment, is not evidence of ATOS getting it wrong its deliberately deceiving the level of diability and difficulty being experienced by those assessed principally it seems to meet contractual requirements.
As JSA staff are overturning ATOS assessments and returning people to ESA its a situation the DWP must be aware of.Will they now claim that JSA staff are trained to assess disability and to do so on the basis of an initial back to work interview of 30 minutes or less?
Deliberatly omitting information in an assessment in order to remove from someone the benefit to which they have a legal right woulkd seem to me to be an obvious disability discrimination as the equivalent able bodied claimants are not being subjected to eroneous reports in order to remove from them the same right to benefit.
How can we trust the DWP to provide genuine assessments we can trust in when experience shows that they have not done so so far?
Four possibly relevant points, towards the Welfare Reform Bill thinking:
1. Percentages-Thinking needs to be included in either the Bill or in the ensuing Regulations, because of the literally destructive & demeasning “false balance” between –
Person A, weekly income £100pw having only £10 per week “pocket money” left over, after living expenses; whilst
Person B, weekly income £1000, living next door, has £900 pocket-money left over after essential living-expenses.
2. The individual’s real-life essential expenses need to be 100% included in the Welfare equation:
I recently had to telephone the Australian Centrelink Welfare Payments authority to ask (on behalf of my more elderly Caree pensioned widow lady) how the Government calculates her ‘entitlement’ vis a vis her actual expenses, and I was told
“The Government pays such welfare as the government can afford (the recipient citizen’s essential expenses have no place in our formulation)”.
3. The same lady caree without her instigation and without her knpowledge had been being overpaid by that pensions-authority $10 per week,(hold breath please for a moment)
for over ten (10) years
before they woke up to their overpayment, blamed her, and wrote demanding immediate repayment of over $5200 within 28 days on pain of losing her whole entitlement.
There being concurrent Postal slow-downs, due not only to the first Iceland volcano dust cloud preventing air-mail, that letter did not reach the lady until two days after expiry of the deadline)…(that night I made an immediate part-repayment online, and telephoned Centrelink, and fortunately got an extension)…(but the lady is having to repay in instalments, all appeals having failed)…
4. The result of all that in my brain was to construct a formal letter asking four crucial questions, none of which have been acknowledged ‘verbatim’ as written by us, and none answered;
so I trust despite having to stretch beyond 250 words that this letter may be shown here, too:
Dear Sir,
We need to know sufficient detail about our incomes-entitlements to enable us to continually check and calculate their components, to life-budget our expenditures accordingly, and to communicate adequately with Central and Local Government and with other involved authorities and parties.
Would you therefore please provide us with full details of our respective entitlements showing:
1. What each entitlement, and component-amount within each entitlement, was/is thought
and calculated by the UN, the EU, the Government, or other authority, to be necessary expenditure for the individual to make and maintain her/himself healthy, citizenlike, and environmentallye-supportive
(we are not asking to be told what to expend our allowances upon once we have the money in our hands, but what the Government or other authority uses, and what we could use, as the Expenses model or template with which to regularly calculate, on a regular basis, what our Incomes and Entitlements should or need to be).
2. How the Government and specificly, we suppose, Centrelink, and the DWP and Local Authorities, calculate each such amount.
3 A sources appendix thereto, including inclusory/exclusory reasoning e.g. for/against
a) Any Economic, and Human-Lifesupport/Individual-Human-Development, Theories;
b) Method III (Gordon);
c) Perceptual Control (Powers); Self Theory (Dweck);
d) (i) Sustainworthiness (A. Hamlyn, D.Smith, J.Stone in Australian Environmental Studies 26 weeks TV university course); and appropriately similar Others, and including
e) JSD Miles via his two holistic-living models (1) Sevenfold holistic living (PhEmMfEnSpSaJb domains see footnote) (2) Palmate Budgeting; and via his democratic-citizen’s contributions
to http://lordsoftheblog.net ; and possibly shortly via his own up-dated website http://www.lifefresh.co.uk or http://www.75l25w.com ;
i.e. showing what knowledge, formal-argumentation, moral-reasoning, and life-experience is included in and what excluded from the designing, deciding and administering of such entitlements/welfare; and why.
4 Any other factors that may be taken into consideration.
————–
Please highlight the words
“What does the government think to be necessary expenditure, by the citizen, in order to make and maintain herself healthy, citizenlike, and environmentally-supportive, lifelong ?”
Shazzyrm
You couldn’t have expressed the thoughts of hundreds of thousands of people any better, well said.
I was accused by the Baroness of exagerating the circumstances of disabled people who have had benefits wrongly removed from them, I was accused of name calling, I was told disabled people deserved a better website than mine, who’s name calling?
Unlike the Baroness I have hundreds of emails sent to me each and every day, it may take me a long time but I do have the decency to reply.
Maybe If she really took the time to look into what’s happening in this country with regard to Welfare Reforms she would be better able to see why so many thousands of disabled people fear what’s going on?
Defending such a company as Unum shows the inherent gap that people like Baroness Murphy and others have in relation to disabled people, no one who truly understands the aims of such a company as Unum would come out and defend it’s practices.
Atos do not just “get it wrong sometimes”. In Hastings, my area, disabled people who access (under-funded, charity-run) representation at their appeals against Atos decisions win over 95% cases.
Please also look at the distress and ill-health caused by Atos “assessments”, delays, appeals and the length of time people spend without their benefits while these things are resolved. Some spend months trying to live on dla or have to borrow from loan sharks because Atos has taken away their income.
Hear hear shazzyrm!
Re the WCA, With your experience Madam ,what other medical examination of people who are known to be sick and or disabled asks them climb onto a fixed height couch via a box.?
Why would such a procedure be deemed necessary?
How can such a procedure be claimed to be safe?
This is just ONE of MANY procedures Atos use in the WCA, which is far from a fair assessment,and far from any medical procedure which has any value.
If you can give one good reason why this should be allowed in such an assessment, I would be amazed.
I could list many more parts of the assessment that are in fact worthless, however I presume you really are aware of them.
Welfare Reform may well be needed,this process however is really a disgusting abuse of the sick and disabled.
Well said Ellen…
The present Welfare Reform Bll is an unsafe Bill, it has been hurridly put toigether by the Tory led Government and is designed to take away the rights of those in reciept of any kind of Wlfare Benefit. The hardest hit will be those who are claiming sickness and disability Benefits, many will find themnselves living below the poverty line, lose thier homes, or lives because of the actions of this cruel and uncaring coalition. It is not possible for a millionaire to imagine what it is like to try to scrape by onthe megre Benefits we have to survive on, most MP’s do not have the foggiest idea how hard it is to live under these circumstances. I not you ask us not to mention ATOS as you know they get it wrong sometimes! well let me tell you this, ATOS get it wrong 70% of the time, thats 70 out of every 100 decisions which are reversed at Tribunals. Waiting times for Tribunalks vary across the country, however, the average is aroung 6 to 9 months. This is unacceptable and will get worse if this abysmal Bill is passed by the Lords. Please take a long hard look at the figures and you will see that the system is doing more harm than good.
rights of those in reciept of any kind of Wlfare Benefit
==========
And what rights are they? Reference to the Human Rights Act or something else would be appreciated.
==========
ATOS as you know they get it wrong sometimes! well let me tell you this, ATOS get it wrong 70% of the time, thats 70 out of every 100 decisions which are reversed at Tribunals.
===========
False. First the figure for reversals is 40%. However your big error is assuming that everyone appeals. They don’t. A small set of people who are border line appeal, and you would expect 50% to win anyway.
Do you have a reference for the 70%?
The Harrington report says it all. I have posted further on and responded to your request. As for what right, well I and millions of other workers made an agreement with the Government when we started work in our teens. We agreed to pay our taxes and NI contributions on time and without argument. We agreed to this on the premis that support for our health and social care would be available at the time and point of need.
Dear Baroness Murphy,
Thank you for at least joining the debate.
PLEASE if you do nothing else, PLEASE ask in the Chamber of the House of Lords…
WHY?
WHY HAVE 12 DISABLED PEOPLE AND CHILDREN SO FAR DIED BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT WELFARE REFORM SYSTEMIC MESS?
http://dwpexaminations.blacktrianglecampaign.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1158
Thank you.
Calum
why will people who have an indefinite award for DLA have to be reviewed, I have MS not relapsing remitting kind, it is progressive so unless ATOS can work miracles I will lose out as will thousands of others who have unpredictable incurable progressive conditions. None of us have any confidence in a system set up to save money.
That’s nothing, Atos HCP believe Amputees can grow back lost limbs…
Really?
Not only do ATOS make massive errors but the tribunals do as they ask questions relating to what can be done now (the day of the tribunal) not the time the assessment took place and the judge at these tribunals allows it.
The HCPs at the assessments often change the wording of what the claimant says so where it says claimants states any alteration in what is said should be denied by the claimant as soon as they spot the alteration.
The last government as well as the present one are doing no more than a cost cutting exercise on those that can least afford it and see the sick & disabled as an easy target, while those who could manage with cuts are not seeing any cuts to their payments (MPs spring to mind )
Terminator, I too found that the tribunal doctor was focused on my capacity ‘today’. I found this approach mirrored that of the WCA in insinuating that my attendence at the respective events was proof of fitness. I did try to convey that my condition (COPD) varied within a day, and according to activity as much as anything, but as other of my comments I don’t think this was welcomed.
