Disability assessment and the Tory government.

[--------]

ATOS - privatised disability benefit assessment in the 21st century
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22991447

http://ww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-22718700

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22561006


Could folks please take a few minutes to check out these links and then seriously consider signing the petition at THIS link?

It was passed on to me by a colleague who's a TA padre concerned about the way ATOS is working. After looking at those BBC reports, i can see why.

Grateful for any help. folks.

http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapA...s_dialog_false (http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapAQESCj2jImM2sqgo5RoRVpABsioS1XI0e9bbLw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.change.org%2Fpetitions%2Fdepartm ent-of-work-and-pensions-hold-a-public-enquiry-into-deaths-after-atos-medicals%3Fshare_id%3DGiUNWUgXro%26utm_campaign%3D friend_inviter_chat%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook%26utm_ source%3Dshare_petition%26utm_term%3Dpermissions_d ialog_false)

[Betty Boop]

ATOS - privatised disability benefit assessment in the 21st century


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22991447

http://ww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-22718700

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22561006


Could folks please take a few minutes to check out these links and then seriously consider signing the petition at THIS link?

It was passed on to me by a colleague who's a TA padre concerned about the way ATOS is working. After looking at those BBC reports, i can see why.

Grateful for any help. folks.

http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapA...s_dialog_false (http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapAQESCj2jImM2sqgo5RoRVpABsioS1XI0e9bbLw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.change.org%2Fpetitions%2Fdepartm ent-of-work-and-pensions-hold-a-public-enquiry-into-deaths-after-atos-medicals%3Fshare_id%3DGiUNWUgXro%26utm_campaign%3D friend_inviter_chat%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook%26utm_ source%3Dshare_petition%26utm_term%3Dpermissions_d ialog_false)

A disgusting form of social cleansing Doddie, have a look at the Atos victims group, some real horror stories.

http://atosvictimsgroup.co.uk/2013/01/31/ex-atos-nurse-reveals-the-real-inside-story/

[--------]

A disgusting form of social cleansing Doddie, have a look at the Atos victims group, some real horror stories.

http://atosvictimsgroup.co.uk/2013/01/31/ex-atos-nurse-reveals-the-real-inside-story/


Yup. First up against the wall when the revolution comes. :grr:

[Pretty Boy]

Duly signed.

A family member of mine in the early stages of a degenerative mental illness had a 'meeting' with these jokers.

The whole thing was a textbook case of bullying, intimidation amd shamelessly confusing a vulnerable person. I'm glad I was there or I dread to think what may have happened.

Still quite impressed with myself that I managed to resist hitting the *****.

[steakbake]

Someone forgot to include those contemptable cretins, the LibDems. They shouldn't be let off the hook...

[lyonhibs]

An appalling, appalling organisation. Any political party wanting to really tap into the thinly veiled well of hatred for the LibCon pisstake that runs our country at the moment should be hauling them over the coals good and proper at every opportunity about this.

Edit: Duly signed and shared. I usually do not give two flying figs about politics, but this is different

[hibsbollah]

I like to give the Tory coalition a kicking as much as the next man, but this has been going on for years. The workplace capability assessments for Incapacity Benefit (the forerunner to the ESA) were equally as unfair and left thousands of disabled and ill people destitute, even under the last Labour Govt.

Hammering the mythical 'scroungers' is popular with the voters, because of years of misinformation from the Tory press. Hopefully the message is starting to get out there that the implication of these policies is cancer sufferers unable to buy food or heat their homes in the winter.

[lapsedhibee]

I like to give the Tory coalition a kicking as much as the next man, but this has been going on for years. The workplace capability assessments for Incapacity Benefit (the forerunner to the ESA) were equally as unfair and left thousands of disabled and ill people destitute, even under the last Labour Govt.

Hammering the mythical 'scroungers' is popular with the voters, because of years of misinformation from the Tory press. Hopefully the message is starting to get out there that the implication of these policies is cancer sufferers unable to buy food or heat their homes in the winter.

Different category of benefit claimant, I know, but in today's i there's a quote from a single mother about the disgraceful treatment she received at the hands of authorities:
'They put me in a one-bed flat with no double glazing'

I wouldn't be bandying the word 'scrounger' about, but am occasionally simply staggered by the sense of entitlement which has been adopted as the norm in some sectors. The very idea, that anyone might be expected to live in accommodation with single glazing! :crazy:

[hibsbollah]

Different category of benefit claimant, I know, but in today's i there's a quote from a single mother about the disgraceful treatment she received at the hands of authorities:
'They put me in a one-bed flat with no double glazing'

I wouldn't be bandying the word 'scrounger' about, but am occasionally simply staggered by the sense of entitlement which has been adopted as the norm in some sectors. The very idea, that anyone might be expected to live in accommodation with single glazing! :crazy:

A bit of a cheeky quote from the single mother. But a damn sight less cheeky than some of the chutzpah from the likes of google and starbucks, who 'voluntarily' handed over cheques to the tax man last month pointing to their 'corporate responsibility' after being outed as stealing tens of millions from the taxman over many years. The Daily Mail and the Express have been a bit quieter on this topic. The expectation that the rich can avoid paying tax is the REAL culture of 'entitlement' in the UK. There is also no comparison in terms of relative scale, the stats are below, cost of benefits fraud: £2.4billion ish (not including £1billion UNclaimed tax credits and other benefits). Total Cost of Tax Avoidance and Evasion: in excess of £100 Billion.

