The treasury suggesting cuts to the benefit system may be used to fund tax cuts in time

apple85

I imagine they’ll be lot of relating articles from the upcoming tory conference to post in the next but (and excuse my choice of language) I’m so fed up of ministers like Hunt and Stride seeing a vulnerable person and picturing a bullseye!

This status quo can’t be allowed to continue

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/30/uk-welfare-budget-could-be-cut-to-pave-way-for-tax-cuts-says-jeremy-hunt

from the original times articles:

Jeremy Hunt has pledged to end the “vicious circle of ever-rising taxes” by reforming the benefits system and tackling the spiralling cost of public services.

In an interview with The Times before next week’s Conservative Party conference, the chancellor said he would launch the “biggest transformation of public services in our lifetimes”.

All departments will be told to identify savings from reducing the number of routine tasks carried out by frontline staff such as doctors, teachers and police officers, helped by investment in new technology.

Hunt said the government was also looking to overhaul the benefits system, which he described as “incredibly damaging to the economy and individuals”. He said that 100,000 people a year were moving off work into benefits “without any obligation to look for work”, leaving people isolated.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies found that record tax rises over the past four years would cost the equivalent of £3,500 per household. The think tank warned this week that Britain was making a “decisive and permanent shift” to a higher-tax economy.Hunt is under mounting pressure from the right of the party to unveil a pathway to tax cuts before the general election amid warnings that the level of taxation has become “unsustainable”.In his most explicit comments to date, the chancellor signalled that the Tories would make a big offer on tax before the election. “The big question that everyone wants an answer to is are we condemned to taxes going on rising for ever and ever?” Hunt said. “The party that has an answer to that, a credible answer, is likely to win people’s trust at the next election.” The chancellor said that the state needed to become “more productive”, not bigger.
He said the government would use artificial intelligence to improve efficiency and ensure public sector workers could focus on frontline services. He suggested that AI could be used by teachers to mark papers, by police officers to prevent crimes and by doctors and nurses to diagnose illnesses.“We need a more productive state, not a bigger state,” he said. “We need a state that doesn’t just deliver the services it currently delivers, but actually improves the services it delivers and recognises that there’s going to be more calls on those services with an ageing population. But we need to find a formula that doesn’t mean that we’re on a vicious circle of ever-rising taxes.”On benefits he said that the government was looking at early treatment for those with mental health conditions to remove “barriers” to work. “We need to make sure we’re doing a better job for people who are finding it difficult to work for whatever reason,” he said.
“We have got a system which is too focused on process and not enough on outcomes. The outcome that we should be looking for is one where dramatically fewer people are permanently signed off having to look for work, because that isn’t a good outcome for them and it’s not a good outcome for the economy.” He said that increasing productivity by 0.5 per cent would pave the way for tax cuts.“Despite the challenges of the last 13 years one of our proudest achievements is that as of last month you can earn £1,000 a month without paying a penny of tax or national insurance,” he said. “We have dramatically reduced taxes on lower paid people. I would like to reduce taxes on everyone.”He called for more positivity about the economy and said people needed to “shrug off a bit of the pessimism”.“When I started the job there was a lot of doom and gloom about Britain, our prospects,” he says. “What I have realised now nearly a year on is that there is just far too much declinism. If you look at the fundamentals of the British economy we have had our setbacks like everyone else, we are the fastest-growing large European country, not just since the pandemic but since Brexit, since 2010.“That’s a period when we’ve had a once-in-a-century pandemic, a global financial crisis that we were particularly exposed to, and a 1970s-style energy shock. Despite all of that the British economy has been very resilient.”He said there was “every possibility” that people could see the “start of a sustained increase in real wages”.Hunt’s remarks on the economy coincided with Office for National Statistics figures showing that the economy is far bigger than first thought, compared with before the Covid-19 crisis.

apple85

Below is an excerpt from the large interview Hunt did with the times:

The other big area of reform in Hunt’s sights is Britain’s spiralling benefits bill — largely driven, he says, by 100,000 people a year moving out of employment and becoming entirely dependent on the state “without any obligation to look for work”.

Many of these people have left work because of mental health conditions and he is concerned not just about the cost to the state but also about their own long-term wellbeing.

“My biggest worry about the way the system works at the moment is that we are seeing about 100,000 people a year moving off work into benefits without any obligation to look for work,” he says. “That is incredibly damaging for the economy (but) it’s also very damaging for the individuals involved.

