New Green Paper Discussion - now includes accessible formats and consultation event sign up links!

Hi all,

Just to let you know, that I, and ADMIN, are on everyones case 24/7, 365 days a year, and the extra 1 every 4 years as a leap year.

they work in the background, and where possible DO, give direction as to what you should and you should have not only financially but in MEDICAL CARE. Not so much as "you need to see a doctor about that." as this is done by the NHS (the real ones) but to make sure that anyone struggling to get their heads around every changes that is imposed on us, but, to make sure that all our voices are heard.

Believe me they are everything but quiet from where I am. always post questions here and also invite friends to join, whether they are working or not, Disabled or long term sick, as we have other catagories here as well, its just at this time because of the "green paper" and the "Discussions which are ongoing about the proposed changes" some here (ADMIN) are frying bigger fish.

This is where you come in. It is by you showing that a reform for the Disabled or Sick must be a show of how to go forward, not to limit the amount of care and finance you may get to support another benefit that has lack of funds.

With that in Mind:

My meeting today at the Tribunal when according to plan, in so much as it made statments of what a tribunal can do and what they can enforce. And it also showed that when a directional notice to produce a certain document of a certain date. That by not doing so now gives me grounds to finish what I have started.

My first ask. I want a copy of the recorded secession, which will be sent to me via a link so I can hear the full proceeding. This I can then join to the Decision Notice, and check that the information comming from the court on behalf of Secretary of State is also correct.

ONE, of my biggest bug bares, is when a PDF. document is produced. b) What is needed to amend the "original" document. c) Should you need to see this before any changes are made. d) How it is logged so that others looking at your file can also see the amendment made.

This is also assuming that you have given permission for them to view its content by ANY government department.

This is only starters.

Should you disagree with the content of the change (which should be sent to you to sign that you need to agree before any changes are made) This can be done electronically by e mail and is excepted by all government departments, as long as the reference number of the claim is shown in the subject, and a little note to say I have seen and agree to its content and can confirm my signature as correct.

This also is used when a claw back of benefits is required, the same as any back payments can also be sent.

ONE, other point, admin and myself (especially me) only give advice, the final decision to go with or not the points I have raised IS YOURS. I certainly will not feel offended if you disagree with my opinion, and as stated I welcome all comment made Good or Bad, (well not bad but different) as this is how I go forward with what I do.

Which also by the way, I have a meeting tonight to present the Tribunal Judicial Review of my case, and what I asked for and what I actually got. This meeting is in the upper tiers of what I do so when I state facts to them, they react, again an opinion of my presentation and requests, and which direction I am heading.

This for another post when the rest of the information comes back.

Hi again,

This is not correct under the Data Protection Act. You are allowed to see any document held by any one, government or not. As this is how a system evolves. This is why you are allowed to have a copy of the assessment completed by the assessor, before it is sent to the Decision Maker since the decision maker can agree with the report or not? Not really since they hired the assessor because of his medical background and that they are registered on a British Medical Register TO PRACTICE, before the assessment takes place. You have to remember that you are sending in Support letters and letters on Headed paper that is entered on your medical history as support, why don't you ask for your next assessment to be entered onto your medical history? (I have been told off before about this, but.) They cannot enter the report because they are not registered. I welcome any assessment by anyone as long as they know what they are doing,and never refused an assessment from anyone, including the assessment providers hired by the DWP and PIP to assess me.

Courts can step in if the government doesn’t follow the rules when making decisions. For example, if they rush a decision without proper consultation or hide important details (like in the Ellen Clifford case), courts can order them to redo the process. However, courts can’t block a policy just because it’s unpopular or seems unfair, unless it breaks existing UK laws or human rights.

If a policy violates human rights, such as causing serious harm by cutting off access to food, housing or healthcare, UK courts must act. They could order the government to change the policy, but ministers might resist or argue the cuts are necessary for economic reasons. These cases are tricky because courts have to weigh the harm against the government’s justification.

If UK courts don’t solve the issue, people can take their case to the ECHR. The ECHR can’t overturn UK decisions, but it can rule that the UK breached human rights and pressure the government to make changes. It only steps in for serious harm, not just because a policy is harsh or unpopular.

Challenging policies means proving they break specific legal rules or human rights. Courts focus on whether the government followed the law, not whether the policy is unpopular. If rights are seriously at risk, the ECHR can help, but there must be clear evidence of harm.

The demonstration against scope was because SCOPOE is a charity and not supported by the Government. So when documents were presented to the Parliament about the previous errors that the government had made is was assumed that SCOPE were the cause, not the result of those altered documents presented to parliament every year.