Economic inactivity: welfare and long-term sickness Oral evidence live 3pm 12/11/24

she's temperamental, she's oddly stood up for us recently for example demanding that the term economically inactive is dropped as is skivers.

also having a shot st stride for the down and bluesy comment, she also apparently tried initially to cancel out entirely the 3bn cuts but couldn't.

However she does also have a history of making her own worrying and harsh remarks.

Reeves is worse but Kendall can't be trusted even if "some" of her recent attitude is better than it used to be.

They are but also remember for a decade or so it is well known Liz Kendall thinks like this, her opinion is of no one should be written of and everyone should be making an effort to get back into employment, she also has a similar mindset to Tories in its down to the individual to improve themselves.
WCA/ESA reform is coming, that bit is not speculation, the guy has obviously been putting pieces together to draw a logical conclusion on what is coming, there is nothing wrong with that.
He is very likely right the issue with Labour is they are not happy with so many people not engaging with the DWP. Kendall's predecessor gave a public quote saying the same thing only 2 winters ago.
The problem with the DWP is they think support means mandating activities, so "inviting" people to engage, making things voluntarily would require a culture shift from them.
I wont comment on what I think the possibilities are though as its my opinion based on what I heard. Just leaving at that changes are coming that will be aimed at reducing LCWRA exemption.
Kendall is also still refusing to meet up with charities or any claimants individually (unless its a charity that supports her mindset, or affiliated with the Labour party), another sign something unpopular is coming.

everyone I know on esa support which is about 12 people all say the same thing,they have no intention of engaging with that horrible system and being basically harassed and threatened so none of them will be claiming it.

They need to learn these disgusting politicians that, those who want to engage will if it's voluntary and no threat to their peace and wellbeing.

All the time they feel their lives are being invaded and can't cope with the demands they simply won't play ball, and good on them.

What's horrifying is that they don't already have that. A department that's literally responsible for keeping millions of people alive and yet has no responsibility to ensure it doesn't accidentally or by design starve some of them to death.

What I want to see are some systems to tackle sadistic work coaches who target vulnerable people for sanctions. We know from much anecdotal evidence that many of them target the mentally ill with impossible conditionality to fulfil sanctions targets. It would be a good place to hide a serial killer...

Thats too hard for them, instead they activate the cheat mode, and just pretend they fit and healthy.

I have seen quotes from a couple of people who were tasked by Kendall to look for solutions, and they admitted their remit is to find solutions to cut the numbers, which is likely why we seeing such one sided stuff, as its not a generic research, its something that by design has to lead to a fixed end goal. They are tasked to find something to justify polices that lead to that end goal. Those of us with memories long enough will remember when ESA was launched by a Labour government, they were boasting it concentrates on what people can do, the same words that are coming out now.

It is akin to a commercial company paying someone to test their products or funding numerous polls (one poll will hit the right result to be published eventually), knowing with confidence it will have favourable results for the advertising campaign.

What they probably should just be doing is cutting everyone's weekly amount by XX pounds with the size of the cut higher on higher awards, it would be an honest up front cut that at least doesnt remove anyone from the safety net, however politically it would be very damaging, so they will be looking for a way to implement a cut that gives an impression they still supporting all the right people, and the pretence that those who are no longer in the safety net shouldnt have been there in the first place. Seen it with DLA to PIP, IB to ESA, it will be a tweak of the eligibility.

I had another look at what the Tories proposals were for the WCA, and it was not as bad as I initially thought it would be (although still against my principle of kicking people out of the safety net), physical side of substantial risk was actually going to be left untouched, with a comment to catch those who fall through the mobility safety net, it was clear they were targeting mental health. But we now have a different government so my feeling is anything can happen at this point, all we know is the WCA will be changed, and there is the possibility LCWRA will get work related activity obligations. The priority is to cut the numbers who have no work related obligations.

If Kendall had anyone proper advising her, she would have been told it is possible the DWP can engage and support people without a threat regime, support does not need to be mandatory activity and sanctions, it doesnt need to cut financial support, I seen a comment in the UC migration thread about the DWP charging forward like a bull, and these upcoming reforms, gives me that feeling, they will be targeting something that gives sharp quick results to whatever metrics they want changing.

That should read spiritual Bishops. 💕 It really is bothersome when these lot have never worked a proper job in their lives or paid tax and NI having any say at all in the matter.

Go hunting jog on you are a out as useful as a chocolate teapot 💕