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6348/economics/cost-of-benefit-fraud-v-tax-evasion-in-uk/

In terms of national budgets, a net cost of £1.4billion is a drop in the ocean. A big hospital or a few days of Afghanistan deployments. But the way its reported youd thnk benefits cheats are the cause of the deficit :hilarious Laughable.
But instead of dealing with the real problem, we're fighting the deficit by ****ing over the disabled instead. :aok:

[RyeSloan]

A bit of a cheeky quote from the single mother. But a damn sight less cheeky than some of the chutzpah from the likes of google and starbucks, who 'voluntarily' handed over cheques to the tax man last month pointing to their 'corporate responsibility' after being outed as stealing tens of millions from the taxman over many years. The Daily Mail and the Express have been a bit quieter on this topic. The expectation that the rich can avoid paying tax is the REAL culture of 'entitlement' in the UK. There is also no comparison in terms of relative scale, the stats are below, cost of benefits fraud: £2.4billion ish (not including £1billion UNclaimed tax credits and other benefits). Total Cost of Tax Avoidance and Evasion: in excess of £100 Billion.

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6348/economics/cost-of-benefit-fraud-v-tax-evasion-in-uk/

In terms of national budgets, a net cost of £1.4billion is a drop in the ocean. A big hospital or a few days of Afghanistan deployments. But the way its reported youd thnk benefits cheats are the cause of the deficit :hilarious Laughable.
But instead of dealing with the real problem, we're fighting the deficit by ****ing over the disabled instead. :aok:

Stealing is a crime. Any indication that google or Starbucks have committed a crime in the UK?

The main tool these companies use is the redirection of where they register the revenues if their business....a practice that is completely legal and is compliant with the laws the tax authorities themselves put in place.

Also to try and paint businesses like amazon, google and Starbucks who provide thousands of jobs and will through other taxation pay millions if not billions to the treasury as the same, or indeed lower, than benefit cheats is just daft.

The MSM are a bit fascinated with 'benefits' but trying to frame the discussion around the welfare bill by quoting £1.4bn as the excess cost is hardly painting an accurate picture...welfare spending is around £60bn, add on pensions and you get to about £200bn. Seems a wee bit strange to me that there can't be a discussion about how this money is spent and if its a sustainable cost without it bring turned into a debate about levels of corporation tax paid by multinationals.

None the less I agree 100% re the new disability tests...they seem designed to test for severe physical disability only and are clearly unfit for purpose.

[lapsedhibee]

A bit of a cheeky quote from the single mother. But a damn sight less cheeky than some of the chutzpah from the likes of google and starbucks, who 'voluntarily' handed over cheques to the tax man last month pointing to their 'corporate responsibility' after being outed as stealing tens of millions from the taxman over many years.

Bonkers Prince Charlie should be in that list too, though his reps haven't admitted any responsibility yet.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/senior-aide-william-nye-defends-prince-charles-over-taxexempt-status-for-duchy-of-cornwall-estate-8710049.html

[hibsbollah]

Stealing is a crime. Any indication that google or Starbucks have committed a crime in the UK?

The main tool these companies use is the redirection of where they register the revenues if their business....a practice that is completely legal and is compliant with the laws the tax authorities themselves put in place.

Also to try and paint businesses like amazon, google and Starbucks who provide thousands of jobs and will through other taxation pay millions if not billions to the treasury as the same, or indeed lower, than benefit cheats is just daft.

The MSM are a bit fascinated with 'benefits' but trying to frame the discussion around the welfare bill by quoting £1.4bn as the excess cost is hardly painting an accurate picture...welfare spending is around £60bn, add on pensions and you get to about £200bn. Seems a wee bit strange to me that there can't be a discussion about how this money is spent and if its a sustainable cost without it bring turned into a debate about levels of corporation tax paid by multinationals.

None the less I agree 100% re the new disability tests...they seem designed to test for severe physical disability only and are clearly unfit for purpose.

Frankly, if you don't think that the flagrant tax avoidance thats been uncovered by the companies named can be called 'stealing', then nothing can. Whether anyone brings a prosecution is another matter.

Call it daft if you like, but I do consider it worse. For a lot of reasons. The scale of the theft involved and the degree of need vs greed for starters. And 'providing jobs' is hardly a defence for tax avoidance, is it?

Of course there 'can be a debate' about welfare fraud. There is more than a debate, there is a concerted daily campaign against welfare fraud being waged by the newspapers for months now. It's a natural response to ask the question Why?