My appeal was disallowed (I can’t believe that they can do this without giving any reasons). I have asked for a Statement of Reasons, which apparently ‘is only prepared when requested’. So what goes down as a legal record of the case if you don’t request it? A simple one sentence judgement, without supporting reasons? This is our law, is it?
Baroness Murphy: now you are aware of the strength of feeling about ATOS and the WCA – may i remind you of the upcoming PIP farago – as this will be another cause of stress and dispair for those on DLA – particually IF atos are employed to do that too
what is the POINT of getting rid of a system that WORKS – IS a fair assessment – takes into account medical EVIDENCE – and whilst not perfect – is a LOT cheaper than paying out millions to private companies to foul up , and then cost MORE millions in appeals costs ??
it does not make sense to us out here – it does not make sense to the tax payer – but it seems that those in “the other place ” are hell bent on bringing in ANOTHER system of assessments that will be a bigger mess than the WCA / ESA
most of us on DLA are NEVER going to get any better ( only worse with age ) – have BEEN fully assessed and are capable of notifiying any changes – and don’t NEED more hassle in their lives !!
DLA WORKS -why change it ???
@muffie02:
But who owns these private companies? And who has shares in them? That is the big issue.
Politicians are very keen on handing out public money to friends, colleagues and those who run the hedge funds.
I bet if you do some research into who is benefiting from these concerns, you will find why they are so keen on keeping this going.
Billions are made from the taxpayer by buying from the companies colluded with. Usually bad investments, on the whole, so the treasury loses in every way. Or, we do. It’s a game and one that has been played for a very long time.
The Americans gave Tony Blair a crash course in how to make millions from the electorate. And now they have become masters at it.
Personal accountability is the only answer.
I can guarantee legal challenges to this bill, but this is what you get with David Freud in charge
I find it hard to believe that all this is just coming to the surface, atos have been getting it wrong MOST of the time for a long time, doh.
If you think that Unum is a reputable company and Atos is doing a good job Baroness Murphy can I suggest that you pull your eyes down from gazing at the beautiful ceilings and read the book “Insult to Injury – Insurance, Fraud & The Big Business of Bad Faith” By Ray Bourhis which is all about Unum and the fraud that they carried out in the US.
What is worse Baroness is that anybody reading this book, (which was recommended to me personally by Prof Dan Feldman, the New York DA’s office special prosecutor who negotiated the legal settlement with Unum on behalf of 38 US States), will recognise while reading the first 30 pages that the methods currently being used by Atos to assess the disabled in the UK as to their fitness to work are exactly the same methods that Unum were using when they were dragged through the courts in the US and fined millions of $’s for running what was described as “Disability Denial Factories”
Where is the redress for all the sick and disabled who are being abused by our government Baroness, it is abuse and nothing else and to know that and not do anything about it is to be complicit in it.
So, if you know Atos get it wrong even sometimes. What are you going to do about it?
The appeals need to deal with how the person was at the time of claim and assessment, not just how they are on the day of the hearing. The process needs to be fast, simple, efficient and just. In my experience it is none of these and on top of that, they do not like to question Atos even when they claim rediculous things such as maximum dose codeine is available over the counter and therefore the claimant cannot be in very much pain!
I would like to suggest the House of Lords spends a couple of hours reading the ESA Training manual.
It will soon become clear claimants are seen as untrustworthy liars from the outset by Atos Healthcare.
Perhaps another couple of hours reading the contract between the DWP and Atos.
This would soon show where Atos were failing to meet the terms of the contract in many ways.
Then look at the cost £100 million to Atos to undertake the work and then £50 million to the Tribunal Service to put right all the unnecessary errors caused by Atos.
Finally go back to the selection of Atos for the work, look what Atos PROMISED the Government of the day to get the contract, a promise to remove 1 million people from benefits.
Prove you are worth a seat in this House of Lords.
I’ve read it. I’ve asked people to say which part of section 3, which is the part about the tests is wrong. No one has posted a link yet.
Where does you 100 million come from? The last figure posted here was that it 60 million with the claim that this was large. However, in the context of 12,500 million handed out, its small.
As for the 40% who win on appeal, I’m not surprised because those appealing are not representative of those who were getting ICB, and they aren’t representative of those who carry on receiving ICB. (None of the latter appeal). It’s just those that are marginal who will appeal.
So given the test is to determine if claimants are capable of ‘some sort of work’, not necessarily the job they were doing before, what tests would you apply to claimants to determine that fact?
If you wish to see what people have to go through please read some of the stories here, maybe then you will see the problem Lord Blagger?
http://registerofshame2.wordpress.com/
If you really don’t understand what disabled/sick people in this country are worried/frightened about then I suppose there is no way of pursueding you, a lost soul maybe?
Lets hope you never ever have to rely on the state for your very existence, let’s hope If you have children they too never have to suffer like disabled people do now in the UK
http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2011/09/09/will-the-house-of-lords-really-help-us/
http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2011/08/23/important-read-circulate/
These references will help Lord Blagger
I’ll certainly read them.
How are you getting on reading the link to the peer reviewed research?
ie. I presume you accept that black triangle is an advocacy group pointing a certain point of view, rather than being independent.
I met someone who came in to regular contact with claimants, who also recognised that ME is a syndrome and not a disease per se. Her wages were not high, only just above the level of Benefit payments.
She decided that, in view of persistent tiredness which is one of the many,many, problems represented as ME syndrome, that she would retire from daily work and claim instead.
The ME diagnosis was made, such as it was, and now she claims permanently with DLA.
Pathology does not have the highest of reputations and at the time of the discovery of “ME” the Royal college of Pathology came in to being in about 1955.
Since then millions of people have become victims of this terrible “Disease” (it is not a disease as such at all) and vast numbers claim DLA with all the other benefits on account of it.
I am very much in favour of a proper system of negative income tax, namely tax credits for everybody, but to confuse it with disability benefits is a mistake.
Tax credits are “catch all” providing everybody, able or non-able, with what is necessary, £60 per week.
Dear Twm O’r Nant,
Your ‘friend of a friend’ who has a view via ‘hearsay’ doesn’t exactly base an opinion on peer reviewed or verifiable facts. So your post doesn’t take the debate that much further forward?
If you want facts, please check out the 12 deaths…..
http://dwpexaminations.blacktrianglecampaign.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1158
Do you have a view on that? Maybe think about the berieved families of this appalling mess. Or is this more of your ‘imagined’ type of disease? They aren’t actually dead. It’s just a long term comatose ‘syndrome’ !
You may need to write to HM Coroners for fact based opinion on what constitutes disease or death!
Maybe you need a little more humanity, a little more FACT and a little less hyperbole, and amateur diagnosis of what is, and what is not a ‘disease’.
I have a lot more faith in Baroness Murphy who is an eminent professor, and a qualified doctor with relevant specialist qualifications. Baroness Murphy also has the guts to put her real name and contact details, rather than rely on a strange anonymous and clearly bias fictional ‘Twm O’r Nant’ character.
Regards,
Calum McLean
My real name.
From the Lords of the Blog Twitter account (http://twitter.com/#!/mentions) if you haven’t already seen it from DrGrumble:
@lordsoftheblog Your Lordships, please read this: http://t.co/Zvl77acd
Beccy
So, at last we get the truth here. Privatisation of the NHS by the back door.
And how many of the companies picking up the contracts will be American? Will anyone tell us?
This will be the end of the health service for Britain. And the beginning of the chaos they have in the USA. The poor will have no health cover at all. Unless of course, you get shot in the war zones being created here. As there. Then you will have cover to save your life, and that’s it. No ongoing cover to keep you alive.
And those who believe they have health cover because they have what is termed ‘Health Insurance’ better sit up and take notice. You also will have no health cover as, the so called insurace, will only last until the next years increase in payments,, if you become long term sick. Your fees will more than double overnight and finally you will not be able to afford it, unles, you have the profits of Phillip Green that is. Comapny health cover lasts only whilst you are with the company. And that is temprary if you become long term ill. They cut you off instantly if they can get away with it.
And don’t forget the kids. If you have a child born with a disability you will never be able to get insurance for him/her. Ever. And your child will only be covered by the states low standard of so called ‘care.’ Which also has a time limit.
If this doesn’t force the electorate to call for a no confidence vote and push for a gerneral election, then we are in the ‘sh-t’ big time.
Maude Elwes
I’m affraid Maude that many people choose not to open their eyes to what’s happening, as you say we are seeing the end of the NHS.
Companies like Unum must be licking their lips with exitement, especially when members of the House of Lords calls them a LEGITIMATE company???
@atosvictimsgroup:
Yes, indeed.
However, the Baroness who opened this thread freely admits the job is overwhelming her as so many of the public wrote in email of their oppostion to it. So, even though she is incapable of representing the population on this matter, she has no intention of relinquishing her ‘state benefits’ of being a Baroness, when duty calls her to do so as her ability as spokesman is in question. This dictates her comforts must depend on it and this small test to her sensitivity is clearly uncomfortable and distressing to her. Yet, she fails to grasp the devastation of those who are perpetually disabled having to submit to constant and humiliating reevalution of their condition? Enlightening.
How does the old saying go, if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
I am always surprised that permanent disability payments for an adult includes the right to a car, which must mean that it is considered a “need” or “necessity”, whereas it should always in reality be considered a luxury.
