Upcoming changes to benefits
Comments
-
Damn it typos, and no option to edit, the last sentence should read "I dont see how it makes sense to cut LCWRA and say your transitional protection is now moot."
1 -
I’m very new to forum so please excuse if this has been discussed before. I see a bigger picture forming.. Reeves undoubtedly wants to tax the masses but this is much more palatable and acceptable if they make the disabled ‘sacrificial lambs’first.?
Starmer.. high on ‘World statesman’ kudos WILL defend this to the death. He doesn’t just want enough money for the defence budget he wants Uber cash. They will cull the civil service and NHS England to gain their monies?
Will it work.. er no. He’s alienated a large chunk of his previous voters. Liz Kendall was his optimal choice.. she’s right wing and should actually have ‘crossed the house’ before now. I personally think they’ve overreached. If peace comes to Ukraine, if he manages the Orange beast’s tariffs.. he can afford to slow down rearmament..why then choose this hill to die on??
Now think of the practicalities, still high waiting lists, a complete dearth of psychiatrists in the UK, DWP staff who are hostile and demeaning to disabled people ( someone needs to access their WhatsApp groups by the way!!)… He’s going to find it nigh impossible to progress legislation. I’d go with deaths of disabled people by suicide( there are stats abounding), I’d challenge figures, there are benefits NOT being claimed.. despite entitlement plus the fact that his own mother was apparently disabled for many years🤷♀️
4 -
Kier Starmer's mam had Stills Disease.
2 -
He will care about the deprived come election time. Remind him of it. Particularly if he has a smaller majority.
1 -
I worry that there will be no opposition to this - or very few voices. Tories will be in favour of it. And the house of lords from what I read a while back when it was being discussed with them, also sounded like they thought "disabled were taking the mickey" …so it seems there are no political voices for the disabled and long term sick. I fear how they will then use the AI technology that is being brought in - which will speed up everything. Every political party has thrown us under the bus - at least that is how it feels. Surly this cant be legal. What would human rights lawyers say? Or does that not count for disabled ?
3 -
Hi secretsquirrel1
Glad you managed to see the podcast he's doing one after the green paper comes out to dumb it down for us lol. Noah is actually transgender and seems to know his stuff
It really helped me last night when I saw the pip and the lcwra podcast.
I think he needs to open up to a much wider audience becomes he knows his stuff.
1 -
I’m really confused about all the information out there tbh . I know no one knows for sure what’s planned but I’ve watched videos by a different bias (month ago) and today Noah bear nyle life . Both recommend on this forum. They don’t seem to think things will be bad as we think . Take a look on YouTube and see what you think .
1 -
So if I'm right PIP and WCA assessors are not actually medically trained?
That's one thing Labour could do, actually place medically trained people including psychiatry to become assessors. The cart is pulling the horse with the DWP.
Only someone experienced within the medical field could have that empathy, that understanding of disabilities and how it effects the individual.
6 -
Alas there is a good number maybe just over 50% who have no TP, were told your getting extra money and within 1-3 month period, it was complete waste of time. In fact it may will result in all these people Losing the UC altogether, so you have to wonder why move the people in the first time. It would have been simpler to just scrap all ESA premium.
0 -
yes I realised he’s transgender after watching the second podcast regarding pip . I must say it’s put my mind a rest a bit . I know he obviously doesn’t know anything for sure but it’s certainly a different prospective on things. Do you know if he works in benefits advice or anything ? What do you think about his idea that they won’t be lowering lcwra but increasing UC for disabled who try work ? I’d love it to be something like that but I can’t see where the savings would come from . A different bias also said labour won’t be making these cuts .
1 -
Funny enough scrapping it was the plan for the Tories, remember the Tories moved forward the date, and then later just before election they announced by 2030 there will be no more LCWRA (on UC only, NI ESA got no mention), although there would be a health top up replacing it, of course to get that top up you need PIP daily living, and they had also planned a mass cull on PIP via eligibility tweaking. So when you put all that together, you get savings. The Tories craftily announced all the pieces months apart from each other, making it harder for people to figure out.
Labour come in to power, and didnt reverse the migration, but my suspicion is they already had the LCWRA payment cut planned, in which case it makes sense to keep the migration as the cut is on UC not ESA. If you make sure the cut happens after most are migrated then TP doesnt recover it. My gut feeling is doing it in 2026 instead of 2025 for that reason will save more money. People on nsESA alone with no UC wont be cut if I am correct, but people on nsESA and UC combined will still be affected, as the cut will act to reduce the UC top up so net income will still be lower.
2 -
Hi
I really don't know but he used to be on tik tok I know an awful app lol he really new is stuff. When he disappeared off tik tok I thought omg where's as he gone I looked everywhere for him until he popped up last night. I think he said last night he as a business but I don't know what it is. But he did say that he worked on giveing advice on a dispatches programme when the Tories were still in power ref welfare. I'm hoping that they won't reduce the lcwra but give extra money to help get back into work. Like you say we can put hope lol.
2 -
Hi
Yes Phil seems to know is stuff to (different bias) I'm glad you saw that video too. I also mentioned him on the forum to. There's a Dr on X called Dr Jay Watts go take a look at her comments to she's a physiologist and activist.
2 -
I’m trying to work out what he meant by they said lcwra receiving less money but not in cuts. I understood that to mean increase to UC ppl working or looking and they keep more UC. Which will mean they will receive more than lcwra without them removing any . I need to listen again as he pointed out the use of the word less money not benefits. If he’s right he’s picked up on something no one else has that I’ve heard . What were your thoughts on it ?
0 -
It makes me wonder if they came out with all this vague stuff to see what the reaction was so they could decide what to do…. maybe they had no plan at all to begin with.
2 -
That’s ok :)
I always make typos on here and the lack of edit button is a pain 😂
But would have said you’d be totally right in what you say a year or so ago.
But today with this lot of corrupt charlatans in charge I really have no confidence in them to do the right (or even legal) thing.2 -
@secretsquirrel1 Thanks for that - I will watch that 😊
1 -
thank you for your recommendations . They’ve given me some peace of mind for now . Let’s hope they’re right 🙏🤞
0 -
This is interesting, what news is publishing the info that they are thinking of safeguarding the vulnerable ?
0 -
you’re welcome. They’ve given were recommended to us by snuggles65. Fingers crossed they’re right .
2