Welfare benefits news, possible changes & constructive ‘discussion - an ongoing thread
Comments
-
This is why newspaper articles should be taken with a very large pinch of salt and this includes "The Times"This here... is quite misleading in comparison to the first link you posted this evening. In my opinion, they've twisted it to make it seem worse.apple85 said:Benefits claimants who refuse to look for a job will lose their right to free NHS prescriptions, dental care and help with energy bills under a “whole state” approach to forcing people back to work.This was taken from this link... https://www.gov.uk/government/news/employment-support-launched-for-over-a-million-peopleStricter sanctions for people who should be looking for work but aren’t – including targeting disengaged claimants by closing the claims of individuals on an open-ended sanction for over six months and solely eligible for the Universal Credit standard allowance, ending their access to additional benefits such as free prescriptions and legal aid;In the above link it also says..The government is announcing two measures to address and penalise disengagement, and incentivise claimants to re-engage with Jobcentre support: closing claims of disengaged claimants after 6 months.Claims will be closed of individuals who are solely eligible for the standard allowance, meaning they are not receiving additional child, housing or disability Universal Credit payments. This means parents claiming the child element and receiving additional benefits like free school meals are not in scope of this measure and will not lose out. This is also the case for disabled claimants in receipt of the disability element of UC and receiving any additional benefits derived from their UC eligibility;
I've highlighted the most important parts in bold above. I will continue to stand by what i said earlier in the thread. Nothing is final until the regulations have been changed.
1 -
If the worst changes from the recent wca constitution goes ahead (we should know on the 22nd) then not many of us on this forum will be considered ‘disabled enough’ by the dwp (the descriptors and ‘substantial risk’ element of the wca is kind of vital for many of us getting an esa/uc award altogether or at the very least in the support group) - if wca reforms are confirmed a lot of us could get lassoed into this other stuff by default
(and yes I do hear the ‘nothing is final’ line but this bunch of Tory ministers are so lacking in empathy unless something external blocks this or slows it down, sunak still has a 60 majority for another 13 months!)
and I hear what you are saying, especially with the time’s article as that seemed to list more ‘withholding of services’ threats than any other article I read on the story - however the times does have direct access to ministers and insiders that could provide additional info - but even ignoring that article the times newspaper is aimed at middle to upper class Tory members as part of their audience who tend to be right leaning rather than extreme far right (the moderates) - the way the times wrote up this new policy is very inflammatory and for those able to see the whole picture, pretty distasteful.
point is why would the tory party okay an article that may even create backlash from their own moderate supporters (I guess it could get an edit request in the next 24 hours - but right now the tory party are obviously happy with the written content being out there)………….actually the tory party never okayed the times braverman interview did they? (Though there were reports of displeasure the next day)
forgive me Poppy, like many I’m exhausted by the sheer amount being released by ministers & the dwp and though I have an great support system I still feel like I’m drowning, gasping for air a lot of the time (what almighty power invented ‘panic attacks’)………..I can’t even contemplate what those in our community without a support system are feeling right now1 -
Since it’s highly likely that Labour will be the next government I wonder what their attitude to all this will be.0
-
You are right Ralph. Same for this and the bank account thing. I’m not even sure both will be in place before the next election. Labour would throw both things out0
-
Up till now labours been pretty disinterested at best (just look up liz Kendall)Ralph said:Since it’s highly likely that Labour will be the next government I wonder what their attitude to all this will be.
They’ll most likely get another opportunity next week to explain how a Labour government would have more empathy than this current one
to me it’s not about how good the incoming government is - this bunch of tories is so bad I really don’t care who replaces them (to an extent) as long as they are gone……..but it’s very much tactical voting and best of a bad bunch next GE right now rather than who’s the best party……..and that especially true for those of us with disabilities as we are politically homeless right now (I’ll be personally voting for the mp candidate best for my constituency and who I may have success contacting in the future if I ever needed help)0 -
It does the aura of that last jump scare of a dying monster in a horror movie doesn’t it 👻woodbine said:
All seems to me like the dying days of a govt. that has run out of any positive ideas and is scraping the barrel by once again gunning for those least able to defend themselves.