A car costs £5000 a year to use and maintain.
a motorized wheel chair is one thing; a car quite another.
You tell me that when you rely on a car to do pretty much anything outside your house because walking leaves you in so much agony sometimes you cant even make it to the car to be driven somewhere. the mobility car system is needed by thousands who face the above every single day.
It is. That’s why I’ve said that the rest of us should pay for the extra costs.
One problem with the current car scheme is that you’re allowed to have other drivers, and this part can easily be abused.
‘the right to a car’ Not remotely.
A person in receipt of DLA Higher Rate Mobility may sacrifice their benefit to lease a car via Motability. The likelihood for many is that their disability will mean the basic models are not suitable and they will need to lease a larger automatic model, and will have to pay extra out of their own pocket on a weekly basis. At the end of three years Motability take the car away and they have the option to throw their money away on a new lease. Compared to purchasing a car Motability actually works out to be a pretty bad deal in financial terms, but if you can’t afford to purchase a suitable car, then it’s the only game in town.
Nor does every person with a disability receive DLA HRM, not even every person with a severe mobility impairment. I walk with crutches, I struggled to walk just 5m just a couple of hours ago, but I can’t demonstrate I clearly meet the HRM guidelines.
ATOS get it wrong? how about “My uncle committed suicide. he was declared fot to work by ATOS, won at appeal and then a few weeks later they started to re-test him all over again. Once more he scored zero points and when the second set of tribunal papers arrived he couldn’t take it anymore so hanged himself.” yes ATOS get it wrong lots of times and the consequences are dead disabled people.
Two points well made. First about the uselessness of Peers.
Second, on the assessment.
1. My take is all new applicants have to be assessed. As a priority
2. As part of the assessment, the time to the next assessment should be determined. For those with conditions that will not improve, a long period should elapse.
3. For those where there is a probability that the condition improves, a shorter probability.
Now I think that leaves one group that is more difficult. Any condition where the condition is intermittent.
@Lord Blagger:
It appears you have little or no knowledge of the proceedure required to obtain DLA.
So here we go. The form that is a perpheral start to the journey is 38 pages long. And in it they repeat over and over again, the requirement for the same information. These questions cover the aids you need, the medication you take, the amount of steps you can take and the need for care. How often you need to be cleaned up when you have incontinence. How many hours in the day and in the night you need this care and when, how long and what your prognosis is.
At the end of that exhausting episode you have to have it witnessed by your GP, your cunsultant, your nurses and your social workers, as well as a nieghbour, etc. They also check those who gave you the aids to assist your daily routine. Just to make sure you have them. Or, do not, as they didn’t supply them because they have run out.
They don’t simply telephone these referees, they write to them, threatening retribution should they give wrongful information. In the meantime, they check with all the other computers they hold your information on, and this process takes months and sometimes years, as one assessment after another is obtained.
Should the members of either the lower and upper chambers have to undergo such scrutiny, prior to being offered to the public as likely candidates for their office, not many of them would pass the necessary criteria.
To then ask for this lunacy to be repeated, every twelve weeks, in peretuity is degrading, insulting humiliating and traumatic. Not to mantion hugely expensive to the tax payer. And that is something you care do about.
What is being hidden from view, is, the amount of claims for disability has risen at an alarming rate as a direct result of mass immigration.
For, it isn’t simply those who come to the country, legally or otherwise, that has overwhelmed the entire system, it is the application for all the old, sick and distant relatives they insist on joining them as it is all free in the UK and a human right to have your family with you.
I was speaking to a really nice Morrocan woman this afternoon and she told me she had first gone to Paris and lived there a year, but, the French were not as kind to her as she heard the British were and her living conditions were cramped there in northern Paris. So she came to the UK where, to her utter surprise, she was placed first in a small studio in central London. Within five months, and without her havingi to make a further request for it, they sent her a letter offering her the opportunity of a nice one bedroom flat on the first floor of a Regency house in a conservation area where she has remained happy for the last five years since. The woman was single, but not a single mother, she had no dependants and walked with a limp. Her English was impeccable, and she was highly intelligent. She though, had not done a days work in her time here, yet she was able to claim and receive DLA.
No British person would ever be treated as humanely as this women. And they certainly would not be housed like that within a five month period. If ever.
This, along with the thieving bankers, pilfering Lords and MP’s on the fiddle, the selling of our assets at knock down prices to those in the know and any and all other proflagacy connected to our irresponsible government workers, is why we are now having to face the real facts of our starving and uncared for sick and disabled.
As an above poster voiced, many of whom have paid enormous taxes throughout their lives until disablity fell on them.
PS: in no way do I blame this above lady for the situation she found herself in. I hold our governments totally and absolutely responsible for what they have bestowed on their hard working countrymen. Whom they obviously abhor.
And the EU is not to blame either. This woman was not given this kind of luxurious welcome under a French government, who is another EU member. So, it is no pan Europe policy the way they keep pushing at you. Only in ludicrous Britain where the population do not make those in power pay personally for abuse of their money.
So LB, turn your wrath on those who brought this situation to us, not those who are suffering under it so badly and resulting in many, many cases of death through suicide or some other grossly unacceptable situation, like a heart attack or stroke brought on as a result of continual abuse and harrassment.
And why isn’t the Labour party fiercely opposing this? Could it be because they collude in the abuse of the sick with the Tories?
It appears you have little or no knowledge of the proceedure required to obtain DLA.
==========
You keep repeating that. However, I have read the manual, section 3, which is about the tests.
The form that is a perpheral start to the journey is 38 pages long. And in it they repeat over and over again, the requirement for the same information. These questions cover the aids you need, the medication you take, the amount of steps you can take and the need for care. How often you need to be cleaned up when you have incontinence. How many hours in the day and in the night you need this care and when, how long and what your prognosis is.
And what’s the problem here? Aren’t these reasonable questions to ask about someone’s disability?
@LB:
You are being deliberately obtuse. And not to mention turning a blind eye to the fact that hundreds of thousands of immigrants are receiving benefits you and your fellow citizens have paid to cover themselves and their families if and when sickness or old age arrives for them. Which, don’t forget, is going to happen to you. I can’t wait to here your call for justice when the social worker comes to your home and forces you to be taken into a so called ‘care’ home. Where you will be starved and left without water to drink whilst they smack your face and pull your hair.
To have to go through that questionaire and have the proof needed, your GP, your Consultant, your nurses or carers or whoever else you put up as back up, is enough just once. Why should they in essence accuse the medics of being liars and cheats. Because that is exactly what they are saying.
It is an abuse to do this in the first place, when all our peronal documentation is already at hand in their computers at a touch of a button. And they have been doing this for years, not just today. They have more information than you have any idea of, and so this game they are playing is simply an abuse of the sick and the disabled because they, and I mean they, the goverment workers including MP’s of all levels, allowed our siocial fund to be stolen and taken for private gain. They conned us all out of our tax pool. They gambled and threw it away. Why hasn’t that got you on fire. Could it be because you gained from it in some way. And would like it to continue in order to let you get fatter and more rotund from the pool you don’t have a right to plunder. Just as they had no right to plunder. It’s called fraud and that is a jailable offence. And it’s time the public collectively called for that crime to be put to justice.
This really must go to the European Court on Human Rights grounds, and a new law that requires those who collude in this, those who gave the word to do it, must be found guilty of gross negligence toward the sick and disabled and made to forfeit their own money to compensate for the intense cruelty they have created. As well as sent to jail if found to have been cruel beyond expectation of a civilised people.
No getting out of it by saying the government told me to do this. My boss told me to do it, I had no alternative. Oh, yes they do/did, just as Hitler and his Nazi soldiers did. All you need to do is say ‘no’ I will not do this inhumane act as it is against the law of conscience to abuse sick people in this outrageous way.
Then make all those who stole our social fund relinquish their entire assets to refund the people post haste.
Want to se how quick change takes place should we get as nasty as they are.
Obtuse about migration? nope. It’s a major disaster. We have the wrong sort of migrant.
Migration should be limited to those that pay more tax that the average government spend per year. Per migrant, not per migrant worker.
So long as they stay above that threshold they can stay. Drop below, and they have to leave.
No benefits for migrants either, and a very long period before you can be naturalised.
Yet another reason why you can’t have your payments. They are going to other people, and there isn’t any money left.
Why should they in essence accuse the medics of being liars and cheats. Because that is exactly what they are saying.
Or they are saying that all these medics haven’t been on the right courses to train them to make the assessments in line with the law. It’s not cost effective to train all these people to make assessments, since that would really put the cost through the roof. Why not have fewer doctors making the assessment on a consistent basis. Same rules for all, across the board?
It is an abuse to do this in the first place, when all our peronal documentation is already at hand in their computers at a touch of a button
No its not. Your doctor is concerned with your treatment. He is not there to assess your fitness for a particular type of work.
This really must go to the European Court on Human Rights grounds,
Which article is your grounds for appeal?
I mean they, the goverment workers including MP’s of all levels, allowed our siocial fund to be stolen and taken for private gain.
There is no social fund. Period. Politicians have taken all the money and spent it. It’s not the private sector. It’s the public sector that has spent the lot.
Ignoring any incapacity payments, they have run up debts of 7,000 bn (rising with inflation). That ignores paying any future incapacity payments. Government income 550 bn. Now work out what mortgage multiple they are on.
That’s the point and you are slowly working it out for yourself. They’ve stolen the money. That money should have been earmarked for those that really need it. It’s gone. End result is that they are having to make drastic cuts and that hurts people.