“We all want to be a society where there’s a safety net — that’s something we’re incredibly proud of as Brits — but I don’t believe the system is working in either the interests of the economy or the people who depend on it.” Hunt says the government is looking at ways to provide early treatment for those with mental health conditions, and reducing the number of people who are effectively permanently signed off sick.

“We need to make sure we’re doing a better job for people who are finding it difficult to work for whatever reason,” he says. “We have got a system which is too focused on process and not enough on outcomes. The outcome that we should be looking for is one where dramatically fewer people are permanently signed off having to look for work because that isn’t a good outcome for them and it’s not a good outcome for the economy.”

Could greater conditionality be part of it? “That’s certainly what Mel Stride thinks,” Hunt says. “He has been making great strides to that effect. Any welfare system has to be a mix of carrot and stick. The most important judge of whether things are working is whether we are succeeding in removing barriers to work. There’s no shortage of jobs.” Hunt’s message is clear — if the Tories can make the public services more efficient and get more people into work there is a pathway to tax cuts.

“I asked the Treasury what it would take to stabilise the level of taxes as a proportion of GDP,” he says. “They came back with a very alluring, simple answer: 0.5 per cent. We need to increase the productivity growth in the public sector by 0.5 per cent a year more than its current levels.” On the question of which taxes could be cut Hunt is more agnostic. Rishi Sunak is said to favour putting a flagship pledge to scrap inheritance tax at the heart of the Tory manifesto.

“All taxes are distortive,” Hunt says. “That’s a problem . . . we worry about inheritance tax, because it’s a tax on aspiration and savings, and we also worry about income tax because it’s important to make work pay.” Will the Tories commit to the triple tax lock again, under which they pledged not to raise income tax, VAT or national insurance?

“Despite the challenges of the last 13 years one of our proudest achievements is that as of last month you can earn £1,000 a month without paying a penny of tax or national insurance,” Hunt says. “We have dramatically reduced taxes on lower-paid people. I would like to reduce taxes on everyone.”

Jimm_Alumni

I'm not sure I am allowed to say the words I'd like to say

apple85

Jimm_Scope said:

I'm not sure I am allowed to say the words I'd like to say

I think in a funny way you’ve been able say it by not saying anything!

feel free to delete my next statement as it is blunt, aggressive and overdramatised:

I perceive Hunts comments above as a statement of war towards the sick, disabled and vulnerable and I hope our community response to these Tories can be along the lines of “winter is coming”


in a way I almost see it as pointless trying to reason with tory mp’s, they have clearly chosen their path.

But both labour & the Lib Dem’s who do not get votes as easily need to be reminded that according to the gov statistics there are 5.3mil people in the uk on working age benefits (and 16mil disabled people though the govs definition on disability you may or may not agree with) plus those who are disabled or are support/unofficial carers who claim nothing off the system.
about 35mil of the uk population voted in the last election but many of the disabled either did not registered to vote or just were to disillusioned to use their vote.
Mathematically speaking, the Labour Party in particular would be stupid not to actively target our vote and it wouldn’t require much effect for either themselves (or Lib Dem’s/snp depending on your constituency) to get these votes in spades!

I hope major figures of the opposition parties will differ themselves from hunts comments and speak out against them (or a least the tories solution to solving an issue) within the next 72hrs

Jimm_Alumni

I think "war" is a combative language that is finding it's way into every part of our political system. Where once was compromise and debate now is war, battle, and argument. It's not nice in my opinion. However, I can see why people, such as yourself, deem it a necessary word to describe what is currently happening.

apple85

I agree with you Jimm and I’d usually try to be more delicate with my choice of word

and your comment using the words ‘compromise & debate’ is interesting because that would usually be my strategy too.

However I need to ask you if you truly think there’s a chance the likes of Hunt and Stride are willing to open direct communication with spokespeople within the disabled community at the very least and engage in productive debate and communication?

if this was truly an option than I would heavily endorse that but Hunt has clearly indicated that he has made his mind up and even more so intends to act on it before the next election (jan 2025 the latest the next election can happen). I’ve posted a few very strong reactions to the wca potential reactions (that the consultation may only be be for show as minds already made up and it could happen much showner than the 2025 earliest start given) and I was so praying to be wrong but Hunt’s words further enforce my fears but I’m still hoping that I am wrong.

My choice of wording was a difficult one and I said as much but I just couldn’t think of an alternative one that held as much of a impactful response 

There is a saying ‘the nice guy finishes last’ - being kind to other is usually a motto for me, even towards bullies……..but sometimes even they can’t be reasoned with like that and it’s not possible to ignore.