Being totally selfish I'm glad that in early 2025 I will be off benefits and on SRP.
I think it’s okay if your main priority is yourself (and your loved ones) and though no one wants to get old, getting to that non means tested safety net of the state pension I can imagine is a huge relief to get to that milestone
And something is seriously wrong with the system that that’s the reason the disabled want to make it to state pension………………every time a politician suggests that only shirkers claim benefits they ignore the reality, because if they asked any truly disabled person why they claim, none of us would say we done so by choice, what sane person would sign up to the current ‘true’ cost of being on sickness benefits.
I honestly don’t get why there are fraudsters claiming sickness benefits in the first place - there are easier, less soul destroying cons out there imo!0 -
The plans are clearly laid out on the government's own website. It makes for grim reading I'm afraid. Cruel and ignorant strategies, Dickensian almost.0
-
I am 50 and keep thinking it will be better when I am state pension age. That is wishing 16 years of my life away because of how being signed off makes me feel.0
-
https://www.bigissue.com/opinion/dwp-check-claimants-bank-accounts-disabled-people/The big issue once again with a good read
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/benefits-claimants-work-nhs-prescriptions-legal-aid-dwp/
a ‘repeat’ article but new response quotes from charities1 -
-
I just want to comment quickly to an add on the times added to the article I posted yesterday as it’s making its way through social media which I’ll post below:
Firstly poppy is right, any media, even ‘reputable’ ones like the times can sensationalise fact (a little less likely than the daily mail but it happens.
but people online seem to be reading this as direct quotes and policy from labour and it’s not
yes liz Kendall is not giving any of us a good 1st, 2nd, 3rd…….impression and it doesn’t sound like she’s changed from for labour leadership bid days
however the Labour Party membership back then rejected her personal policies and I doubt membership opinion on this has changed much.
and yes even though this story is partially burrowed by other news stories there are hints of backlash forming (even on the gbnews writeup when reading the comments section last I was quite shocked the the majority of comments were criticising these policies and seemed somewhat concerned about the vulnerable in society)
if there does happen to be major backlash in the coming weeks it would be advisable for labour to change their position on this to something less Tory-mirroring (dare I say it, starmer gets rid of Kendall if she loses labour votes with her personal philosophy - she’s kind of labours ‘braverman’ right now)
Edit: the times have posted yet another benefit related preview story but I’m going to withhold posting and wait to see if the guardian or bbc do a writeup as the times do seem to be on a scare mission right now (I’ve yet to read it myself but the title has that vibe)
edit 2: there’s actually not much relevant in that article so I’ll only post the relevant parts with direct quotes:Jeremy Hunt has pledged to tackle inefficient public services and rein in the welfare bill to make room for tax cuts as he says the economy has “turned the corner”.The chancellor hinted at cuts to business tax as he promised an “autumn statement for growth” next week that is expected to overhaul the planning system to fast-track pylons and other energy infrastructure.Hunt promised manufacturers a £4.5 billion green growth subsidy package designed to boost growth and offer a “realistic” response to President Biden’s $369 billion stimulus package.Under pressure from Tory MPs for tax cuts, Hunt will spend the weekend finalising a package after receiving final forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility on Friday that are expected to give him billions of pounds more to play with than in the spring budget.Speaking on a visit to a green power company in Sheffield, he added: “The best way that we can bring down the tax burden is to grow the economy, so that will be our primary focus. We’ve always said that under a Conservative government we do want to bring down the tax burden.”This week Hunt promised a “stick and carrot” welfare policy designed to get people back to work, and insisted on Friday that it was a key part of his drive to keep taxes down. “If you want to control the size of the state, you do need to include welfare reform as one of your priorities,” he said.The former chancellor, Lord Clarke, told Times Radio it would be “appalling” for Hunt to cut inheritance tax for the rich if working people on benefits have to pay for it.“Choosing inheritance tax at the present time might appeal to the Conservative right, but it leaves them open to the most appalling criticisms when inflation is making poorer people in this country very vulnerable indeed,” he said. “It’s not the tax cut I would choose.”1 -
wow - one hell of an heading from the independent
dare I hope after years of things particularly being ignored that some of the media and public are going to stand up for the disabled, sick and vulnerable?