You’re persisting in shooting the messenger, not the criminals.
Now, to get your money as you see its a right, who are you going to get to pay it? People who committed the fraud, or people who are also the victims of the fraud.
Don’t forget too, that if you want victims of the fraud to pay, then it pays to be nice to them, rather than attacking them. You might want my money.
At the end of that exhausting episode you have to have it witnessed by your GP, your cunsultant, your nurses and your social workers, as well as a nieghbour, etc. They also check those who gave you the aids to assist your daily routine. Just to make sure you have them. Or, do not, as they didn’t supply them because they have run out.
Hit the button too soon.
So why wouldn’t you want your GP and consultant signing it? People have been saying it should just be down to them as they know best. You seem to be now saying that you don’t want the GP and consultant to know.
Social workers? If you go with the joined up service idea, shouldn’t they be in the loop?
What percentage of people have nursing care?
They don’t simply telephone these referees, they write to them, threatening retribution should they give wrongful information. In the meantime, they check with all the other computers they hold your information on, and this process takes months and sometimes years, as one assessment after another is obtained.
It’s called bureaucracy. After all there are lots of people working for the state that need to be employed, and what better to have them organise this, get their 30K a year, plus pension, office, etc. About 100K per person in total.
After all, what do they care about getting money to people who need it when they have a mortgage to pay.
No British person would ever be treated as humanely as this women. And they certainly would not be housed like that within a five month period. If ever.
So you’re all going to lose as a result. Labour’s legacy. There is no money. It’s been spent. It’s also gone on huge number of non-migrants to keep them off the unemployment figures.
This, along with the thieving bankers, pilfering Lords and MP’s on the fiddle, the selling of our assets at knock down prices to those in the know and any and all other proflagacy connected to our irresponsible government workers, is why we are now having to face the real facts of our starving and uncared for sick and disabled.
Exactly. And that also includes those above. The migrant you refer to, plus the hidden unemployed.
So back to the real question that you still can’t seem to answer.
So LB, turn your wrath on those who brought this situation
You haven’t been reading my posts on this blog. I’ve already had one peer arrested and jailed for his frauds – Lord Taylor.
I’ve a lot more in my sights.
What have you done about dealing with the fraudsters?
What should the rules be to separate out this woman and the indigenous who are also claiming when they shouldn’t be from those that are?
You haven’t answered this question. Instead you’ve gone on the attack along the lines of, we can’t test people because its too stressful. The implication of that is all the people who are claiming such as your example will continue to get the money.
@LB:
You can start with article 14
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/the-human-rights-act/the-convention-rights/article-14-prohibition-on-discrimination.html
I am sure others will follow.
@LB:
Well what a clever boy you are! How did you do it? I refer to Taylor. Are you a policeman?
And your implication that I can do something should I choose to, is not only the sign of a mind lacking content, but, also lacking a certain aptitude of spirit.
Add to that, I am never nice to the undeserving punter.
—>I am always surprised that permanent disability payments for an adult includes the right to a car, which must mean that it is considered a “need” or “necessity”, whereas it should always in reality be considered a luxury<—
Care to look at that troll-like comment and verify it. At what rates of what benefits/allowances would you claim your statement is based? Or do you think all people claiming all disability related benefits/allowances include the right to a car? (then go and look up the eligiblity for the motorbility scheme and post your apology here please)
If by some chance I should suffer a permanent disability, a car would be wholly useless as whilst I can drive – I passed my test at 16 nearly half a century ago – I only have one eye and very slight cataract in the other, so feel it safer – as others might too = that I do not drive. It seems foolish therefore, if true, that “permanent disability payments for an adult includes the right to a car, which must mean that it is considered a “need’ or ‘necessity'”
Research commissions not taken here;all done and dusted many years ago, and it always surprises me.
Twm O’r Nant ( you can get some funny anagrams out of that name ) opined : “a motorized wheel chair is one thing; a car quite another.”
and one supposes that like many, you think that the government pays for them too ?? – the majority of people who need wheelchairs or mobility scooters PAY FOR THEM and the maintainance costs THEMSELVES as they are an individual item
THERE ARE NO “RIGHTS ” To either cars or other aids you get what you can afford -or are lucky enough to be offered ( some people cant afford to run cars – shock ) and other disabled people are not allowed to drive owing to their disabilities
but , as some of us KNOW , the public perception is that we disabled are lavished with all these things at “THEIR” EXPENSE – and when you disavow them of this opinion they are frequently surprised
so once again we are getting “outraged taxpayer syndrome ” -HELLO – DISABLED PEOPLE PAY TAXES TOO !! – NEVER HEARD OF INCOME TAX AND VAT ?? – AND MANY OF US HAVE PAID LOTS AND LOTS OF TAX AND NATIONAL INSURANCE – AND RESENT BEING CLASSED AS SCROUNGERS ……..
(yes i was shouting there ) – and how pray is a car a “luxury ” ?? we dont all live in cities you know – so what of the disabled person who lives say in the middle of DARTMOOR , where i KNOW the bus service is virtually non existant and without a car you might as well be in the famous prison there
and before you quote me the mythical “support group ” we ALL allegedly have – ER NOT !! – or say take taxi’s – to go from the moorland villages to say hospital in plymouth by taxi will cost upwards of £ 20 each way – ( kinda screws up that generous DLA payment we get each month in one foul swoop ) and as the hospital car scheme is running down owing to cutbacks ………..in fact to go one way in a taxi from plymouth city center to the local hospital is +£6 and rising
so mr Twm O’r Nant – you are spouting about a subject you plainly know nothing about – you obviouly know NOTHING of the problems of mobility for many disabled people – and care even less one suspects
oh and we must not “forget” FREE bus passes for the disabled – great if you can walk to the stop and at the other end – ( have YOU tried getting on a bus in a wheelchair ?? )
and trains – don’t even get me started on them ….
so cars a luxury ?? – wot you – having a laugh ??
@muffie:
That is the deprived British mentality. From the days when they were surfs and the mentality of the underserving poor was poured onto them like waste bucket contents thrown from windows as they walk beneath.
For goodness sake, we still regard a fridge as a luxury and don’t mention the phone, you know that regal thing that stands in the hall, only to be lifted by the master.
Of course, it comes from the aristocrats and serious old money who reject central heating in favour of a burning fire. As well as interior decoration for fear if they give the place a paint job and a cushion lift they are betraying the heritage of their ancestry and Grandpapa will put a curse on the estate in turn for their bad behaviour.
So, when the help can afford a dog they go into a tantrum, as they know, ‘pendulum swung too far t’other way.’ Which means they will be out of cheap labour come Christmas. And they will have to light that fire themselves and chop and carry the logs.
Twim and twat is clearly sub normal and it is times like these that I wish, with all my heart that he suffers from a disability as like Me and many others it can hit you when you least expect it..as im sure he will take EVERY penny that he felt he deserved with no guilt or regret. So Mr Twot.. I put you in amoungst the ill informed, ignorant, and obviously bored enough to get your kicks out of rile.
By the way I have MS, I worked very hard for my Mortgage up until I could no longer work. Depression (a symptom not a cause) of MS.. I have needed the system on many levels in the last 3 yrs ..I have needed legal aid to apply to the council after struggling with my mortgage due to lack of help.. and then the suicide of a partner in my home led to PTSD and s long stay in the local mental health unit.
Im Thanks to the amazing help of Shelter, CAB and people of absolute kindness I am now In housing association, im on DLA and I have a car on motibility of which I can now afford to give up the allowance I would have recieved otherwise to pay for getting to A2B.
Now I will never have dreams.. I cannot make things better. I am now for the rest of my life dependant on the government in some way.
So to the Baroness .. I can promise you whomever is in government if I EVER have to go to an ‘assesment’ again I would rather die first. I have pride and honesty and anyone who continually punishes me for getting this chronic lifelong condition is just making me feel like a begger, l feel I have no voice anymore..and yet im probably THE most qualified to comment on the WRB and every part of it worst of all I feel a scourge on society.
Baroness Murphy
Something you said shows that you have no understanding of the assessment process whatsoever otherwise you wouldn’t of said what you did, and I quote you?
“How are you to be assessed for the more help you might later need if you won’t agree to be properly assessed? It’s this refusal to see the possible benefits of a regular assessment which I don’t understand. An assessment isn’t a punishment; it’s trying to find out what you really need and the best way to supply it.”
The assessment process is NOT about finding out what help one requires Baroness, politicians and spin doctors for the political parties are brilliant at spinning that message but in reality it is a complete lie.
The Atos HCP doesn’t ask you questions like,
“What could we do to improve your everyday life”
Baroness, when you say properly assessed what do you mean?
I also find your words here very amusing?
“It’s this refusal to see the possible benefits of a regular assessment which I don’t understand. An assessment isn’t a punishment”
You cannot see why people are not up for regular assessments? When you say regular how many is regular? I know people who have been to an Atos assessment 3 times in a year, they have conditions which will never improve, please do tell me what the purpose could possibly be to continually assess those people?
And as for you stating that an assessment isn’t a punishment, well the majority of people undergoing the Atos assessment process would disagree with you, it’s a punishment for being disabled and that’s a fact, there can be no reason for recalling people who have severe lifelong conditions which will never get better, it’s a vindictive process which all the political parties have a hand in.