I don't like thread hijacking normally, but when the subject is the state of the public purse then welfare fraud and tax fraud are essentially the same thing. It's just one is a drop in the ocean and one is the Pacific, or something else big and wet and ocean like.

[CropleyWasGod]

Frankly, if you don't think that the flagrant tax avoidance thats been uncovered by the companies named can be called 'stealing', then nothing can. Whether anyone brings a prosecution is another matter.

Call it daft if you like, but I do consider it worse. For a lot of reasons. The scale of the theft involved and the degree of need vs greed for starters. And 'providing jobs' is hardly a defence for tax avoidance, is it?

Of course there 'can be a debate' about welfare fraud. There is more than a debate, there is a concerted daily campaign against welfare fraud being waged by the newspapers for months now. It's a natural response to ask the question Why?

Very unlikely, given that (thus far) there is no evidence of any laws having been broken.

My anger, as ever in these situations, is directed at those who make the laws in the first place.

[Jack]

Stealing is a crime. Any indication that google or Starbucks have committed a crime in the UK?

The main tool these companies use is the redirection of where they register the revenues if their business....a practice that is completely legal and is compliant with the laws the tax authorities themselves put in place.

Also to try and paint businesses like amazon, google and Starbucks who provide thousands of jobs and will through other taxation pay millions if not billions to the treasury as the same, or indeed lower, than benefit cheats is just daft.

The MSM are a bit fascinated with 'benefits' but trying to frame the discussion around the welfare bill by quoting £1.4bn as the excess cost is hardly painting an accurate picture...welfare spending is around £60bn, add on pensions and you get to about £200bn. Seems a wee bit strange to me that there can't be a discussion about how this money is spent and if its a sustainable cost without it bring turned into a debate about levels of corporation tax paid by multinationals.

None the less I agree 100% re the new disability tests...they seem designed to test for severe physical disability only and are clearly unfit for purpose.

I'd be interested to see where you got your welfare stats from. The old guy that does the Apprentice was on the telly last night saying benefits only made up 10% of the welfare budget.

To my mind the benefit fraud even at a ridiculous level of that 10% could hardly be very much, but still millions and no excuse for it happening.

I smiled at your attempt to explain the taxes and the like paid on behalf of employees of the mega companies as this somehow absolving the companies themselves from paying tax on the profits they earn in this country. Exactly the same excuse Mad Vlad gave when Hearts got caught fiddling their taxes.

[Beefster]

Frankly, if you don't think that the flagrant tax avoidance thats been uncovered by the companies named can be called 'stealing', then nothing can. Whether anyone brings a prosecution is another matter.

Call it daft if you like, but I do consider it worse. For a lot of reasons. The scale of the theft involved and the degree of need vs greed for starters. And 'providing jobs' is hardly a defence for tax avoidance, is it?

Of course there 'can be a debate' about welfare fraud. There is more than a debate, there is a concerted daily campaign against welfare fraud being waged by the newspapers for months now. It's a natural response to ask the question Why?

I don't like thread hijacking normally, but when the subject is the state of the public purse then welfare fraud and tax fraud are essentially the same thing. It's just one is a drop in the ocean and one is the Pacific, or something else big and wet and ocean like.

The vast majority of the population avoid tax by some method. Cash-in-hand, ISAs, pension contributions, CGT, putting money in child saving accounts, Gift Aid, Childcare vouchers and lots more.

If the politicians have a problem with how people/companies reduce their tax bill, within the law, they have the power to change it.

PS. I can't comment on Atos at the moment but since both of my parents are due to be reassessed for DLA at some point soon, I'll have an opinion after that.

[hibsbollah]

The vast majority of the population avoid tax by some method. Cash-in-hand, ISAs, pension contributions, CGT, putting money in child saving accounts, Gift Aid, Childcare vouchers and lots more.

If the politicians have a problem with how people/companies reduce their tax bill, within the law, they have the power to change it.

PS. I can't comment on Atos at the moment but since both of my parents are due to be reassessed for DLA at some point soon, I'll have an opinion after that.

Are your parents over 65? If not, DLA has been withdrawn to be replaced by a single 'independence' payment.

[Beefster]

Are your parents over 65? If not, DLA has been withdrawn to be replaced by a single 'independence' payment.

Both of them turn 65 next year. Right enough, I seem to remember them saying something about 'PIP'. That will probably explain why they're being reassessed despite being both on 'indefinite' DLA.

[hibsbollah]

Both of them turn 65 next year. Right enough, I seem to remember them saying something about 'PIP'. That will probably explain why they're being reassessed despite being both on 'indefinite' DLA.