it would be a long time coming
hope can be such as dangerous thing as if you lose it hopelessness just tears a person apart
i don’t know how realistic a hope this is but I hope that the majority think the tories have gone too far, I hope the backlash from public and media is unlike anything we’ve seen before (in relation to the govs treatment of the vulnerable) and I hope labour take note and realise this could lose them voters and they need a major rethink (yes that’s probable fictional thinking from myself but I hate feeling hopeless)Does Jeremy Hunt want to work the disabled to death?
New plans, to be unveiled in the government’s autumn statement, will penalise those living with long-term conditions who fail to get a job. The consequences for our most vulnerable will be devastating – like ‘I, Daniel Blake’ all over again, says James Moore
What would the late Stephen Smith have made of reports that the government plans to save £4bn for the nation by threatening to cut the support given to some of Britain’s most ill and disabled people?
Smith – a 64-year-old with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, osteoarthritis and an enlarged prostate that left him in chronic pain – made headlines in 2019 after a workplace capability assessment judged him fit to work. As a result, his employment support allowance (ESA) payments were stopped, and he was required to sign on to receive a £67-a-week jobseeker’s allowance. To qualify for that, he needed to visit a JobCentrePlus in person every week, to prove he was indeed looking for work.
Horrifying pictures emerged of Smith emaciated in hospital with a bout of pneumonia. His weight had dropped to six stone and he was barely able to walk, let alone attend an appointment with his job coach to discuss what work he should do. He died before the year was out.
Smith’s case was even more bleak than the storyline of Ken Loach’s award-winning film, I, Daniel Blake, in which a hard-working builder recovering from a severe heart attack struggles to negotiate a callous and unfeeling benefits system, and gets it badly wrong.
Now, it seems, Jeremy Hunt wants to make things even worse.As part of next week’s autumn statement, the chancellor is set to reveal plans to penalise people who “coast” on benefits – his word – if they refuse to get a job. That includes the disabled.
He wants claimants who have been deemed fit to work to accept a job or undertake relevant work experience – or else be hit with an “immediate sanction”. Such measures include stopping free prescriptions and dental treatment, cheaper mobile phone packages and help with energy bills, all of which are currently available to the long-term sick.
According to the government’s own promotional video issued ahead of the autumn statement, this is all about “fairness for the taxpayer”. But to many, this is not a fiscal matter concerned with clawing back money for the Treasury; sanctioning those individuals who pocketed billions for unusable PPE, and properly taxing non-doms, would raise several times the cash of a clampdown on the disabled during a cost-of-living crisis.At heart, this is a chance for the government to shine a light on the “extras” given to the needy, and creating another wedge issue ahead of the coming election. On the doorstep, it would be divisive stuff. (Have you heard about all the things your disabled neighbour gets for free? Vote for us, we’ll put an end to it…)And where would Hunt’s cost-cutting drive leave a Stephen Smith? You may say that case was at the extreme end. But there are plenty of people who are still very sick and/or disabled who may suddenly find themselves caught by thanks thanks to another of the government’s benefits reform. Read on and you will say why I would use the word “vicious” to describe it.
Tucked away within the benefits system overhaul is, at least, a smidgen of good news: the hated fitness-for-work test that Smith and the fictional Blake both “passed” is now slated to be scrapped.Clearly, it hasn’t worked well. Per the latest Ministry of Justice statistics for January to March 2023, one in every two ESA appeals are upheld.Mel Stride, who retained his position as work and pensions secretary in the recent reshuffle, has put the figure for the number on benefits and inactive due to a long-term condition at 2.5 million. He is formulating plans to not just scrap the test, but to scrap ESA altogether. In future, job coaches will be asked to assess what people can do, rather than what they can’t.