When someone has to fight so hard just to get what they are rightfully entitled to, then an Atos HCP comes along and produces an assessment that looks like a script from “Fantasy Island”, and then you say you can’t understand why people are averse to being assessed?
I doubt it will be long before all disabled people have to wear a golden cloth badge with a wheelchair emblem attached, just so society can pinpoint who’s disabled or not? Didn’t that happen in 1930s Germany with another group?
As a DLA recipient I would like to understand why a computerised tick-box exercise carried out by someone who is not an expert in their field carries more weight than the medical opinion given by professional doctors and consultants?
Given that the NHS proposals by Andrew Lansley will deem GP’s capable of having responsibility for much of the total NHS accounts, I wonder why they are deemed incapable of deciding whether their patient is ill/disabled or not.
It makes no sense & it is making people like me feel very scared for the near future. Without my DLA, I am unable to pay for my care & will end up taking a hospital bed & eventually will cost the state far far more than now.
Is this really what you want?
Baroness Murphy I’d like to make a comment. My wife is severely disabled, I’m her full-time (government exploited) carer and I’d like to let you know what she told me about the possibility of being tested on a regular basis baring in mind she is so bad as to have been awarded DLA indefinitely.
She has said to me she would rather take an overdose than be subjected to constant retests on conditions she has, one being so rare that less than a hundred people in England have it. My wife has to take in excess of 25 tablets a day, she isn’t faking anything. Her mental health team has dwindled to a once a month appointment over 20 miles away (cutbacks mean no home visits now and the staff that have left/been removed have not been replaced) She cannot take the stress and upset of these tests from a corrupt organisation like Atos nor should she have too, nor should others who are so disabled as to be awarded DLA indefinitely.
You said somewhere that a lot of the concern is “hyperbole”, I’d call your comment something much cruder having been a carer for almost 20 years now and having seen past-present (and no doubt future) governments treat disabled people as dirt. There is no other way to put it, well there is but I’m doing my best not to swear.
The blatant benefit cuts (it isn’t welfare reform as everyone knows) should not be allowed to happen. DLA actually works, it has fraud set at below 1%. The rise in numbers of people receiving DLA was built in at it’s inception due to the aging community and I’d hazard a guess that Attendance Allowance has dropped as older disabled people have died. There is an annual underspend on benefits of around £15 billion a year, where has that gone if there has been such a huge rise in claimants?
P.I.P is going to cause deaths, again this isn’t “hyperbole” this will actually happen.
Disabled people already find it hard to cope with the increases in fuel/heating/food prices and then throw in Housing Benefit cuts. How do you think they are going to cope with this vicious Tory attack on the benefits they rely on to exist?
DLA isn’t easily gotten and it could be improved BUT P.I.P will be worse, harder to get, harder to keep. Services for disabled people have been cut back savagely, if this bill goes through then the Tories ideologically drive CUTS will leave a legacy of deaths, attempted suicides and homelessness, but as long as a few quid is saved it’s worth it eh?
I issue you with a challenge, personally meet any or all of the disabled people posting here and speak to them in person about their concerns, this ‘medium’ won’t let you see the real concern of disabled people that are being targeted and portrayed as dole-scrounging layabouts draining the country of money’.
DLA actually works, it has fraud set at below 1%.
==============
That’s not the case.
1. Vast numbers of people were moved from unemployment benefits to incapacity benefits.
That has been admitted. So the 1% figure isn’t correct.
2. Why has there been a huge rise in claimants?
3. Tory cuts? It’s a direct legacy of Labour’s profligate spending. End result there is no more money.
Who is going to provide the billions you want?
So I’ll ask you the question that others can’t answer.
What are the tests that should be applied to get disability benefits?
@Lord Blagger:
Hospital and GP’s records. Of which there is a hundred weight on every person in the land. Including you. Just as they do when they want to catch the fraudulent now, the ones you regularly crow about. But you would know that wouldn’t you. As you are in a position of catching fraudulent MP’s and Lords and setting about making them face the music.
Lord Blagger,
It’s unclear whether you are posting deliberate misinformation, or are simply utterly clueless about the benefit system. DLA is not an out-of-work benefit and may be received in addition to IB or ESA, by pensioners, people who are working, and by children. Moving or not moving people onto IB or ESA has no effect on DLA claims and your argument depends on a linkage which does not exist. If you aren’t aware that that linkage does not exist, then you don’t know enough to comment. Research has clearly demonstrated that while peope may have been moved onto IB by past Conservative governments to ‘massage’ the unemployment figures this is no longer the case, that cohort having since retired. The rate of disability benefit fraud is confirmed at 0.5%, lower than the rate of DWP error.
Equally DWP have (quietly and belatedly – the figures were delayed by 3 months to ensure the WRB cleared the commons) admitted that there is no massive increase in DLA claims, that they had forgotten that pensioners could receive DLA, that children could receive DLA, that the population is increasing, and that once these figures are taken into account DLA is rising precisely as it was predicted to do when it was introduced (the rise being largely because previous benefits did not allow pensioners to claim).
Cold comfort, perhaps, but strongly self-blame-relieving I do nonetheless submit:
(1)”We humans have become a plague on Earth”
(Prof Jonathan Stone, Australian Environmental Studies TV course) –
so you have no need to feel or think yourself “a scourge” or suchlike;
and this is further strengthened by
(2) Premise #1: Any-one making ends meet upon <£300 per week and remaining 'happy'
(i.e. healthy, citizenlike, and environmentally-supportive)
must surely be personally life-efficient (regardless of their Workplace costs and skills);
(Sub-conclusion so far): Therefore any-one having-to-have twice that weekly income (=£600) is only 50% personally efficient at living (again, in their 75% lifeplace timeframe, distinctly separate from their 25% Workplace timeframe).
I count Vanessa and many thousands of others disabled, impaired, disadvantaged, or 'normal', among such 100% personally-efficient 'livers';
and I'm guessing that so do Earth's Lifesupports,
and doubtless that God does too.
Vanessa Wigmore, Thank you for telling us your story, no-one will doubt you have a need for all the help you are getting and perhaps in the future you will need more. How are you to be assessed for the more help you might later need if you won’t agree to be properly assessed? It’s this refusal to see the possible benefits of a regular assessment which I don’t understand. An assessment isn’t a punishment; it’s trying to find out what you really need and the best way to supply it. It is this aspect of the Bill which has the greatest potential to enhance the help which people like you get. I don’t understand why you feel assessment is a punishment, truly I don’t comprehend why you should think that it is. I hope very much you will see any future assent as an honest attempt to assess your real needs.
Thanks to Muffie02 for pointing out that mostly people with disabilities pay for their own transport and other aids and in this day and age a care is more or less essential for out of town dwellers to lead any sort of life.
What I want is DLA (or the new PIP) to be allocated more generously and fairly to properly assessed and regularly reassessed individuals with disability needs. A tighter fairer system is in their best interests.
@baroness murphy – i think the perception that these assessment are a “punishment ” may be because of the way which the WCA is being carried out by ATOS – and what people on DLA FEAR is that the new PIP will be the same
we disabled do not mind being reassessed PROVIDED the assessment is FAIR – ACCURATE – TAKES INTO ACCOUNT MEDICAL EVIDENCE – AND for those who have long term disabilities that are NOT going to improve – NOT TOO FREQUENT – or at least sensibly so
we have evidence of people failing WCA – appealing and the award changed onlY to be summonsed BACK to atos for re assessement with in a few weeks – plainly a ridiculus system – and costly to the taxpayer .
THIS i think is where the “punishment ” bit comes in – people want to have a FAIR assessment and then be allowed to get on with their lives – NOT be dreading the next time the “brown envelope ” drops through the door in a matter of weeks
the PROBLEM as i see it is this – from the initial discriptors in the draft regulations – i note that there are many things that are NOT taken into account – for intance the effects of chronic pain on ability to do things – the omission of the fact that many disabled (and frequently elderly ) people live TOTALLY ALONE – they do not HAVE the option of assistance and help in any of the fields the draft regs show – what of them ??
you see baroness – what we have here is another system for the disabled -designed by the able – oh shure the “charities ” all got consulted – but where ANY individual disabled people asked to review the proposals ?? – i read everything that comes out about PIP and can poke large holes in the current ideas – and thats just an ordinery joe who is disabled – and on the strength of what i have seen so far – i have little confidence in either a lot of the “experts ” ( of whom – how many are disabled BTW ?? ) NOR THE GOVERNMENTS ABILITY TO DELIVER AN ASSESSMENT CRITERIA THAT IS “FIT FOR PURPOSE ”
thank you for listening to the views of the ordinery folk affected by this – its just a pity those in the “other place ” seem to have terminal deafness when it comes to our viewpoint .
So, given you are making the rules.
What are the tests that should be applied to determine who gets the money and who doesn’t?
Dear Baroness Murphy,
If I need any help I go to my MS Nurse, I can access medical help through social services, my Neurologist and my GP..
If I need help financially I go to a marvelous site called Gov.uk which tells me what and how to access the benefits I need.
It is my understanding that Atos are contracted by the Govt purely to determine who is genuine and who is not by covert observation as well as a tick system. I have experience of an assesment before Atos which was very very similar..
To meet a complete stranger and speak of sometimes very personnal struggles is, I feel completely unfair when My GP, Neurologist can give you the info you need.
There is no doubt in my mind that this test IS to get people off benefits.. but is done in such a way as you are a scrounger unless proved otherwise.
