(Warning: political topic) Question r.e. being disabled under various govts

66Mustang

I really don’t like talking about politics but I have a question that’s been on my mind since I’ve been on this forum.

I have only ever been a benefit claimant under Tory governments so am asking this question from a position of trying to further my understanding, perhaps from those who have been disabled while Labour were in power who can share their experiences of what that was like. 

Not trying to start an argument.

Furthermore I am asking this question as someone who does not support any of the political parties.

The question is: if Labour were in government, would it be easier to claim support as a disabled person?

I am getting the impression people think under Labour you would almost just write down your name and national insurance number and then be given whatever help you need.

Personally I wonder whether the parties are roughly all the same and nothing would change. There would still be lots of bureaucracy and people who need help would slip through the net and not get the help they need?

As stated I don't want to start an argument just hoping to be educated.

Thanks!

michael57

haha good question i have only ever voted once in my life they promise you this that or the other then when they get in power and get there stupid salary and expenses they seem to forget what they said to the people who put them there once they get in power the sacrifices the working people have to make to remedy the ousted party mess of running the country means nothing to them they have just had a nice big pay rise then in a few years time it happens again the country is revolving not evolving through peoples greed for money and power they are fast running out of things to tax us on and sell off then what will happen this is just my rambling thoughts 

MW123

Mustang

Staying apolitical, I've only claimed PIP under a Conservative government, so I lack the qualifications to make broad judgments. To maintain a neutral stance, I've observed various political parties in office over the years.  It has been historically acknowledged that the Labour party has often been associated with championing the interests of the working class and marginalised communities, at least from my individual viewpoint.

66Mustang

Thanks everyone for the posts. Appreciate all of the responses and info.

Yeah I have heard stories of "red Tories" and "blue Labour" and that them all being a mix of each other.

The info about it being easier under Labour in the past is useful to know - thanks.

Jimm_Scope

I think the term "red tories" and "blue labour" have to do with our electoral system. We use FPTP (First Past The Post), unlike much of Continental Europe which uses Proportional Representation. FPTP  naturally coalesces most political opinion into 2 parties, outside of regional parties (think the SNP in Scotland for example). It's a wonder the Liberal Democrats have survived as long as they have under a FPTP  system, the other most famous example of a FPTP  system is the USA.

This... coalescing of political opinions means instead of a wide range of parties with different political opinions you get 2 parties with a wide range of political opinions and factions within them. Which causes a lot of party in-fighting as the different factions can often have quite different views, but stick together because it is easier to get elected when you're a part of the 2 large parties in a FPTP  system.

66Mustang

Yep @Jimm_Scope I have heard that "tactical voting" is a big thing in a FPTP system as well and there are even websites which recommend who to vote for based on your beliefs and who is winning in your area.

An example is, say you are into liberty and green issues, but in your constituency it's between Tory and Labour. Voting Liberal Democrat or Green Party is pointless from a stats point of view so it may be suggested you tactically vote for Labour just to make sure the Tories don't get in. (this is just an example)