PIP claim debate in westminster. she wants your experiences.

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e486f18f-03dd-4241-9dfd-b1a98eabef26

that's the debate, free to watch and you don't need a tv license to view it either. if you don't want to watch, or can't for any reason, here's a brief(ish) summary.

she mentioned that not all disabilities are covered by the form,
terminal illnesses should not be being reassessed,
the assessors aren't even qualified to diagnose the disorders they are supposed to be assessing,
people feel like they've been lied about in assessments,
tribunals are wasting judicial time and take too long to get a tribunal date (over a year in some cases),

opposition mention that more people with mental health issues get PIP than DLA, that's all they said in response to all of the above.

laura starts going on about how many more people aren't even entitled to the benefit and give up because the appeal process is too much for them to cope with, she also mentions food bank usage, and how the disabled community are being scared or treated like they are fraudsters or not worthy of help, then she tells a few personal stories of people who have contacted her,
she asks for medical professional documents to be considered before an assessment even,
and says the PIP process is failing,

opposition saying the PIP service was brought in because of labour and says it wasn't brought in to cut costs because they spend a lot more using it, and mentions that only 22% of mentally ill people got the highest rate of DLA because you had to be completely incapacitated to get it but 66% get it under PIP, and more people with visual impairment get PIP. and it's a mistake to think that the DLA system was better than the PIP one. he accuses the opposition of grabbing statistics out of thin air. he mentions 1 in 3 people who were awarded a life long claim under PIP their condition will change within 12 months. and that they should keep being assessed so they don't miss out on higher rates of benefits.

different guy now, not sure who he is but he's saying the PIP process isn't working as it should because 55% of people are getting their benefit cut after reassessment. and that people are finding they can't cope with appealing. he also mentions a story about someone who his condition got worse so applied for a higher rate and they took his award of him completely.
he says nobody chooses to be on PIP and we should remember disabled people are vulnerable,
another guy saying the system should be changed as it's degrading.
woman now saying the whole welfare system has been turned into a dehumanising experience under this government. there's been a few more personal stories about how people are suffering under cuts. she's asking about the PIP reviews and what this entails exactly and how long it is expected to take,
another guy saying that terminally ill people are getting benefits reduced and the process needs to be reviewed,
epileptics being mentioned now and how their benefits have been reduced most of all, they ask make sure people with training on epilepsy review people with the condition, also mentions that PIP should be helping people to retain their independence,
another guy saying the tax payer is paying the cost for messing up, and claimants with their lives, mentions pseudo professionals when it comes to assessments and the claims system shouldn't be degrading,
personal stories now one about someone being denied a home assessment and there's not enough assessors in her area, other services are being out under pressure having to help people with appeals, mentions it's hard for aspergers and agoraphobics to get to assessments,
next guy backs her up, and more personal stories,
kind of tuned out after this but there was some talk about people with mental health issues and them being arrested.

not a bad debate really. i don't think the tories were listening though, and most fo them walked out when a protestor managed to start shouting at them from outside the room. no idea if anything will be done without more pressure from the public.