Is it too much to ask that common sense prevail and in cases like mine which is a chronic life limiting condition that repeat assessment is unhelpful.
Yes I want to work and indeed did find myself a lovely little job..but when I couldnt work again and had to reclaim my so called fast track to benefits left me to lose my mortgage as it took a yr too sort and with debts im still paying today.. The bailiffs employed from the local council came round and listed goods if I didnt pay.. £400 then and there and it cost me £141 for the pleasure of the visit. and every consequent visit if im even a day late next time…
I would like allowance to those whos conditions fluctuate and vary and never improve overall. Somedays my eyes dont even want to open and nor does my brain or body. Other days I can manage but only in my own time with my own space to do so. But unfortunately I cannot dictate each day.. so how do you think anyone else can?
Im asking for to be allowed to deal with my MS and be a mum with some quality of life.
I am proud as are many, and I dont understand why I have to go to a test which is demoralising and would feel more probing than helpful to someone I have no trust in and do not know at least professionally
Imagine, god forbid, you are ever accused of something you didnt do and had to stand in front of a jury and try to articulate your innocence knowing the jury is bias!? thats how it feels.. imagine when you retire you have to go for an assesment to see if you are infact too old to work still?
The uncertainty of future that is decided by those who don’t understand or possibly care is the most frightening thing ive endured.
Right now not only do I have Atos to worry about, im scared by the rate im seeing the NHS fail. The Social Services dire need for staff, The DLA changes. The worry that there will be nowhere to turn if I need advice or help to fight decisions Thats before ive even mentioned my 16 yr old and his prospects.
Most in positions of power only have to worry about the higher tax threshold
Treat me as an individual who knows what she needs rather than a guilty scrounger who maybe milking the system dry.
Its that simple.
Also do you think it is fair that cancer sufferers undergoing chemo are classed fit for work? This is what DWP told my dear friend whilst she was tryimg to claim some help while getting treatment.. Hospital visits alone where taking all her money in parking.
She has worked all of her life, she has a mortgage, and two boys of 13 and 15 and has never claimed.
All she was worried about was her boys should she become terminal.
I think she deserved a pat on the back and all the time she needed until her GP claimed her fit for work?
This used to be Great Britain what has happened? its all gone wrong?
I feel that this welfare reform bill is completely going backwards. its actual persecution!
I am the first to agree we now live in a ‘something for nothing’ society. But thats not on the benefits side. That is a product of credit card culture and debt!
As you know I now live in social housing, in a close of social housing and there is only one other that stays home. Every single other home goes to work and they all work hard. This does not tally with the perception?
Why not look into the winter fuel repayments? Expats livng in warm climates get it as do the rich?
why not look at capping child benefit on incomes over a certain amount?
And im still reeling from the £450b Super fire centre fiasco.. The centre here stands empty since 2007.. the Govt rejecting Devon and Somersets fire brigade offer to occupy, expecting £750.000 rent per yr which they cant afford?. so who is paying that now?
So you see my anxiety as it seems the ill and disabled may be just classed as ‘collatoral damage’ in the whole scheme of things and the future looks very very bleak for those on low incomes relying on this country to support them in times of need.
If I could see into the future I see suicides a plenty and brushed under the carpet. I see people filling the mental health system that is cracking up..I see a huge rise in homelessness and despair.
Oh hang on.. is that America ..?
Never in my 43 yrs did I feel so so worried about the way we are going as a country.
Thanks to all who acknowledged me. And to everyone relying on the support of the system, stay strong. keep talking and changing attitudes..We are not scroungers. We need understanding and a realisation that ignorance is in fact a condition from our past times and the uneducated.
We are all human beings irrespective of colour, disability, race and ability to work. And each one of us law abiding quiet citizens deserves to be treated with dignity and respect.
So you see my anxiety as it seems the ill and disabled may be just classed as ‘collatoral damage’ in the whole scheme of things and the future looks very very bleak for those on low incomes relying on this country to support them in times of need.
I agree. This is a direct consequence of the mess ups and outright fraud. Because government tolerates fraud, because in many cases they are up to the necks committing fraud themselves, they have allowed it to go on.
Look at ministers who’ve been sacked next popping up working for the people who just a short time prior to this they were buying from. No need to get value for money, because you will get your pay off in a year.
You’re right to be worried. That’s the reason why it is vitally important that those who can work are removed from ICB and its variants. If they aren’t it will definitely go wrong. I happen to think we are already passed that point.
Thanks to Muffie02 for pointing out that mostly people with disabilities pay for their own transport and other aids and in this day and age a care is more or less essential for out of town dwellers to lead any sort of life.
And they shouldn’t.
The fact that we all don’t pay for it is because the money is being diverted to those that don’t need it, and the disability industry whose livelihood depends on making it complex.
Baroness
You just don’t get it do you? Vanessa you say just exactly what I feel, clive you are also on the same wavelength. I would much rather end my life than carry on with this torture, the baroness clearly doesn’t understand the added stress this is causing, and she doesn’t realise the test is about REMOVING us from benefits and not helping us get what we need. If that was the case I would not have failed my IB assessment would I? I won outright on appeal, this proves that the test was not fit for purpose.
Some of you people who constantly wine about us on benefits may one day be in the same situation and god help you then, because at the rate things are going there may be no benefits for the sick whatsoever.
So out of interest, why was it denied in the first place, and what changed on appeal?
Lord Blagger
The reason most people fail the initial assessment is because the Atos HCP doesn’t bother or they refuse to look at or read all the other evidence produced by the claimant, then when you go to appeal they see the evidence you originally showed in the first place.
Atos HCP are meant to read any evidence that the claimant produces at the time of the assessment, (Consultants letter’s/reports- x-rays, scan reports) They are just not doing this.
One must ask oneself why they refuse to look at evidence which would help them make a correct decision? The reason is that they want you to go away, they fail you at your initial assessment and hope your too ill to fight at appeal or tribunal stage, the whole idea is to wear you down, If you die in the process all the better…
“what changed on appeal”
The ‘Midwife’ that assessed me was incompetent, Simple!
I am sure the thousands of people facing the Atos assessment process, would wish all they had to worry about is that their email box was jammed. Instead they have additional stress impacting their existing health problems,wondering whether they will be able to hang on to their only means of existence, and if they can manage to keep a roof above their head. We are talking basic needs of food, warmth and shelter, which no-one should be without.Governments look after themselves,and make decisions to line the pockets of private companies like Atos.They are not interested in the rest of the population, who have been left to rot.
@Baroness Murphy, how do you arrive at the opinion that an assessment isn’t a punishment; it’s trying to find out what you really need and the best way to supply it?
That is what an assessment should be but you are ignoring all the evidence of what Atos/DWP assessments really are: A sham for disability denial.
Everybody has condemned this process including Professor Harrington, as you know up to 70% are overturned on appeal yet Atos suffer no financial penalties whatsoever and their contract is extended. How on earth can this be trying to find out what you really need and the best way to supply it? their are 11,000 people a week put through this torment and that has been going on for ages whilst people like you are in denial and tinkering around the edges.
Even if the Assessment was changed today to make it completely fair and honest, what of the hundreds of thousands of people that have already suffered this disability denial?
Baroness Murphy and Lord Blagger just don’t get it, they don’t understand because they are not disabled or sick themselves, they have closed minds and will never have their views altered…
They also have too much money coming in for it to be of any interest to the Atos Victims Group, how many disabled people would love the luxury of in excess of a £300 a day allowance to pontificate about issues that they clearly have no knowledge about while gazing upwards at beautiful artwork on the ceilings.
I wonder if they would find the artwork as beautiful and be there to gaze at it as often if their “allowance” was less than £20 a day and that was all they had to survive on.
Considering that successful appeals are at 40% (and 70% with representation), does Baroness Murphy not consider that any company who is only successful 30 – 60% of the time has serious questions to answer about its ability to perform their role?
Do these high numbers of successful appeals mean nothing to you?
The government last year promised to reduce working age expenditure on this benefit by 20% on the forecast expenditure for 2015/16, triggering suspicion among campaigners that the changes are motivated by the need to cut costs rather than to improve the way the benefit is distributed.
As Richard Hawkes, CEO of Scope said “How can you decide that [a reform] is going to save 20% in advance? I would think that this is driven by cost reductions, and that they have come up with a way of assessing people that will result in the cost savings they want to make”
Doesn’t the fact that so many charities that help the disabled, have major concerns about the WCA & PIP not ring alarm bells?
Your trite remarks “How are you to be assessed for the more help you might later need if you won’t agree to be properly assessed? It’s this refusal to see the possible benefits of a regular assessment which I don’t understand.” are almost beneath contempt.
Do you think we have a choice about being assessed? Really??
Can we refuse to be assessed? You know we can’t!
What we want is for that assessment to be fair and to take into consideration all our evidence from qualified medics.
We want to not be recalled for testing 3 months after winning an appeal – an appeal that should never have been necessary in the first place.
What we want is for Ms Miller/Mr Grayling to cease their poisonous press releases to the right-wing media alleging that DLA/ESA is a benefit that requires only self-certification with no evidence by medics necessary.
Does that help clarify things for you?
My Dad had terminal cancer of the liver, and these stupid fools wrote on his report he could return to work in 6 months. Not one person picked up the fact that he was DYING.
