The Autumn Statement 2023
Comments
-
worried33 said:If Labour get elected there is a chance this wont happen, but I personally think they will be less compassionate, especially as they announced yesterday they are planning to have a new harsher assessment in place of WCA, whilst the Tories are going in the other direction and wanting to remove the assessment from existing claimants.All I heard Rachel Reeves (who I am no fan of) say was that she agreed that the WCA needed to be reformed, which has been their vague policy for years. During the Labour conference Vicky Foxcroft (shadow disability minister) said they didn't agree with making the WCA more stringent and would scrap the Tory changes. Which on the face of it doesn't sound like they plan on enforcing a harsher regime.Where did you hear this announcement?0
-
It's a way to get people voting for them. On one hand, they're taking a tougher stance on benefits claimants with harsher sanctions and rules, because they know it will appeal to the people who love nothing more than hating on benefits claimants.Votadini said:Grissom123 said:I bet the only reason they'll be targeting new claimants is because it would be too much effort to have to reassess all of the existing claimants. I doubt it's out of compassion.There are 2.4 million people in the support group/LCWRA. The last person stupid enough to try to reassess them all in a short space of time was Iain Duncan Smith and he broke the system leading to massive backlogs and everyone having their reassessment deferred by at least 2 years.I absolutely agree with you. This has nothing to do with compassion and everything to do with a lack of capacity and a fear of legal challenges.
And on the other hand, they've announced that people who are on LCWRA/Support Group apparently won't be reassessed or affected by the new WCA, in what strikes me as a very desperate effort to try and get the sick/disabled to vote for them out of thankfulness for their "generosity".
I expected that they would actually scrap the LCWRA altogether not just amend it. Maybe I'm just cynical but the only reason I can see for this is because as we've seen they have taken a battering the last few weeks and they're way behind in the polls; they need all the votes they can get. It is just not in their nature to be this generous and the last 13 years prove that.
If any of these changes do go ahead, with either the Tories or Labour in charge, it'll be interesting to see what happens.1 -
Thanks Poppy (and Albus) your posts on here have been really helpful and informative to lots of very worried people.poppy123456 said:LeoGuaje7 said:Hi all, new member here. Thanks to you all for the reassuring words posted on here in such a tough time. Those in government are truly awful, awful 'people'.
It seems that those of us who receive disability benefits should be okay, but does anyone know what will happen when i eventually have to migrate from ESA Support Group to UC? Would this count as a new claim for UC?
I receive income-related ESA SG and PIP, but the thought of the new WCA assessment is terrifyingUnless you're claiming Tax credits then you won't be migrated to UC until at least 2028. Unless a change of circumstances prompts a move before that.When you do claim it, whether it's managed migration or natural migration, then you will be entitled to the LCWRA element from the start of your claim, providing you're still in the Support Group.2 -
I would seriously recommend for everyone claiming a disability benefit to contact their local Labour MP or as many Labour MP's as they can. We need them to know before the next election that treating disabled people like scum is not acceptable and not a vote winner.raspberrysorbet66 said:This is all so confusing. I’ve seen a few people mention now that if you already have LCWRA then you’ll never face another WCA again? Is this correct, I assume it can’t be, I also assume that if not there will be something equally as cruel to take its place. … in the meantime, what can we do, who can we write to, can we campaign. Why OH why are we always set upon?1 -
How long will those already in LCWRA or LCW remain safe from a reassessment? That’s what I want to know… I did ask earlier but nobody replied. - I’ve read a few times now that those in wrag will never face an assessment again… never being literal? … or until something else comes along I can’t see them just leaving us alone. We’re not that fortunate.0
-
This is an apolitical question, no politics intended and I've never voted before in my life.
I'm 35 next month, I've been signed off since July, I always worked or studied so until recently I've never been in this situation.
So I ask what are Labour like with disabled people on benefits? Are they historically hard or soft on them in regards of assessments, support and such?
0 -
Labour are historically not as evil as the Tories, and there is much nicer MP's on the Labour side. Although Starmer and Reeves seem absolutely awful, i would expect for things to be better for disabled people under Labour.1
-
The more I read the more I'm convinced that this entire proposal has entirely no substance and was just a soundbite to get vote from their 'red wall' Boris lovers.