There will be a lot at stake at that meeting then. I recommend you get advice from a welfare rights officer or similar, get a letter from their doctor and make sure they are accompanied by a witness at the meeting. Theres been some horror stories about manipulative questioning recently :aok:

[speedy_gonzales]

The old guy that does the Apprentice was on the telly last night saying benefits only made up 10% of the welfare budget
.
I'll try and find the exact quote, but from memory the 10% does not include disability, housing, tax credits, child benefit etc, it was purely unemployment benefit. Add in the rest and it is a LOT more than 10%. There is a significant percentage of claimants that claim more than one type of benefit!

[Beefster]

There will be a lot at stake at that meeting then. I recommend you get advice from a welfare rights officer or similar, get a letter from their doctor and make sure they are accompanied by a witness at the meeting. Theres been some horror stories about manipulative questioning recently :aok:

Thanks HB. I'll speak to them to find out exactly what's happening with it and take it from there. It should be fairly evident from looking at them and the way they move (or don't) that they need the extra assistance they get but you never know when there are targets to be met.

[cabbageandribs1875]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/mum-of-three-elenore-told-find-job-2074333


Her dad Ian said: “Even though she told the ATOS assessor that she had the brain tumour, they started the process to get her back into work.
“She was going to appeal but then she became unwell and was admitted to the Western General.
“After two weeks we were told there was nothing they could do for her. She died at St Columba’s Hospice



wouldn't surprise me if the added extra stress played a part in her death, her boyfriend doesn't exactly have great health either

[lapsedhibee]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/mum-of-three-elenore-told-find-job-2074333


Her dad Ian said: “Even though she told the ATOS assessor that she had the brain tumour, they started the process to get her back into work.
“She was going to appeal but then she became unwell and was admitted to the Western General.
“After two weeks we were told there was nothing they could do for her. She died at St Columba’s Hospice



wouldn't surprise me if the added extra stress played a part in her death, her boyfriend doesn't exactly have great health either

“She would take absences where she would just glaze over as if she wasn’t there. It could happen anytime, there was no warning.

“She had epilepsy as well. She was never capable of working.

“She would have annual scans and had been on benefits for years because the tumour did affect her greatly.

“When she was operated on we were told she would either be fine, severely brain damaged or somewhere in between. She ended up somewhere in between.

An evil Tory might wonder why she went on to have three children if she was somewhere in between severely brain damaged and fine (ie, brain damaged)? If you are not at any time in your adult life capable of doing any work whatsoever, how on earth are you capable of bringing up children (Kate Middleton excepted)? Think that report is probably grist to IDS's mill.

[HKhibby]

ATOS - privatised disability benefit assessment in the 21st century


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22991447

http://ww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-22718700

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22561006


Could folks please take a few minutes to check out these links and then seriously consider signing the petition at THIS link?

It was passed on to me by a colleague who's a TA padre concerned about the way ATOS is working. After looking at those BBC reports, i can see why.

Grateful for any help. folks.

http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapA...s_dialog_false (http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapAQESCj2jImM2sqgo5RoRVpABsioS1XI0e9bbLw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.change.org%2Fpetitions%2Fdepartm ent-of-work-and-pensions-hold-a-public-enquiry-into-deaths-after-atos-medicals%3Fshare_id%3DGiUNWUgXro%26utm_campaign%3D friend_inviter_chat%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook%26utm_ source%3Dshare_petition%26utm_term%3Dpermissions_d ialog_false)


If any luck it might root out the work shy and skiving brigade that is the UK!...welfare this...welfare that! ETC... ETC...make them do a day's work for a change! and then and only then you might discourage the East European cowbay builders etc.. from coming over to your country and taking away jobs! and taking the welfare system that is so apparent in the UK!

[Jack]

If any luck it might root out the work shy and skiving brigade that is the UK!...welfare this...welfare that! ETC... ETC...make them do a day's work for a change! and then and only then you might discourage the East European cowbay builders etc.. from coming over to your country and taking away jobs! and taking the welfare system that is so apparent in the UK!

Would you like to check your facts and report back?

I can spot 9 statements there that are no more than bigoted, unfounded, misleading drivel.

[CropleyWasGod]

If any luck it might root out the work shy and skiving brigade that is the UK!...welfare this...welfare that! ETC... ETC...make them do a day's work for a change! and then and only then you might discourage the East European cowbay builders etc.. from coming over to your country and taking away jobs! and taking the welfare system that is so apparent in the UK!

Ducks. Row. BANG.

[Beefster]

her boyfriend doesn't exactly have great health either

Obviously it's difficult to get the guy's full circumstances from a newspaper article but none of the things he's described as suffering from are an automatic basis for not working. There are plenty of folk with diabetes and/or bits of their bowel removed that work full-time.

[Twa Cairpets]

If any luck it might root out the work shy and skiving brigade that is the UK!...welfare this...welfare that! ETC... ETC...make them do a day's work for a change! and then and only then you might discourage the East European cowbay builders etc.. from coming over to your country and taking away jobs! and taking the welfare system that is so apparent in the UK!

Seriously - do you understudy for that guy in "scanners"?

