The official 2024 budget discussion.
Comments
-
I Agree thoroughly with your interpretation here.
3 -
looks like they expect it to take longer indeed, but going by every other rollout I'd be surprised if it wasn't paused at least once and if it was completed by 2027, their bull in a china shop approach always has and will create major backlogs and delays, they don't learn!
1 -
agreed
0 -
Does anyone know where we can read about how they plan to move us into work? I would like to read more about it.
1 -
not yet we need to wait for this supposed white paper for that info.
2 -
I can't get over sunak venom on his after the budget speech on disabled people, It shows his hatred of us. Karma hopefully prevails see how he likes living with some sort of disability. He is a cold hearted posh boy
6 -
let's just be grateful he can't do anything else from his position.
4 -
That's true, just hope kendall dosent take it on what he said
2 -
she's just one person, I'm sure she'll be reigned in if she gets too excited in her role.
2 -
Hell get his karma in this life or the next. I’ll be glad to see the back of him. Bizarre thing is his siblings are a clinical psychologist and his sister does work for the UN, you’d think he’d have found some empathy somewhere.
3 -
The battle has begun.
4 -
I’m curious about the idea that 'the battle has begun.' It seems challenging to engage in a battle without clear information on what we’re facing. Nobody actually knows what the proposals will be; they could even work in our favour. I believe it’s wise to hold off on reactions and speculation until we have more clarity.
3 -
These plans have been in place since 2016, following the failed 2011-2014 national reassessment programme.
We do know that plans for a single "health assessment" and payment of a single "health element" will be introduced from April 2025 alongside the current UC migration programme which involves reassessing existing claimants.
1 -
GB News and Mike Parry are hating the whole budget so imo it can't be all bad ✊️🙂
4 -
I strongly disagree, it's a disgrace that they are seeking to cut the money of some of the poorest when there are so many other options available to tax the wealthy & corporations. It's written in plain English that they are planning to make cuts and they have stated that one way they will do it IS to reform the WCA and make fewer people eligible for LCWRA.
We cannot wait until the changes are so far down the road that we stand no chance of preventing them. We must get the word out to make it clear what they would be doing to us, in order to prevent harm, not fight the fire once it's already started.
I am going to write to my MP and the press, lay out exactly what effect all the proposed cuts would have on me and of what effect that would have on demand for other public services. It makes no sense for them to drivw thousands of people into mental health crises or drive ever more thousands to food banks or homelessness when the system can't cope as it is.
We must act preemptively, it's our only chance to halt this madness
6 -
reform the WCA and make fewer people eligible for LCWRA.
The disgrace is that we're still being sheltered from the facts. Keeping this buried for the last decade hasn't helped anyone and as far as I can see, we're already too late.
1 -
I actually can't see how that's going to work. Those who are assessing are not going to have the qualifications or knowledge to decide what someone can or can't do, for every single condition (s) a person could have. Even a g.p won't know that, that's why you have specialized fields.
My understanding and I accept this is just my opinion so correct me someone if this wrong. You have those who are longterm sick and cannot work, that's what the esa support group is for, then you have those who are significantly disabled which is what DLA was for. It was for those with severe, significant impairments eventing day to day life beyond the ability to work.
I do wonder if since covid we've simply had a huge increase of claimants that weren't seen face to face. I guess it does make sense to send people for a WCA like they are doing for PIP. However removing the mobility part as society has people working from home isn't the answer. You need to attend the interview and interact with people, have a computer.
0 -
whistles, you are correct that the health assessors are not medically qualified, nor are the decision-makers.
You have those who are longterm sick and cannot work, that's what the esa support group is for,
The Work-Related Activity Group (WRAG) was also for those who are long-term sick with limited capacity for work. Thousands were incorrectly and unlawfully found 'fit-for-work' or placed in the WRAG during the first national reassessment programme of 2011-2014.
That's where we've all gone wrong, misunderstanding these two groups and their qualifying criteria. Not by accident I should add!
2 -
My theory is, the crux of the entire matter lies in the introduction of Integrated Care Services to monitor our health more closely and report to government under the disguise of closing the gaps health services received vs other individuals, and yes this will include some voluntary organisations such as telephone befriender service as well as the local council collecting yellow bags of bio-waste, as well as any 'social' workers, GPs, and other local staff, collecting data. The top-tier (yeah there is literal tiers) of the decision makers will be the government first, then the NHS, then everyone else, in that order.
I get checking for fraud, however, neither the Labour nor Tories are out for claiming back moneys, their number one priority was always cuts, cuts, cuts.
What it will come down to, is like it stated in the paper on the 2023-2024 study about benefits, WCA and all elements is this: Pensioners (or people who have supposedly had a long "working record") will get an extra money top-up, saved by cuts to people who came after them, the further and further disabled by a world left behind by said pensioners.
They are basically drawing a line in the sand to the onslaught of bigger numbers of all older disabled people coming after the baby-boomers onwards to limit the damage done to public finances and the NHS by an ever increasing aging population year after year ever since 1945.
So they have to decide what's the lesser of the evils, go after the rogue employers and thieving wealthy or have more justification for benefit cuts, and their statistical analysists probably gave the prediction that overpopulation outpaces wealth usurpation. I only agree with them on the fact that usurpation can be remedied at any time and quickly (especially as a means to an end) by legislation and executive powers, however overpopulation is unstoppable, so are diseases and disabilities, hence they demand more investigative powers to clarify the long-asked question by the experts: what is the definition of essential needs in benefits and to what extend can we establish a statutory right to the benefits of essentials in the charters of the DWP? In order to stop the constant battle in society of pro or contra benefits during this disabled population onslaught and to establish rules for cuts, this is what they came up with.
2 -
This is the old system and it might have continued to work if out of work sickness benefit levels had kept up with the cost of living. As it stands, basic UC is not enough to survive on short term, people who can't find work quickly go into debt, get behind with their rent and it's creating a cycle of people having to take part time insecure work just to keep their heads above water. In 2017, the Tory government slashed the LCW benefit so that anyone short term (2 years or less) sick from work would only recieve this inadequate basic rate. So hundreds and thousands of people were faced with months or years of increasing debt with no way to increase their income.
I think it's this that has led to the increase in LCWRA awards, because only then can people have sufficient income to actually feed themselves and pay their rent. LCW rates have made people much sicker, hence then eligible for LCWRA under substantial risk rules, because being so poor & under constant threat of being sanctioned makes you ill.
If you have any chance of managing a disability of any kind, LCWRA on it's own is not enough, hence people have been forced to make PIP claims when in previous times it might not have occurred to people. For example when I was last in work unbeknownst to me I could have been claiming DLA but I didn't know it. It was only when I became to ill to work that I researched what extra help I could get.
If we had adequate short term sickness benefits which properly supported people until they were ready to return to work, the PIP bill wouldn't be as high imo.
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 14K Start here and say hello!
- 6.7K Coffee lounge
- 57 Games den
- 1.6K People power
- 78 Community noticeboard
- 21.6K Talk about life
- 4.9K Everyday life
- 36 Current affairs
- 2.2K Families and carers
- 814 Education and skills
- 1.7K Work
- 412 Money and bills
- 3.3K Housing and independent living
- 858 Transport and travel
- 651 Relationships
- 59 Sex and intimacy
- 1.3K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.3K Talk about your impairment
- 843 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 888 Neurological impairments and pain
- 1.9K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.1K Autism and neurodiversity
- 34.9K Talk about your benefits
- 5.5K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 18.2K PIP, DLA, and AA
- 6.2K Universal Credit (UC)
- 4.9K Benefits and income