And even though I used the W word, my initial preference is to bypass the likes of Hunt altogether and present a diplomatic argument & statistics to the opposition who may still be open to compromise and debate and open to find a solution to all.

 I also used my previous wording preemptively - perhaps minds can be changed, u turns forced and unpopular ideas shelved but at the current trajectory it is likely this is where hunt and stride are heading I feel

apple85

Woodbine, I wish that was the case 

However the conservative’s are the uk default vote - more people will vote Tory no matter what compared to other parties (in my lifetime there has only been one non conservative elected prime minister and that was tony Blair!)

Labour should have sewn up this upcoming election beyond doubt ago but they haven’t and that is because they don’t inspire confidence………the next election will be decided on the best bunch (a tactic the tories are very versed in already) and labour are portraying themselves as a future government but almost are framing themselves as already there.

Hence why I’m saying labour should be regularly commenting on and differing themselves from these sorts of policies from hunt, stride, etc….. because from browsing on this forum labour has convinced no member that voting for them would improve their lives (only that we know for certain what will happen under another Tory so we have nothing to loose by putting our vote elsewhere but many may take the 3rs option of not voting at all - especially with the ID issue)

The reason I’ve been so vocal on this forum and posting new threads on the subject is I hope people will read the articles I post and listen to opinions - they don’t need to agree with me but I hope it at least encourages people to do their own research and form their own opinions. And then furthermore I hope the threads I make encourage members here to explain in their own words what could be happening to their friends and family, writing to a local mp (especially if they aren’t a Tory as they are the more realistic sway), if it can be done in an identity safe way spread accurate information on social media, if you know someone with a public or social media profile that may be open minded see if you can get them to take notice (and I’m sure there’s many ideas I haven’t mentioned)

But the more people that talk about about this the less straightforward these reforms will be for the likes of Hunt and Stride - I don’t know if this can be stopped but at the least we should not make it easy for them (via our silence) and I’d hope it may be possible to slow their ambitions down.

chiarieds

With the voter ID you mention, this may be worth linking to again for our members: https://www.gov.uk/how-to-vote/photo-id-youll-need  especially noting: https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-photo-id-voter-authority-certificate Also as woodbine has previously mentioned, a postal vote is another option.

WhatThe

Jimm - the mental health community was divided more than a decade ago over welfare reform

Jimm_Alumni

There's a lot of opinions on it indeed, personally I am in favour of trialing Universal Basic Income (UBI). The trials done so far have been very promising. It removes *all* the bureaucracy from the system, which is costly in itself. I may be incorrect about this but I remember reading that the bureaucracy to check if people are exempt from paying prescription charges ends up eating up most, if not all, of the money saved by charging people prescriptions. The DWP spends 30+ million a year on JUST tribunals, not the assessments, decision making, MRs, data entry, QA, HR for all those staff. UBI removes all the bureaucracy, a simple system that everyone gets the minimum needed to live. It would even replace pensions.

Of course there would then be the question of, disabled people have to spend more to live the same level of comfort. So would there still need to be a system to give an extra amount to those who are disabled, which would require an amount of bureaucracy.

apple85

A couple of updates from the Tory conference 

excerpt from the bbc:

At a fringe event on Sunday, Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride said the government was already looking at the Work Capability Assessment "so it reflects the way the modern world works", including increased opportunities for home-working. 

The assessment decides how much an individual's illness or disability limits their ability to work. If someone is deemed fit for work their benefits may be withdrawn. 

Getting people back into employment is a key part of the government's plan to grow the economy and was a focus of the chancellor's Budget in March. 

The number of people who cannot work because of long-term sickness has been rising, with recent figures showing 2.5 million were missing from the labour market because of medical conditions.

Excerpt from sky news:

Mr Hunt will tell the party membership in Manchester: "Since the pandemic, things have being going in the wrong direction. Whilst companies struggle to find workers, around 100,000 people are leaving the labour force every year for a life on benefits.

"As part of that, we will look at the way the sanctions regime works. It is a fundamental matter of fairness. Those who won't even look for work do not deserve the same benefits as people trying hard to do the right thing."

A party spokesman said: "To ensure work always pays, the chancellor will also confirm that he and Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride will look again at the benefit sanctions regime to make it harder for people to claim benefits while refusing to take active steps to move into work.

"Proposals will be set out in the upcoming autumn statement."

Speaking last month, Mr Stride said that he was consulting on changes to the Work Capability Assessment, the test aimed at establishing how much a disability or illness limits someone's ability to work.