You seem desperately, head-explodingly angry and bitter about stuff that hasn't affected you for seemingly 30 odd years. You are woefully uninformed about almost every point you make (if the word "point" doesn't give credibility to the ceaseless, endless, sputum-spluttering drivel you consistently come out with).

We get that you hate the uk. We get that you hate Scotland in particular. I don't know why, and I don't care what undoubtedly stupid reason you have for such passionate loathing, but such bile filled ranting without any evidence or with such broad sweeping generalisations is just that - ranting.

Life where you are may just be the bees knees, and I'm happy for you, but it certainly is not conducive to any type of debating sense.

[--------]

If any luck it might root out the work shy and skiving brigade that is the UK!...welfare this...welfare that! ETC... ETC...make them do a day's work for a change! and then and only then you might discourage the East European cowbay builders etc.. from coming over to your country and taking away jobs! and taking the welfare system that is so apparent in the UK!


You patently have no clue as to what my original request was about. Nor do you have any clue about the reason of purpose for the petition.

Since you clearly don't live in the UK, I would suggest that this thread doesn't concern you.

If you're serious - and I'm very afraid you ARE serious - you appear to be a badly-mutated cross between Colonel Bludnok and Sir Oswald Mosley, and you should be pickled in formaldehyde and placed in a big glass jar in a museum with all the other dinosaurs.

[Jonnyboy]

If any luck it might root out the work shy and skiving brigade that is the UK!...welfare this...welfare that! ETC... ETC...make them do a day's work for a change! and then and only then you might discourage the East European cowbay builders etc.. from coming over to your country and taking away jobs! and taking the welfare system that is so apparent in the UK!

Seeing as how you are an immigrant and have decided to abandon the UK I suggest you shut the **** up as nobody on here has any interest in any of you bigoted nonsensical drivel

[Jonnyboy]

Seriously - do you understudy for that guy in "scanners"?

You seem desperately, head-explodingly angry and bitter about stuff that hasn't affected you for seemingly 30 odd years. You are woefully uninformed about almost every point you make (if the word "point" doesn't give credibility to the ceaseless, endless, sputum-spluttering drivel you consistently come out with).

We get that you hate the uk. We get that you hate Scotland in particular. I don't know why, and I don't care what undoubtedly stupid reason you have for such passionate loathing, but such bile filled ranting without any evidence or with such broad sweeping generalisations is just that - ranting.

Life where you are may just be the bees knees, and I'm happy for you, but it certainly is not conducive to any type of debating sense.

Ironic isn't it TC that the blowhard has deprived some Hong Kong resident of a job.

[cabbageandribs1875]

“She would take absences where she would just glaze over as if she wasn’t there. It could happen anytime, there was no warning.

“She had epilepsy as well. She was never capable of working.

“She would have annual scans and had been on benefits for years because the tumour did affect her greatly.

“When she was operated on we were told she would either be fine, severely brain damaged or somewhere in between. She ended up somewhere in between.

An evil Tory might wonder why she went on to have three children if she was somewhere in between severely brain damaged and fine (ie, brain damaged)? If you are not at any time in your adult life capable of doing any work whatsoever, how on earth are you capable of bringing up children (Kate Middleton excepted)? Think that report is probably grist to IDS's mill.


:greengrin i noticed that article this morning and thought i would put it on here after reading this thread the other day, i didn't put it up as a means of bashing any tories etc etc(or any other party), merely just to show how very unfair it must be for people with pretty serious health issues starting to get all the added stress that financial reductions would bring, i do agree with your points re having kids though.




Obviously it's difficult to get the guy's full circumstances from a newspaper article but none of the things he's described as suffering from are an automatic basis for not working. There are plenty of folk with diabetes and/or bits of their bowel removed that work full-time.


yeah i know, but one thing i certainly can relate to is the guys diabetes although the article doesn't say if it's type1 or type2, if it's type1 one then he really doesn't have his troubles to seek with all else that he's having to contend with, my type1 caused me a whole lot of probs when i worked 12-hour shift patterns, with the sugar levels all over the place, but your right it shouldn't stop him doing at the very least some kind of Menial work :agree:

[Twa Cairpets]

Ironic isn't it TC that the blowhard has deprived some Hong Kong resident of a job.

I suspect the operation to remove his irony gland worked a treat.

[Just Alf]

Re the Having kids bit.... I guess she'll have had help from friends and family, not sure what levels of support you'd get in a (paying) job? ..... There'd be some I guess?

[Silky]

ATOS - privatised disability benefit assessment in the 21st century
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22991447

http://ww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-22718700

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22561006


Could folks please take a few minutes to check out these links and then seriously consider signing the petition at THIS link?

It was passed on to me by a colleague who's a TA padre concerned about the way ATOS is working. After looking at those BBC reports, i can see why.