You can shove all the reforms and all the bills through parliament you want to, but nothing can replace the stupidity of someone who is meant to be qualified deciding that someone who has weeks to live will be able to return to work.
The rest of the population has over the years paid 400 bn to people who no longer qualify for ICB.
Yep, they have been left to rot.
Still no one able to say what rules are.
Everybody has condemned this process including Professor Harrington, as you know up to 70% are overturned on appeal yet Atos suffer no financial penalties whatsoever and their contract is extended.
It’s a distortion to say, up to 70%. The actual figure is 40%.
Nice try at imply that 70% of all assessments are wrong. They aren’t. It’s only the borderline ones that appeal.
Lord Blagger –
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/26/work-assessments-incapacity-benefits-system?INTCMP=SRCH
“The work and pensions committee report also notes that 40% of decisions go to appeal, with up to 70% of those being overturned at tribunal.”
I think you’re getting a little mixed up Lord Blagger or misunderstanding what people are trying to tell you.
And if Lord Troll had bothered reading what he quoted I actually said ‘up to 70%’
Go the other stats that you’re missing?
How many people have
1. taken the tests
2. failed the tests
3. passed the tests
4. appealed the tests
5. won the tests
Numbers, not percentages.
Can also to comment on the number of people on benefits and why it has tripled?
Thought not. Bit difficult to explain that one away isn’t it.
Laird Blogger,
It seems that every forum or weblog has someone like you.
Asks questions that suits their hidden agenda.
DECLINES to answer or IGNORES what doesn’t suit them.
If you want the information, go do the work yourself. Make your own Freedom of Information request. Maybe a better use of your valuable time, instead of being a disability-denier or taunting sick people.
You should be barred from this forum until you answer this….
is it right for 12 people, including a five month old child and an unborn baby to die at the hands of the welfare system – at your altar of saving money at all costs?
Lets hope and pray you never sustain a lifelong disability serving your country like many of us did.
Regards,
Calum.
You’re misreading it.
How many people were claiming ICB?
What percentage were rejected? 93% <–
How many people appealed the decisions?
How many people win the appeals?
Never feed a troll, so I wont
Lord Blagger,
Nice try to write: It’s only the borderline ones that appeal.
That is utter rot.
Tens of thousands have to appeal as the system is NOT fit-for-purpose. NOT because they are borderline, but because the LiMA computer system is useless, as are the DWP with their culpably dangerous policy.
Why do you think that Baroness Murphy is attracting so many comments on her welfare reform thread???
May I ask you a question?
Is it right for welfare reform to be so systemically defective that it causes people to kill themselves for a meagre £30 a week saving to the state…..
http://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/9215292.Dad_committed_suicide_after_housing_benefit_cut/
….. when politicians spend thousands of taxpayer pounds on moat cleaning, free plasma tvs, home-flipping and general expense fiddling which was rife?
There are too many examples of these reforms killing people to list.
Lastly, what is your interest in this subject? There is a counter argument to be made, but the general tenor of your debate is less than objective.
Regards,
Calum.
Objective? I’ve repeatedly asked those are complaining to come up with an objective set of rules to test if people are fit for some sort of work.
Can you provide this?
What’s my interest?
It goes back a long way. People were moved from unemployment benefit to ICB for political reasons. To hide unemployment.
You know that, I know that, politicians know that. The cost over the times its been running is 400 bn pounds. That money has gone. Its been wasted.
Now if you think that 400 bn pissed away on people who didn’t need it isn’t a problem, think again.
The consequences now is that even people who are marginal, on the boundary, will lose. Rather than set a lower standard, to give people a bit of benefit of the doubt, the government has no choice because there is no money. It has been spent. It is gone. I could go into a whole dead parrot equivalent. Your not addressing this at all.
You think the money has to be provided, but you’ve a complete disconnect. Some abstract body, the government provides the cash with no side effects. It doesn’t, it takes it from other people, a lot of whom are in poverty.
The total cost for a single person on incapacity is far more than any extra payments they get. Add on free health care, free pensions, free housing (not in all cases but in huge numbers). It’s not thousands, its lottery win money.
So let me ask you a question. Should you ask individual taxpayers for the money? Cut out the government?
And at the end of the day, what about saying thank you?
That’s your problem. You’re so engrossed in rights, entitlements, human rights, that you’ve forgotten its real people, working hard, that you are taking the money from.
Now I’m prepared to give that money, but the conditions are that people are tested as to there abilities.
Hardly imposing. Wake up. It’s not going to change.
it’s trying to find out what you really need and the best way to supply it?
==============
No its not. It is to find out if you have cross the borderline and receive support. That’s the purpose.
You can either say why that borderline is drawn in the wrong place. Or you can say what changes should be made to the testing of which side people lie.
If you want something else, you need to propose a new law.
Baroness Murphy said: “It’s this refusal to see the possible benefits of a regular assessment which I don’t understand.”
Because as someone who has gone through this assessment, I am telling you that nothing to benefit me came out of that assessment.
I suffered from Cervical cancer in 2005. I underwent treatment of radiotherapy every day for 7 weeks, chemotherapy and at the end of it all, brachytherapy which is metal rods attached to radiotheraphy equipment which is shoved up your doodah for 24 hours whilst lying on your back. It saved my life but as you can imagine I have problems now. I suffer from continence problems, anxiety, social phobia, Hidradenitis_suppurativa and depression.
Having had an asessment which lasted about 20 minutes if that and answering all the questions to my discomfort to someone who clearly had no idea what I was talking about and barely looked at me, imagine my surprise when the report came back and I could barely read it as it was in such a messy handwriting and of what I could read, it was a pile of rubbish. 0 points I scored and quite naturally I appealed and complained to ATOS. I received an apology letter from ATOS apologising because the HCP hadn’t taken my cancer and treatment into consideration. After receiving information from ATOS about my case and the fact that the HCP was reprimanded and information sent on to DWP about my case, DWP ignored it and went on with the appeal. It took a whole year before I got a hearing and meanwhile I had £65 a week to live on. My depression got worse and quite often I felt like ending it all.
My appeal went well. The doctor and judge asked me questions and the result was 15 points with hardly any proof because being there in person showed that I was panicing, was clearly unhappy and in pain and even then I was put in the WRAG group EVEN THOUGH I should be in the support group due to my continence problems.
Please tell me, why would I want to go through that again? The stress, the humiliation and the hopelessness? I hope what I’ve just written actually opens your eyes as to what actually goes on in these assessments and not the fairytale you clearly think is happening.
Listen to what Shazzyrm is saying and wake up. I would like to write of my own narrow escape from suicide following my farce of an assessment, but my mind is too foggy today. If the assessment can kill, how can that be remotely justifiable, let alone a good thing?
1 million people on icb. reassessed and for the sake of argument, 0.5 million its a no. 50,000 appeal. 40% successful on appeal.
error rate is 50,000 x 40% / 1,000,000 or 2%
The one thing you can say for certain from all this post is that if you can possibly avoid getting disabled, do so; eh Blagger?
And yet the number of people seriously and permanently injured, or killed from road accidents is around 3000 per year.
If you are killed all you need is the death grant but you can’t arrange your own funeral which in other circumstances would be possible and preferable, especially if you are a good organizer. You can apply for the funeral grant for yourself £700, and that apart from about £300 is enough for a basic funeral otherwise the NHS has you even in death.Quite how is best not discussed.
Blagger says nearly everything here.
Didn’t ATOS win the DWP contract because they promised to get a million people off Incapacity Benefit?
Lord Blagger. You are wrong about the appeal statistics. The figures quoted by CAB are; 40% for unrepresented appellants & 70% for appellants with representation. In Hastings & Oxfordshire it’s 95% so there may be other areas with similar figures.
And what percentage of the people who were on ICB, are appealing?
Obviously the figures of 40% and 70% are in relation to the people who appealed to Tribunal. It isn’t possible for the Tribunal overturn cases that had been taken to Tribunal so only those figures are relevant.
You’re getting there.
And only a small percentage of the people who were on ICB, have gone to the tribunal.
The implication that people are trying to make and failing is that up to 70% of all assessments are wrong, or that up to 70% of people on ICB are wrongly being denied ICB.
It doesn’t work that way.
No not at all, it is only you that is choosing to appear confused, you are playing devils advocate to provoke a reaction in an attempt to deflect from the issues.
The figures are clear, up to 70% of appeals to the Tribunal are overturned because they are wrong. But not everyone who is victim of the state sponsored disability denial has the strength to face the ordeal of the Tribunal.
The perpetrators of this evil are aware that is the case, these are vulnerable people whose well being is being gambled with in the pursuit of corporate greed and collaboration. As the committee of MP’s have stated Atos/DWP and the WCA are causing fear and anxiety to vulnerable people. People are feeling trapped, cornered without hope by a system designed to demonise them and then deny them their disabilities. This is a dangerous game with people lives and it is a very bad idea to make people feel cornered.
No, people are saying that around 40% are wrong and that IF a person has proper legal representation, that figure rises to 70%.
You also ask what percentage of people on Incapacity benefit are appealing.
Well, the governments own figures say that
actually since April 2011 – when the huge numbers of people started to be moved off Incapacity benefit – not 40%, but 49% of decisions which go to appeal are upheld in favour of the appelant. There is no breakdown of what the percentage is when people get legal help – but the figure of 70% came from the Citizens Advice Bureau research and I hardly think they are going to lie!!