I will try and find further quotes later today

I will say it doesn’t sound like the disabled specifically would be targeted via new sanctions however I can’t say with certainty that we won’t get caught up in this - it’s know that benefit ‘lifestylers’ know how to slip the net and I’m not sure Stride would care if the vulnerable indeed got caught in this.

It’s obvious the dwp and treasury are going into overdrive right now, and they’ll almost certainly try to do too much too quickly imo

I do think the last quarter of 2023 could be a tough read for many of us and I’m praying that the 2025 earliest start mention by stride the beginning of sept is accurate and we have a general election before this kicks in

(Once again if you haven’t already registered to vote please do so and you can apply for a free id card if you don’t have a driver’s license, passport, etc…)

apple85

From @resfoundation

Turning to @MelJStride, he breaks down the economically inactive into three groups. Looking first at older workers, he highlights the Government's mid-life MOT which is helping to get older workers back into the workplace if they want to return to work after retirement.

Two other groups are also being targeted by Government to get into good employment: parents and young people. 

Parents can be supported back into work through better childcare provision, while young people can be given better access to training and mental health support.

Work is essential to the health and wellbeing of people. In order to help keep people in work while recovering from illness, @MelJStride mentions several consultations that @DWPgovuk are currently undertaking to address this, including reforming Work Capability Assessments and GP fit notes.

From @ionewells:

DWP secretary Mel Stride says there’s been an “unsatisfactory” upward trend in the last four years of economic activity due to long-term sickness. 

Says one factor is mental health - and claims reasons include “social media” and the “socialisation of mental health.”

Stride adds: “We feel we can much more easily talk about mental health. But maybe there is more extensive labelling of people’s mental health that maybe wasn’t the case years ago.” 

He says 2.6m are out of work with no expectations on them to look for work.

He says “work is brilliant in terms of helping those with mental health conditions” for finances, mental health and relationships. 

Adds govt is looking at reforming work assessments, GP fit note appointments, occupational health and potential for people to WFH.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/oct/01/time-to-withhold-benefits-from-those-who-wont-look-for-work-jeremy-hunt?CMP=share_btn_tw

Is anyone else here just exhausted by the constant ‘threats’ from people who have no clue what real life is like for the people they are targeting?

apple85

So they are either going to force you to take prescribed drugs (which we all know can be a minefield of side effects) or to do see some type of therapist (I presume that’s the implication - which doesn’t work for everyone and can make things a lot worse if it’s the wrong match up)
Hunt may be considered a smart man but in this area of knowledge he’s an idiot

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/susanna-reid-scolds-jeremy-hunt-31082959

https://www.ft.com/content/4f7f5965-6a12-48c0-84c9-b536ed7c55d6

apple85

As I mentioned in another thread on here, later tonight I will create a new thread with a much more open and ongoing name for the title

there is probably going to be a lot of developments on the benefit system that may affect members here that are reported on between now and the end of 2023 (and onwards) and it would be best to group it under a single title

(also a last thread I started got closed a while back not under great terms and I want to try a more constructive method this time)

Albus_Scope

In all honesty, if I was offered therapy along with signing on, I'd have jumped at that chance.  I know many people with severe MH issues aren't getting that kind of support.  

Though, I'd expect the therapy to be a pamphlet on yoga and that's about it. 

apple85

Albus_Scope said:

In all honesty, if I was offered therapy along with signing on, I'd have jumped at that chance.  I know many people with severe MH issues aren't getting that kind of support.  

Though, I'd expect the therapy to be a pamphlet on yoga and that's about it. 

I read the therapy comment as ‘talking based therapies’ rather than physical based ones (just because the nhs wait list for the physio based ones is ridiculous long right now)

but you’re right, Hunt could be referring to both types

(although I just had a thought, what if he intends for us to pay out of our own pockets to go private as the term to continue receiving welfare benefits? - it’s an extreme thought but this is Hunt we are talking about - id hope even he’d have a limit)

Albus_Scope

I think as it's all very much conjecture currently, we shouldn't jump to any conclusions and just wait and see, as we don't want to cause anyone any unnecessary worry.    

Hannah_Alumni

I agree with @Albus_Scope that offering more opportunities at therapy would be so beneficial to many, but it shouldn't be seen as a fix it all solution to get people back into work.

I can see where you think prescribed medications may also be an option @apple85 but was concerned with your opinion of it being forced. I just wanted to check in that everything is ok?