In the meantime, the stream of horror stories such as Smith’s keep coming. There was the student from Ormesby St Michael, near Great Yarmouth, with a severe form of cystic fibrosis, who reported that his ability to use a satnav saw him stripped of his Motability car. Or how about the Deeside woman receiving chemotherapy for stage-four Hodgkin’s lymphoma who was denied jobseeker’s allowance? Countless tales abound on the internet.Louise Rubin, head of policy at disability charity Scope, is concerned that, with the government’s policy shift to encourage more disabled people into work, there will be more coming. “We’re worried these proposals will end up forcing huge numbers of disabled people to look for work when they aren’t well enough, making them more ill. If they don’t meet strict conditions, they’ll have their benefits stopped.“While the flawed work-capability assessment should be scrapped, the government must not replace one out-of-touch test with another. Rushing these proposals through during a cost of living crisis is deeply unhelpful.”
Rubin does not deny that some people on ESA are actually keen to work and might benefit from “tailored, flexible employment support”. Apparently, there are people within the DWP who are sharp enough to see the potential problems with the proposed new set-up, and who have been making that case. But support costs money, and that will inevitably reduce the savings that Stride – and the Treasury – is hoping to make. Savings that would help provide the fiscal headroom needed for the government to offer a pre-election tax cut, which is what this is really all about, isn’t it?With the government’s proposals likely to be phased in, any new system set to be imposed on new claimants first. However, it will probably be for a future administration to deal with the inevitable rash of stories, like that of Smith’s, that it throws up. There will be many. Some might be as horrifying as his.Perhaps this is not just about creating fiscal headroom on the backs of some of Britain’s most vulnerable people. There is, lurking within this, the seeds of a very nasty political trap.1 -
Please within the next 13 months time can we end this man’s political career? - it doesn’t come close to what he and his pals have taken from us but it will do!
(it’s his smug smirk that winds me up the most…..well not the most but I can’t type the worst
edit: 1st comment after article - “ The most slappable face in British politics?” - made me laugh)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/11/17/jeremy-hunt-uk-economy-tax-cuts-autum-statement/
2 -
Hi Apple,
The legislation for these plans was passed in 2016 with Labour's support indeed Labour's help in closing the third reading of below
I watched two of the three readings of The Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015 which received Royal Assent in 2016 - the delayed reassessments under new measures are in operation now and under acceleration. Those reforms came in response to the failed National Reassessment Programme of 2011 - 2014 when most claimants were found 'fit-for-work' or LCW.
The act was overshadowed by the 2015 General Election, a referendum in Scotland, Brexit, two more general elections then Covid. Lord Freud got what he wanted while the country's attention (how convenient) was elsewhere.
I found myself reading legislative text too. Briefings at the time were misleading and I don't think we've caught up. The problems many if not most of us face won't fix themselves and I value your efforts here.
0 -
I think that’s a compliment and thank you if it is 😉WhatThe said:
I found myself reading legislative text too. Briefings at the time were misleading and I don't think we've caught up. The problems many if not most of us face won't fix themselves and I value your efforts here.
legislative texts attached to parliamentary bills (and upper tribunal case writeups - claimant vs dwp type stuff) is HEAVY reading…………….that’s what I’ve learnt the last fortnight (also that information is power)
I was going to post some of what ive been reading in terms of personal research and precedents on Tuesday to see if I could calm via common sense and logic.