They put out a terrifying press release, even reported in the liberal press seemingly verbatim, about how we're all going to be stripped of our benefits, then out comes the small print (not reported in the headlines so most voters won't see it) that they didn't mean us, just people who claim from 2025. None of it is evidenced, none of it makes sense, most of it is so blindingly obviously dangerous it would surely fall at the first legal challenge.
All that said however, I don't think it does any of us any favours to say "don't worry" and then forget about it. Anyone who is able might be wise to write to their MP and to disability charities, their Labour candidates for the GE and not let these proposals fly under the radar unchallenged. If we don't fight now, Labour might not do any better for us.7 -
If it wasn’t for this group I wouldn’t have got the correct information I’m so grateful to everyone on here helping me with correct information. I’m so glad I was told about scope2
-
I'm very glad we were able to help you @mason50
I do love the community, despite me only being here a short time.
0 -
it’s amazing . The worse thing I did was read news articles they wasn’t the full truth and made my anxiety through the roof . I do tent to report myself a lot because I can’t take information in very well . So when I felt unsure I just went back on all the comments and read them again . Thanks all I really appreciate you all1
-
Votadini said:worried33 said:If Labour get elected there is a chance this wont happen, but I personally think they will be less compassionate, especially as they announced yesterday they are planning to have a new harsher assessment in place of WCA, whilst the Tories are going in the other direction and wanting to remove the assessment from existing claimants.All I heard Rachel Reeves (who I am no fan of) say was that she agreed that the WCA needed to be reformed, which has been their vague policy for years. During the Labour conference Vicky Foxcroft (shadow disability minister) said they didn't agree with making the WCA more stringent and would scrap the Tory changes. Which on the face of it doesn't sound like they plan on enforcing a harsher regime.Where did you hear this announcement?It was in her response to the budget, she was quite emotional and clearly wanted to prove she can out do the Tories on what they doing. She said she wants people on long sick moving to the work place and would replace the WCA to achieve it. up until I heard this Labour as you said have been very vague (I think deliberately) but this was quite clear, she perhaps said more than she wanted to but was very flustered.Whilst she did also say she will target improvements in the NHS to address mental health issues, it was pretty clear she isnt going to leave things alone on the WCA.0
-
Grissom123 said:
It's a way to get people voting for them. On one hand, they're taking a tougher stance on benefits claimants with harsher sanctions and rules, because they know it will appeal to the people who love nothing more than hating on benefits claimants.Votadini said:Grissom123 said:I bet the only reason they'll be targeting new claimants is because it would be too much effort to have to reassess all of the existing claimants. I doubt it's out of compassion.There are 2.4 million people in the support group/LCWRA. The last person stupid enough to try to reassess them all in a short space of time was Iain Duncan Smith and he broke the system leading to massive backlogs and everyone having their reassessment deferred by at least 2 years.I absolutely agree with you. This has nothing to do with compassion and everything to do with a lack of capacity and a fear of legal challenges.
And on the other hand, they've announced that people who are on LCWRA/Support Group apparently won't be reassessed or affected by the new WCA, in what strikes me as a very desperate effort to try and get the sick/disabled to vote for them out of thankfulness for their "generosity".
I expected that they would actually scrap the LCWRA altogether not just amend it. Maybe I'm just cynical but the only reason I can see for this is because as we've seen they have taken a battering the last few weeks and they're way behind in the polls; they need all the votes they can get. It is just not in their nature to be this generous and the last 13 years prove that.
If any of these changes do go ahead, with either the Tories or Labour in charge, it'll be interesting to see what happens.They kind of did it on the quiet. Most of the public still think all the existing LCWRA is heading towards sanctions and mandated activity. This is why I think they did out of necessity rather than as a means of scoring points with disabled voters, of course I might be wrong.But regardless of their reason I am a little less anxious than I was a week ago, I took part on the DWP consultancy, and anyone else who took part will know what their original intentions were, the decisions they have ended up making, were not stated even as an option in the consultancy. It was going to be much much worse.0 -
I was really worried about this as well, I figured they would actually go through with scrapping the LCWRA altogether.worried33 said:Grissom123 said:
It's a way to get people voting for them. On one hand, they're taking a tougher stance on benefits claimants with harsher sanctions and rules, because they know it will appeal to the people who love nothing more than hating on benefits claimants.Votadini said:Grissom123 said:I bet the only reason they'll be targeting new claimants is because it would be too much effort to have to reassess all of the existing claimants. I doubt it's out of compassion.There are 2.4 million people in the support group/LCWRA. The last person stupid enough to try to reassess them all in a short space of time was Iain Duncan Smith and he broke the system leading to massive backlogs and everyone having their reassessment deferred by at least 2 years.I absolutely agree with you. This has nothing to do with compassion and everything to do with a lack of capacity and a fear of legal challenges.