Grateful for any help. folks.

http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapA...s_dialog_false (http://www.facebook.com/l/PAQFkRrapAQESCj2jImM2sqgo5RoRVpABsioS1XI0e9bbLw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.change.org%2Fpetitions%2Fdepartm ent-of-work-and-pensions-hold-a-public-enquiry-into-deaths-after-atos-medicals%3Fshare_id%3DGiUNWUgXro%26utm_campaign%3D friend_inviter_chat%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook%26utm_ source%3Dshare_petition%26utm_term%3Dpermissions_d ialog_false)


Signed it, Doddie.

This is something I see everyday (I'm a Welfare Rights Officer) and it is a national scandal. It's disgusting and a complete waste of taxpayers money. If these assessments are any reflection on the "practitioners" (and I use that word loosely) undertaking them, then it is no wonder they can't get work in the NHS!

[DH1875]

Without getting into it and having an argument with everyone, there ARE 100s if not thousands of cases ripping the piss out of it. I genuinely feel sorry for those who are losing out but maybe if there weren't so many taking the P it wouldn't be an issue.

[Jonnyboy]

Without getting into it and having an argument with everyone, there ARE 100s if not thousands of cases ripping the piss out of it. I genuinely feel sorry for those who are losing out but maybe if there weren't so many taking the P it wouldn't be an issue.

Again, without getting into an argument, can you tell me the source of that information? I mean a genuine study, as opposed to an urban myth :wink:

[DH1875]

Again, without getting into an argument, can you tell me the source of that information? I mean a genuine study, as opposed to an urban myth :wink:


Urban myth? I could genuinely take you right now and point out loads of people who claim DLA/sick pay and they should be nowhere near it. I can think off at least 50+ people I know who are screwing the system and I promise you, it ain't no exaggeration :bitchy:.

[hibsbollah]

Urban myth? I could genuinely take you right now and point out loads of people who claim DLA/sick pay and they should be nowhere near it. I can think off at least 50+ people I know who are screwing the system and I promise you, it ain't no exaggeration :bitchy:.

You know over fifty people that are fraudulently claiming disability related benefits? :bitchy: Even as a NY Jets fan that is very surprising :greengrin
I refer to you back to the stat of £1.4billion net fraud across ALL benefits in the UK.

[Jack]

Urban myth? I could genuinely take you right now and point out loads of people who claim DLA/sick pay and they should be nowhere near it. I can think off at least 50+ people I know who are screwing the system and I promise you, it ain't no exaggeration :bitchy:.

Are you then not part of the problem by not reporting your suspicions to the proper authorities?

I understand this can be done anonymously and there may even be a reward but I'm not certain about that.

[DH1875]

You know over fifty people that are fraudulently claiming disability related benefits? :bitchy: Even as a NY Jets fan that is very surprising :greengrin
I refer to you back to the stat of £1.4billion net fraud across ALL benefits in the UK.

Thing is, I'm not exaggerating. Don't know if it's a society thing or just where I live but everybody seems to be doing it. I know whole families that are screwing the system and the really stupid thing is that as well as getting their own DLA they all get it TWICE as they are each others carers :confused:.


Are you then not part of the problem by not reporting your suspicions to the proper authorities?

I understand this can be done anonymously and there may even be a reward but I'm not certain about that.

It's not suspicions, it's fact. These people aren't shy about it and don't try to hide it. Some of them are close friends and family so as much as it annoy's me, there's no chance of me grassing on them. That's just not cricket :tsk tsk:. I'm also not going to divulge the details on an open forum but trust me, some of the stories are totally flabbergasting.

[Jonnyboy]

Urban myth? I could genuinely take you right now and point out loads of people who claim DLA/sick pay and they should be nowhere near it. I can think off at least 50+ people I know who are screwing the system and I promise you, it ain't no exaggeration :bitchy:.

Shop them then. If it's your family you think it's ok to screw the system

Double standards

[Killiehibbie]

Urban myth? I could genuinely take you right now and point out loads of people who claim DLA/sick pay and they should be nowhere near it. I can think off at least 50+ people I know who are screwing the system and I promise you, it ain't no exaggeration :bitchy:.It seems to be a career choice for quite a few people. Can't remember the figures but Glasgow had a very high percentage of people deemed unfit for work and I bet quite a few of them are at it.

[Hibrandenburg]

Thing is, I'm not exaggerating. Don't know if it's a society thing or just where I live but everybody seems to be doing it. I know whole families that are screwing the system and the really stupid thing is that as well as getting their own DLA they all get it TWICE as they are each others carers :confused:.



It's not suspicions, it's fact. These people aren't shy about it and don't try to hide it. Some of them are close friends and family so as much as it annoy's me, there's no chance of me grassing on them. That's just not cricket :tsk tsk:. I'm also not going to divulge the details on an open forum but trust me, some of the stories are totally flabbergasting.

You can't really moan about it if you're not willing to do anything about it. People need to get their own house in order before criticising others.

[Jonnyboy]

You can't really moan about it if you're not willing to do anything about it. People need to get their own house in order before criticising others.