I do believe that if that were to be the case, many doctors and specialists would intervene let alone the strikes we'd see from the public!

apple85

apple85 said:

(although I just had a thought, what if he intends for us to pay out of our own pockets to go private as the term to continue receiving welfare benefits? - it’s an extreme thought but this is Hunt we are talking about - id hope even he’d have a limit)

Can i clarify that the above comment was just something that popped into my head as I was writing that post (and I was probably wrong for typing it down without further thought and honestly I’d think the backlash would be huge………and I may think Hunt is nasty but at this moment in time not mad!

Albus_Scope said:

I think as it's all very much conjecture currently, we shouldn't jump to any conclusions and just wait and see, as we don't want to cause anyone any unnecessary worry.    

My personal opinion is there’s a fine line between unnecessary worry and burying one’s head in the sand

i will heavily reiterate that nothing has been 100% confirmed at this point (and even if was things can be u turned and even shelved)

but at the same to imply to people that it’s too early to worry is also doing a disservice (my personal preference is to have time to digest the ‘worst’, forward plan when possible and if it never comes to be have a ‘giddy’ relief feeling - but that’s me only)

you also mention ‘conjecture’ which is interesting because in recent years (in my opinion only) many newspapers have very effectively (though morally questionable) been using conjecture in many of their headlines and stories. By that I mean that is is well known that many people read only a (sensationalist) headline and either don’t read the article or at least don’t read it throughly, jump to conclusions and then a public outcry/backlash is started which then the same papers feed more into 
many government u-turns have been triggered by this chain of events (sometimes even before the official confirmation)

Once again these are solely my own thoughts - but if conjecture (in the form of pre announcements and attempting to join dots, and yes even jumping to conclusions) triggers public outcry/backlash then in this case it could be very beneficial for people like us in terms of stride/hunt being forced to somewhat u-turn (they still need to attract voters…….they think targeting welfare will be positive for their numbers, if it turns out to be the reverse I’d imagine they’d have a rethink providing they aren’t daft) or at the very least labour may have a rethink of their own welfare policy to vacuum off voters turned off by the conservatives on this.

And honestly waiting till the tories potentially officially announce worst case scenario policies before doing or saying something is in my opinion just daft.

‘it’s easier to stop the train before it leaves the station, even if your not 100% certain of the passengers or goods on board at that moment in time!’

  

bg844

Interestingly (to me anyway), Ireland is also reforming their sickness benefit system. I do know its system is quite complex just like ours and is planning on bringing in a 3 tiered system or ‘solution’ as they see it. The reason I thought it was useful to mention is because British Citizens have a special right to claim in whatever country that National is residing thanks to the Common Travel Area.

See: https://www.gov.ie/en/consultation/3b001-green-paper-on-disability-reform-a-public-consultation-to-reform-disability-payments-in-ireland/

By looking at their paper and ours, it just shows that disability benefits uptake is a huge problem for most countries and there’s no real way to address it that will please everyone. Both sets of Citizens aren’t happy but in all seriousness, what could they (the government) possibly do differently? I agree that for some work isn’t an option and no one has argued this, for others however, I do feel they could prepare for work more rather than the DWP shoving them in the LCWRA/Support Group as an easy fix. Once someone has been on benefits for many years, it becomes harder and harder for them to get off them.

I was chatting to my GP a few weeks ago about an unrelated issue that spread in to a life interview. He did say that over the past few years, people requesting fit notes has tripled and that he doesn’t actually have the time to truly assess their fitness for work before issuing so would just rather give to save him a headache as they are under constant pressure to keep everything in a 10 minute slot.

apple85

Hannah_Scope said:

I agree with @Albus_Scope that offering more opportunities at therapy would be so beneficial to many, but it shouldn't be seen as a fix it all solution to get people back into work.

I can see where you think prescribed medications may also be an option @apple85 but was concerned with your opinion of it being forced. I just wanted to check in that everything is ok?

I do believe that if that were to be the case, many doctors and specialists would intervene let alone the strikes we'd see from the public!

I really hope you’re right, the dwp and ministers ‘play god’ enough as it is (excuse the term and feel free to suggest a more delicate term)

im not willing to go into detail but therapies and prescription drugs is something I’ve built a lot of knowledge about over the years.

it would be hugely irresponsible to write what I think could be worst case if the dwp are allowed to take some control over this area too (and it is ludicrous to even be analysing possible consequences because if Hunt/stride were even just thinking this on a whim, even that would be total madness imo) - at the very minimum I’d imagine it would be a human rights issue to make welfare benefits dependent on going to therapy or taking prescription drugs 

so yes if sanity prevails I don’t think it will happen and if Hunt actually said or implied this then shame on him