And on the other hand, they've announced that people who are on LCWRA/Support Group apparently won't be reassessed or affected by the new WCA, in what strikes me as a very desperate effort to try and get the sick/disabled to vote for them out of thankfulness for their "generosity".
I expected that they would actually scrap the LCWRA altogether not just amend it. Maybe I'm just cynical but the only reason I can see for this is because as we've seen they have taken a battering the last few weeks and they're way behind in the polls; they need all the votes they can get. It is just not in their nature to be this generous and the last 13 years prove that.
If any of these changes do go ahead, with either the Tories or Labour in charge, it'll be interesting to see what happens.The thing is they didnt advertise this change, they kind of did it on the quiet. Most of the public still think all the existing LCWRA is heading towards sanctions and mandated activity. This is why I think they did out of necessity rather than as a means of scoring points with disabled voters, of course I might be wrong.But regardless of their reason I am a little less anxious than I was a week ago, I took part on the DWP consultancy, and anyone else who took part will know what their original intentions were, the decisions they have ended up making, were not stated even as an option in the consultancy. It was going to be much much worse.
But knowing that those of us in the LCWRA won't be affected by the changes has caused me some relief.
I took part in the consultation too, sent a very lengthy and scathing email to them and I also contacted my MP twice about it, got no response.
As previously stated they've probably figured it's easier for them to target new claims rather than face the hassle of having to reassess everyone.1 -
worried33 said:It was in her response to the budget, she was quite emotional and clearly wanted to prove she can out do the Tories on what they doing. She said she wants people on long sick moving to the work place and would replace the WCA to achieve it. up until I heard this Labour as you said have been very vague (I think deliberately) but this was quite clear, she perhaps said more than she wanted to but was very flustered.Whilst she did also say she will target improvements in the NHS to address mental health issues, it was pretty clear she isnt going to leave things alone on the WCA.I didn't hear it like that but there's no denying Reeves has previously said some appalling things about slashing benefits. Fortunately she'll be in the wrong job to do it. Unfortunately the one who would be in the right job is Liz Kendall who has openly supported Tory welfare reforms in the past.There's no denying Labour have a dubious past at best when it comes to sickness/disability benefits. They brought in the WCA and ATOS after all, but worse than the Tories? You'd like to think not.Besides, they're going to inherit such a mess that I suspect welfare reform will be way down their list during a first term. They've got a lot of other things to fix first.
2 -
This is why I'm not very optimistic about Labour winning the next election. From what I've read and seen they wouldn't really be that much better than the Tories. Unless it's all just grandstanding to attract voters.Votadini said:worried33 said:It was in her response to the budget, she was quite emotional and clearly wanted to prove she can out do the Tories on what they doing. She said she wants people on long sick moving to the work place and would replace the WCA to achieve it. up until I heard this Labour as you said have been very vague (I think deliberately) but this was quite clear, she perhaps said more than she wanted to but was very flustered.Whilst she did also say she will target improvements in the NHS to address mental health issues, it was pretty clear she isnt going to leave things alone on the WCA.I didn't hear it like that but there's no denying Reeves has previously said some appalling things about slashing benefits. Fortunately she'll be in the wrong job to do it. Unfortunately the one who would be in the right job is Liz Kendall who has openly supported Tory welfare reforms in the past.There's no denying Labour have a dubious past at best when it comes to sickness/disability benefits. They brought in the WCA and ATOS after all, but worse than the Tories? You'd like to think not.Besides, they're going to inherit such a mess that I suspect welfare reform will be way down their list during a first term. They've got a lot of other things to fix first.0 -
Liz Kendall has already been posting about "getting Britain back to work" on her twitter account, and done a guardian article on it. Sadly it is a priority for them and forced really as it has been made a key election issue, and likely the reason Liz was given the role.
The hope is, it might be a while before the election and is a chance something else takes focus before then. Public opinion could also turn as LBC radio and other outlets have been very publically opposed to the policies.