So, let’s go back to that figure – 49% – close as damn it to half of decisions made are found to be wrong.
http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/statistics-and-data/mojstats/sscs-stats-notice-april2011.pdf
Did you realise that there is only 1 month allowed from the date of a decision for a person to lodge an appeal? We are talking about very ill people whose lives have been thrown into chaos – less money, stress, anxiety – all of which will make their condition worse – trying to find the time, energy and stamina to actually go through that process.
I heve no doubt that more would appeal if they were well enough to cope with it and din’t have such a short deadline looming over them at atime of great difficulty.
I’m beggining to wonder If Lord Blagger might be a mole?
So, let’s go back to that figure – 49% – close as damn it to half of decisions made are found to be wrong.
=============
No. That is for the decision that are appealed. This is not the same as the total number decisions made.
However, if you want to exagerate a case, its the one to use.
So, there I was answering comments by Lord Blagger so decided it was time to register on the site, only to find myself on a different blog with different people, still fighting the same uphill battle with the Baroness and with Lord Blagger…. There is none so bling as those who WILL NOT see…
I’ll make it easy for them both: NO able bodied layperson, who are not medically qualified, can possibly comprehend permanent illness or disability. Lord Freud is a classic example as he has confirmed in public that he failed to comprehend why anyone could be offered a disability benefit for life…. How about because they can’t EVER get any better, just like Baroness Campbell.
The ATOS assessment tests are BOGUS. Medically they are incomprehensible, administratively incompetant and financially cannot be justified. Be advised please that ALL profound illness and disabilities are variable conditions; with clients speaking about having ‘a good day’ or having one of their ‘bad days.’ QED ANY test is simply a snapshot into a day in the life of that chronically sick or disabled person. Add this to the fact that the assessors are using a totally discredited computer evaluation system, with the possible limited answers to the questions as far away as possible as to the required possible answers for given conditions or disabilities and you have the bigest gvt scam since Churchill.
Add to this the fact that the so called ‘assessment’ is a verbatum copy from UNUM Insurance, who’ve been consultants to the DWP since Prof Ansel Maylward introduced them in 1994, and Unum continue to fund the Prof at the Unum Centre in Cardiff, and you realise that this has been a long term goal by successive UK gvts since Thatcher, and is the pre-requisit to another step on the road to a US healthcare system funded by insurance.
IF you really want to know more about the assessments then I suggest you consider: Atos Healthcare or Disability Denial Factories at: http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosveterans.html or check out the Black Triangle website as the research summary report is highlighted on the site. Then again, you should already be aware of Unum Insurance as the recent research report: Welfare Reform: Redress for the Disabled was distributed to 360 members of the House of Lords in advance of the Welfare Reform debate, 2 members quoted from it during their speeches and I wrote it.
Mo Stewart – Retired, QUALIFIED healthcare profesional.
How about because they can’t EVER get any better, just like Baroness Campbell.
===============
Hold on. We’ve just had other posts where people have said, look they passed on the day, and then on another day they didn’t. Their conditions vary over time.
So there are people whose condition changes.
What about all those on disability for
a) Stress
b) Obesity
Permanent or variable conditions?
Note before you start on another one of your attacks. I’ve said that part of the assessment must be the time to the next test. If its a condition that clearly won’t improve, set it at a long time.
Barroness Campbell. Working in the Lords or not? Point made. She is clearly able to work.
Baroness Campbell might have a word or two to say about your perceptions Lord Blagger.
Do you have any idea of how she is the day after she has worked in the Lords? The cost to her health and energy levels?
No, thought not.
Hold on a second. She is working. So she clearly passes the test that she is able to work.
Now you’re implying that because she is able to work (and get paid for it by the way), that she should also get extra payments because she is not able to work?
Make your mind up.
Are incapacity benefits payments for people who can’t work?
Are they a general top up?
Or are they for the extra costs?
If its the latter, should people with no extra costs get incapacity benefits?
If incapacity benefits don’t cover the extra costs, then what is wrong with me saying that society should pay all the extra costs?
Or is that you don’t want these costs paid by society.
I was wondering when someone would pick out certain members of society and target them?
Stress and obesity kills, there are reasons for people suffering with either, some very complicated reasons?
It’s nice to see empathy is alive and kicking in the UK, maybe those who seem so anti are dunfounded by the headlines they read in the “Daily Mail”???
Following Mo Stewart’s excellent post:
And who is going to be making the money they are slavering at the mouth to get their clammy hands on? Why, Cherie Blair and her American friend. With, you know who, in the background, hiding his sick face in case it puts you off falling for this scam. The woman climbing on Blairs back is a failed businesswoman from that place across the big pond and feels, with the Blair dummy grappling for attention, she can surely win over here.
How is this friend allowed to set up business in this country? As her ability and background has a scent to it that should be followed before the simple folk, who buy in Sainsbury’s, get fleeced.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8795717/Cherie-Blair-stands-to-gain-from-NHS-privatisation.html
They keep the USA so close to hand don’t they. It doesn’t make them anything other than ‘hurry come ups’ though and never will do. No matter how much they steal from the tax payer.
Thanks Maud. Mo
If any of us are truly serious about improving the surrounding Field of Human Needs and How-best-and-most-affordably-to-meet-these Needs, and thereby improving Britain’s Welfare Needs in general, within which this Welfare Reform Bill and its currently highly contentious “atos victims”, “DWP Assessments”, “WCA, DLA and PIP” matters sit, then we need to be listing and priority-ordering our various Needs – & Hows – – all of them.
THAT (please, this is not ‘shouting’, simply and seriously emphasising) needs to be appended to the Welfare Reform Bill;
and included therein should be similar submissions from any and all Others;
and should not overlook such necessary material as the 4-questions, already put to Government and made available to the Public but still being ignored evidently by both, submitted above at 1020PM last Tuesday 20/09/2011 and rightly allowed by Baroness Murphy to be published.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmworpen/401/40104.htm
Between 1979 and 2002 the numbers of people on incapacity benefits more then trebled to 2.7 million. That is greater than the combined total of lone parents and unemployed people on benefit. Nearly half of those on incapacity benefits have been receiving benefit for over five years, compared with less than 5 per cent of the unemployed and 35 per cent of lone parents. Once a claimant has been on incapacity benefits for a year, the average duration of their claim is eight years.
Can those who think I’m wrong explain why disability had trebled, but vast amounts had been spent on the NHS, and the working environment has lost lots of the heavy and dangerous industries from the past? Cars have got much safer and the number of injuries are down.
ie, Why isn’t the obvious conclusion that many of these people are able to work, but it was politically expedient to hide them away and right them off.
@Lord Blagger:
The answer to your question is a pretty easy one to understand.
During the years you cite the indigenous British population grew older, the baby boomers began to collect their pension as well as face various maladies as a result of age and accidents at work. Growing cancer diseases, aids and all toonumerous to mention other illnesses. Add to this the almighty influx into the country from immigration. Have you any idea how many people entered the UK and settled during that period. It’s kept very quiet by government, but, it must be there somewhere if you look.
As more and more people came here, the NHS began to bend under the weight. The entrants brought the sick and elderly their extended familiesto be treated freely as that benefit did not exist in their countries of origin.
Once here, they settled, not wanting to return home as they had a better standard of living and their families were now part of the UK population.
You only have to go into our hospitals and to each of the clinics and you will see the streams of individuals sick and infirm all being treated at the British tax payers largesse. To the detriment of their own infirm people.
I’m not sure migration is the cause of all the people on incapacity. That’s not saying migration isn’t a problem. Particularly low skilled migration, and illegal migration. A million in London alone, and influxes of 250,000 a year is a problem.
With Europe getting to the debt crisis before the UK, (we are as deep in it as Greece – consider that when you want more spending), more people will be arriving.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmworpen/401/40104.htm
However is the evidence that I’m talking about.
Let me pick some bits out.
Look at table 3, the top twenty places to claim ICB. I don’t see hot spots of migration amongst them. Which of these areas have large migrant populations on ICB?
No the basic problem with ICB isn’t migration.
This is the real problem
Between 1979 and 2002 the numbers of people on incapacity benefits more then trebled to 2.7 million.
Unless you can explain where the 2/3rds came from, and its not migration, then you don’t realise what the problem is.
There are not 2.7 million people in the UK incapable of some sort of work, to the extent they need vast sums of money from other people. That is blatently obvious to all bar a few here who won’t address that.
The biggest cause of that is political and its to do with hiding unemployment and relabelling it as disability.
The consequences are now starting to become clear of that decision.
1. People know that’s the game.
2. The money has run out.
3. Benefits are going to be slashed, particularly for those who didn’t deserve it and there are a lot.
4. The knock on is that those who do deserve/need it, are going to be caught up. That’s the bit I feel is wrong, but inevitable.
Lastly, if you think its bad now, just wait until the real cutbacks kick in.
After all, spending was up last year.
Dear Baroness.
DLA enables me and many other people to live there lives. For instance the money I received for mobility I use to purchase a Disabled Persons Railcard. This gives me freedom in that I can get around.
The DWP’s own figures and rationale for the scrapping of DLA are fundamentally flawed. http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/08/dwp-dodgy-figures-come-home-to-roost.html
The Way I am currently being treated by the DWP stinks and it worries me that If i am stripped of my DLA that I will no longer be able to continue in my career.
Clause 52 Of the welfare reform bill is dsown right evil and is meant to inflict a life of poverty on any disabled child and their parents. ?