but in all honestly (and excuse my language), if the ‘previews’ are any indication there’s a good chance Wednesday’s gonna be a s***show (I’m so sorry for the language again)
im wondering if the best thing is to get all the panic reactions out of the system (be a headless chicken for a few days), regroup composure over the next weekend, and start thinking (working together as a disabled community) of constructive ways to move forward/overcome/fight back when brains are a little less chaotic
(and all honestly I want to figure out how best to cause certain ministers a ‘headache’ - it’s overdue from this community let’s be honest……………and if the likes of sunak and hunt have proven anything in recent days it’s that they are actually not that smart (in terms of commons sense at least))1 -
Hi woodbine.I agree with you
would the bank account thing need to go through parliament? Thanks0 -
There is already a ‘social security fraud act’ already in place so in theory that could just be amended which would be a shorter process than a totally new bill.Tonawanda17 said:Hi woodbine.I agree with you
would the bank account thing need to go through parliament? Thanks
However I had a read of this existing social security fraud act and (and I’m no expect of the processes of government) these new proposals go so much further than what is currently in law and so many regulations in the existing act would need to be amended, in my honest opinion it’s been such a long time since a new act on this has gone through that I think a new parliamentary bills (with the readings Sind the ping-pongs) would be needed in this case.
(that’s from my own research but as I don’t work in politics that is a guesstimate)
————————————————————
also the government will only be able to get so many ‘new’ parliamentary bills (from 1st reading to royal assent) within the current nov2023 to jan2025 parliamentary session - with mps eager to be in their constituency canvassing for their seats (over seating in the House of Commons)
Using my past research on the previous parliamentary session to help with a guesstimate I can’t see this government getting many more than 15 newly announced bills (from the kings speech and onwards) from 1st reading to royal assent (because there are several other bills from previous sessions in mid process)
what I don’t know from recent announcements and the upcoming autumn statement is how many of these policies need a new parliamentary bill or amendment to an existing act (which would be required if legislation or legislative change is needed) or can just be announced and implemented on the spot (the gov official ‘back to work’ announcements this week didn’t seem to need legislation to be implemented (or an existing recently passed bill already covered it) but we’ll hopefully get more details next week)
if many new separate new bills are indeed needed (benefit fraud, wca reforms and back to work policies) than would these new bills be a government priority to get to royal assent within the next 13months? On that I’m unsure
0 -
inews seems to be championing for our community which is good, exposure wise:
https://inews.co.uk/news/chancellor-jeremy-hunt-difficult-decisions-reform-welfare-state-inheritance-tax-cut-27642092 -
Sure it's a compliment
it's a new skill I discovered too and worth celebrating since everyday things are so difficult to process 
Very heavy though. Benefits are headline news but we're never given the full facts. Hansard is a transcript of proceedings, not the whole story - that is the art of politics
0 -
It's horrific what the Tories are doing, it's so severe and will result in so many more deaths and mental torture it's actually unbelievable and seems like more like a nightmare I would have than reality.
If all the disabled, sick, mentally ill, etc got together I think maybe we could do something about this, there's millions of us.
If enough of us contacted the media outlets, like email newspapers, email news programs on the TV, email news websites, and asked them to please, please give enough coverage of what the Tories are doing and what will happen as a result of it. If we could explain how it's going to affect us, how it's killed so many already and will kill so many more, and that if they gave enough coverage of this the Tories may scrap this, especially if there ends up being enough outrage in the UK, it also means even less chance of the Tories wining the general election.
If enough of us do this and they have a heart surely they will give all of this a lot more coverage to help us, knowing that it will save many, many lives.
I believe the news outlets have the power to save us and this could be our greatest chance.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 14.9K Start here and say hello!
- 7K Coffee lounge
- 81 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 104 Announcements and information
- 23.5K Talk about life
- 5.5K Everyday life
- 289 Current affairs
- 2.3K Families and carers
- 857 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 501 Money and bills
- 3.5K Housing and independent living
- 1K Transport and travel
- 865 Relationships
- 253 Sex and intimacy
- 1.4K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 858 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 916 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 38.2K Talk about your benefits
- 5.9K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.2K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 7.7K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.5K Benefits and income