1 -
I understand your concerns Worried, they're completely valid, but at the moment this is all supposition and we're getting ahead of ourselves. Let's just deal with this current bunch of *expletive removed* before we start concerning ourselves with what might come after.Being on sickness benefits was no picnic under Labour last time but it was a hell of a lot better than the last 13 years under the Tories. As an example under Labour I was given a lifetime award, never to be assessed again, which vanished in a puff of smoke once the Tories and Iain Duncan Smith arrived.Reeves and Kendall are going to come out with all sorts of **** to keep the right wing press happy, I'd take it with a pinch of salt until they come out with any actual policies.6
-
Their record is awful, and I think there has been some letting political alignment clouding things. You say the "unknown" is better than been told we will never be assessed again.Votadini said:I understand your concerns Worried, they're completely valid, but at the moment this is all supposition and we're getting ahead of ourselves. Let's just deal with this current bunch of *expletive removed* before we start concerning ourselves with what might come after.Being on sickness benefits was no picnic under Labour last time but it was a hell of a lot better than the last 13 years under the Tories. As an example under Labour I was given a lifetime award, never to be assessed again, which vanished in a puff of smoke once the Tories and Iain Duncan Smith arrived.Reeves and Kendall are going to come out with all sorts of **** to keep the right wing press happy, I'd take it with a pinch of salt until they come out with any actual policies.I was on ESA during the Labour years, and here is a reminder of what it was like.The benefit was designed to have utterly relentless reassessments, anywhere from about 3 months up to a maximum of 3 years, it was legislated to 3 years maximum. Labour boasted it would kick a million of sickness benefits.I was assessed 14 times between 2006 and 2010, and I have been assessed 3 times since 2011. I was found fit for work on one of the assessments before 2010, and initially was placed under LCW, I havent been moved out of LCWRA since 2011.
The vast majority of people who qualified were put in the LCW group due to how strict everything was designed in the WCA.
The DWP have confirmed it was 21% who made it into LCWRA in 2011.
Since the transition of government, regulation 35 and descriptors got tweaked to the point that now 65% of claims get put in the LCWRA group. I remember watching a select committee where a tory minister was been asked about the support group and he revealed there and then he had signed of a change to allow people of a certain condition to go from LCW to LCWRA, none of what I have typed above is supposition.Likewise I wouldnt have even qualified for the older DLA, but the changes to PIP recognise my circumstances as a problem and I qualify for that as well.
Liz Kendall has a history of wanting clampdown on social security, again this is not supposition, she has a history, you can check the news, check her twitter account, check voting records in parliament, she was the only member of harriet's front bench to vote with the tories on austerity cuts.
Reeve doesnt have a shining history either and actually told parliament 2 days ago she is going to replace the WCA to reduce numbers. She said it, you cant pretend she didnt say it or pretend she didnt mean it and then call what I said supposition.Meanwhile we have a published document stating very clearly where the current government stands, and I dont think it could have been better news for anyone currently in the LCWRA, no more assessments, and on top of that no penalty for trying to return to work.I think its important to keep people aware of this and put any party loyalty aside,Why would it be my priority to get rid of this government first before I worry about what happens after? I would only care about that if I was a Labour party supporter and was putting that before the needs of sick people. (I dont vote for the record, and I dont trust the current government or the DWP, I just feel its important to say we shouldnt be trusting Labour either).If I remember right when ESA got introduced, people treated the rumours as supposition and as a result didnt fight it until it was too late and already law, we just sleep walked into the changes. Thats the problem when the can gets kicked down the road. This is why I took part in the DWP consultation.1 -
I'm so confused with what is going on.
Still on Tax Credits and Income support here,
DH with mental health and extreme anxiety with me being his carer - he's been on PIP for 10 years,
I'm expecting we're going to be moved to UC any time now.
Is DH going to be suddenly expected to look for work? His state of mind is NOT good and this is making him so much worse.
Any advice would be much appreciated as i'm struggling to get my head around it all.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.1K Start here and say hello!
- 7.1K Coffee lounge
- 84 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 116 Announcements and information
- 23.9K Talk about life
- 5.6K Everyday life
- 349 Current affairs
- 2.4K Families and carers
- 863 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 513 Money and bills
- 3.6K Housing and independent living
- 1K Transport and travel
- 876 Relationships
- 254 Sex and intimacy
- 1.5K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 859 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 920 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.1K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 38.9K Talk about your benefits
- 5.9K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.4K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 8K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.6K Benefits and income