:agree:

[Scouse Hibee]

Without getting into it and having an argument with everyone, there ARE 100s if not thousands of cases ripping the piss out of it. I genuinely feel sorry for those who are losing out but maybe if there weren't so many taking the P it wouldn't be an issue.


You say you genuinely feel sorry for those who are losing out and it wouldn't be so bad if so many weren't taking the pish then you clearly admit that family members are it and you choose to do nothing about it! I think you are the one taking the pish!

[DH1875]

You say you genuinely feel sorry for those who are losing out and it wouldn't be so bad if so many weren't taking the pish then you clearly admit that family members are it and you choose to do nothing about it! I think you are the one taking the pish!


:yawn2::yawn2::yawn2:.

So I'm talking pish because I won't report family or friends :applause:. It does annoy me and it is a joke but like Killie said, it seems to be some sort of life choice here. It's not like these people try to hide it and they play the system to their gain.

[Scouse Hibee]

:yawn2::yawn2::yawn2:.

So I'm talking pish because I won't report family or friends :applause:. It does annoy me and it is a joke but like Killie said, it seems to be some sort of life choice here. It's not like these people try to hide it and they play the system to their gain.


Yawn all you like ****** pathetic.

[Jonnyboy]

:yawn2::yawn2::yawn2:.

So I'm talking pish because I won't report family or friends :applause:. It does annoy me and it is a joke but like Killie said, it seems to be some sort of life choice here. It's not like these people try to hide it and they play the system to their gain.

So, the 50+ are either family or friends. Sorry but I simply don't believe you. Seems to me you've formed a view based on a small sample and multiplied it up to encompass the whole of society

[RyeSloan]

So, the 50+ are either family or friends. Sorry but I simply don't believe you. Seems to me you've formed a view based on a small sample and multiplied it up to encompass the whole of society

Which may be true but its his experience.

Throughout my life I've know many many people that have scammed the benefits system one way or the other...my personal experience would also suggest that it is wayy more widespread than any official figures suggest.

As for insisting the poster should grass up or shut up, I don't agree. The system should made much more robust to prevent fraud and multiple claims not rely on family members calling a hot line to report each other. It's not him perpetuating the fraud nor him responsible for administering the system.

[HKhibby]

Would you like to check your facts and report back?

I can spot 9 statements there that are no more than bigoted, unfounded, misleading drivel.

The truth hurts does it not?...tell me how bigoted?...tell me the 9 statements?...tell me the misleading?...certainly not drivel!, try doing your research and looking at the wider picture other than the Scottish Labour / SNP drivel that comes out of there week in and week out, i have lived away from the UK for a long time now, but was over in London working only just 3 years ago or so, and lived right next to Heathrow Airport, where there are a large amount of east europeans living, ask the locals about the crime levels going up and up!...they will tell you about it and who it is.

-ask the locals around there why the local builders have all been undercut and they have gone to the wall?...there is the cowboy builders part!

-ask why there was a high dependency on welfare in the whole area (including nearby Hounslow), the answer so many single parents etc.. and more to the point two reasons!...(1) all the welfare to work etc...etc...etc..benefits that good old Mr Blair and Mr Brown brought in, the locals prefer not to work!
(2) as spoken to me by a Polish worker in a bar living in the area...just before Poland joined the good old EU!...there were websites and big adverts in the job market stating get to the UK you can claim this and that and legally send it back home!!
_but then again the party in Red were in Government then and predicted did they not a few thousand workers would go to the UK?
-Bigoted am i?...maybe in the definition of Scotland!, i live in Asia and married to an Asian, with proper Immigration controls where people have to earn a living and earn residence after so long etc..and certainly do not rely on Government hand outs!...but then again going back to the original word Bigoted!...yes you should certainly no about that in Scotland!

[hibsbollah]

The truth hurts does it not?...tell me how bigoted?...tell me the 9 statements?...tell me the misleading?...certainly not drivel!, try doing your research and looking at the wider picture other than the Scottish Labour / SNP drivel that comes out of there week in and week out, i have lived away from the UK for a long time now, but was over in London working only just 3 years ago or so, and lived right next to Heathrow Airport, where there are a large amount of east europeans living, ask the locals about the crime levels going up and up!...they will tell you about it and who it is.

-ask the locals around there why the local builders have all been undercut and they have gone to the wall?...there is the cowboy builders part!

-ask why there was a high dependency on welfare in the whole area (including nearby Hounslow), the answer so many single parents etc.. and more to the point two reasons!...(1) all the welfare to work etc...etc...etc..benefits that good old Mr Blair and Mr Brown brought in, the locals prefer not to work!
(2) as spoken to me by a Polish worker in a bar living in the area...just before Poland joined the good old EU!...there were websites and big adverts in the job market stating get to the UK you can claim this and that and legally send it back home!!
_but then again the party in Red were in Government then and predicted did they not a few thousand workers would go to the UK?
-Bigoted am i?...maybe in the definition of Scotland!, i live in Asia and married to an Asian, with proper Immigration controls where people have to earn a living and earn residence after so long etc..and certainly do not rely on Government hand outs!...but then again going back to the original word Bigoted!...yes you should certainly no about that in Scotland!

