Green Paper Related Discussions

Options
1175176178180181195

Comments

  • jasminehoop
    jasminehoop Online Community Member Posts: 46 Contributor

    Trying to make himself quasi-relevant by tacitly supporting the Labour leadership? And that's just about Starmer's level - high praise from Travesty Truss's blundering Chancellor.

    What a joke they are 🙄

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Online Community Member Posts: 2,042 Championing

    I think she’s also said Vicky foxcroft is the only frontbencher to show concern about the cuts and there is no rebellion

  • alexroda
    alexroda Online Community Member Posts: 241 Pioneering

    I’m sorry but this man should not be talking about economics.

    It’s incredible that MSM still have the balls to give him space to speak out. He nearly single-handedly sunk the country.

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Online Community Member Posts: 2,042 Championing

    Regarding the severe criteria do they mean a particular symptom has to be constant? I have ME and fibromyalgia which causes constant leg pain and fatigue. It’s every day . Are they saying that counts or if I take pain meds and get a few hours respite that no longer counts as constant ? Same as say eating, if you need prompting to eat will that not count if you eat a biscuit without being told to ?

  • alexroda
    alexroda Online Community Member Posts: 241 Pioneering

    coming from her, I would not be surprised if that’s just another lie.

  • Ranald
    Ranald Online Community Member Posts: 2,138 Championing

    It has been said countless times, those that are considered rebelling, they will keep their powder dry until the bill progresses further.

    Why risk their career when there may be serious revisions, reverse ferreting, climb downs, u-turns, call it what you will.

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Online Community Member Posts: 2,042 Championing

    I think they’ll be some that are brave and will speak out straight away as they have done and those watching to see what’s happening. Safety in numbers . One said if Starmer takes away the whip from them all they’ll just start another party . Now Vicky’s resigned the whip it may give them more courage to follow suit 🤞

  • apples
    apples Online Community Member Posts: 549 Empowering
  • Ranald
    Ranald Online Community Member Posts: 2,138 Championing
    edited June 20

    She is still a Labour MP, she just resigned as a government whip.

    LOL, I remember Wendy Morton resigning as a whip during Truss' brief tenure, after a bit of argy bargy in the voting lobbies! I can imagine Therese Coffey throwing her weight about, but weedy Rees Mogg? The mind boggles!

  • Ranald
    Ranald Online Community Member Posts: 2,138 Championing
    edited June 20

    Do you refer to Kamikaze Kwasi, lol? Not read the article but guessing.

    Old Etonians never apologise, they were born to rule!

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Online Community Member Posts: 2,042 Championing

    Ranald what do you make of the severe conditions criteria? The part that says constantly is rather ambiguous. Do they mean the symptoms that get you the award must be 24/7 with no respite from pain or fatigue etc . Is that their way of turning people down. The pip test says you only need symptoms 50% I think.

  • Ranald
    Ranald Online Community Member Posts: 2,138 Championing
    edited June 20

    I'm afraid I haven't read any severe conditions criteria, nor indeed much else, just the odd newspaper article. I refuse to spend time analysing the first reading of a bill.

    I imagine they are referring to progressive, incurable conditions, ones that have been diagnosed by NHS clinicians.

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Online Community Member Posts: 2,042 Championing

    I think incurable conditions what sum up us all really. Most conditions seem to be treatable at best . My ME isn’t even treatable

  • Ranald
    Ranald Online Community Member Posts: 2,138 Championing

    I think they are hoping, by ambiguous wording, to trip up those whose conditions fluctuate.

  • JasonRA
    JasonRA Online Community Member Posts: 299 Championing

    There were mentions here that whenever benefit cuts/reforms come to the table it's like bartering, you start from a high position then you bring the price down so it can sell.

    As much as Labour would love to, as much as the political establishment would love to they can't go full throttle.

  • MW123
    MW123 Scope Member Posts: 1,396 Championing

    That’s the issue, isn’t it? There’s never a clear list of which conditions are considered “severe” enough to be exempt from reassessments. Everything is handled on a case-by-case basis. They consider whether a condition is lifelong, progressive, or incurable, whether someone is likely to remain out of work long term, and whether they meet the LCWRA criteria. But they never name specific conditions, so the system remains vague and inconsistent.

    Something like ME might qualify if the evidence is presented strongly enough, but it all depends on how the case is written up and what the assessor decides on the day. Two people with the same diagnosis can be treated completely differently.

    One of my colleagues was deeply distressed about her sister, who was wheelchair bound and suffering from small cell lung cancer. Just a week before she passed away, she was still required to attend a meeting with a job coach to prove she had been actively looking for work. It’s hard to comprehend how someone in such a clearly terminal state could be put through that process.

    But because doctors couldn’t say with certainty that she would die within a year, she didn’t qualify for the Special Rules. So despite the seriousness of her condition, she was treated as eligible to look for work.

    I want to believe that the new rules will offer better protection for people like my colleague’s sister in the future. But that’s the core of the problem. The rules are often written in ways that leave too much open to interpretation, depending on how the assessor views the situation. And that makes the system feel unpredictable and, at times, deeply unfair and even cruel.

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Online Community Member Posts: 2,042 Championing

    Omg that’s just terrible. Things like that should not be happening. My GP asked me recently who makes these decisions are they Drs etc . I said no at best a nurse but it depends on how truthful and nice they are .
    If these changes go through they should at least use NHS guidelines and not the opinion of the assessor. When I read about the criteria I read it as you firstly have to not only qualify for lcwra but for severe it has to be constant. So will that mean your condition has to be constant or the symptoms you get awarded on constant. Example if you get it on the mobility do you have to have the same level mobility 24/7 or are you allowed good days as you are with pip ? If you have an eating disorder and need prompting is it for everything you eat or if they say would you go and eat a biscuit without prompting and you say maybe, then you fail . And of course you could pass all these tests and fail the 4 points . I don’t think they’ve thought it through hence no real details.

  • Passerby
    Passerby Posts: 776 Championing

    Apart from those holding ministerial posts, the rest have no careers to lose. They might lose the whip but not their seats, which they'll even be likely to keep come the next GE when most of current Labour MPs will be at risk of losing their seats, most of Starmer's current ministers in the first place.

    Instead, they risk losing their seats at the next GE by licking the boots of Starmer.

  • Passerby
    Passerby Posts: 776 Championing

    And 4pts on one descriptor alone won't be enough. People will still have to score 12pts.

This discussion has been closed.