:thumbsup: Great stuff, its been too long.

[Jonnyboy]

Which may be true but its his experience.

Throughout my life I've know many many people that have scammed the benefits system one way or the other...my personal experience would also suggest that it is wayy more widespread than any official figures suggest.

As for insisting the poster should grass up or shut up, I don't agree. The system should made much more robust to prevent fraud and multiple claims not rely on family members calling a hot line to report each other. It's not him perpetuating the fraud nor him responsible for administering the system.

All fair points, well made.

I guess I'm sensitive to this issue as I have a member of my family in receipt of DLA. It bugs me when people generalise because it's as though they are saying everyone is at it when clearly they are not.

[RyeSloan]

All fair points, well made.

I guess I'm sensitive to this issue as I have a member of my family in receipt of DLA. It bugs me when people generalise because it's as though they are saying everyone is at it when clearly they are not.

Oh indeed there are many people who rely on these benefits through no fault of their own and I too know someone who needs that support that is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum from the scammers. Totally understand your frustration when anyone and everyone receiving government help is portrayed as some sort of sponger

The sad thing is though is that we could be supporting those people so much better if the system had not been so wide open for abuse or indeed so wide that money is scattered around too large a percentage of the population.

It's not only fraud that's the issue, 'benefits' like working tax credit are a joke. Why the government sees it as a requirement to subsidise private employers wages I have no idea. They already have the required tool in the minimum wage yet instead of setting that at the correct level they top it up with tax credits...bizzare.

[Twa Cairpets]

The truth hurts does it not?...tell me how bigoted?...tell me the 9 statements?...tell me the misleading?...certainly not drivel!, try doing your research and looking at the wider picture other than the Scottish Labour / SNP drivel that comes out of there week in and week out, i have lived away from the UK for a long time now, but was over in London working only just 3 years ago or so, and lived right next to Heathrow Airport, where there are a large amount of east europeans living, ask the locals about the crime levels going up and up!...they will tell you about it and who it is.

-ask the locals around there why the local builders have all been undercut and they have gone to the wall?...there is the cowboy builders part!

-ask why there was a high dependency on welfare in the whole area (including nearby Hounslow), the answer so many single parents etc.. and more to the point two reasons!...(1) all the welfare to work etc...etc...etc..benefits that good old Mr Blair and Mr Brown brought in, the locals prefer not to work!
(2) as spoken to me by a Polish worker in a bar living in the area...just before Poland joined the good old EU!...there were websites and big adverts in the job market stating get to the UK you can claim this and that and legally send it back home!!
_but then again the party in Red were in Government then and predicted did they not a few thousand workers would go to the UK?
-Bigoted am i?...maybe in the definition of Scotland!, i live in Asia and married to an Asian, with proper Immigration controls where people have to earn a living and earn residence after so long etc..and certainly do not rely on Government hand outs!...but then again going back to the original word Bigoted!...yes you should certainly no about that in Scotland!

17 ellipses
12 exclamation marks
4 bits of hearsay reported as evidence
0 bits of actual evidence

A good, solid effort from our resident expat bigoted loon.

[yeezus.]

Does anyone know what role ATOS play in helping people look for work? A friend said they found him his job and were more helpful than the Job centre which wouldn't be hard I guess...

[Jack]

17 ellipses
12 exclamation marks
4 bits of hearsay reported as evidence
0 bits of actual evidence

A good, solid effort from our resident expat bigoted loon.

I read it and didn't think it worthy of a reply.

I admire your effort with the analysis. It will be way over his head so I doubt any future posts will include anything worthy of debate or factual.

[Scouse Hibee]

The truth hurts does it not?...tell me how bigoted?...tell me the 9 statements?...tell me the misleading?...certainly not drivel!, try doing your research and looking at the wider picture other than the Scottish Labour / SNP drivel that comes out of there week in and week out, i have lived away from the UK for a long time now, but was over in London working only just 3 years ago or so, and lived right next to Heathrow Airport, where there are a large amount of east europeans living, ask the locals about the crime levels going up and up!...they will tell you about it and who it is.

-ask the locals around there why the local builders have all been undercut and they have gone to the wall?...there is the cowboy builders part!

-ask why there was a high dependency on welfare in the whole area (including nearby Hounslow), the answer so many single parents etc.. and more to the point two reasons!...(1) all the welfare to work etc...etc...etc..benefits that good old Mr Blair and Mr Brown brought in, the locals prefer not to work!
(2) as spoken to me by a Polish worker in a bar living in the area...just before Poland joined the good old EU!...there were websites and big adverts in the job market stating get to the UK you can claim this and that and legally send it back home!!
_but then again the party in Red were in Government then and predicted did they not a few thousand workers would go to the UK?
-Bigoted am i?...maybe in the definition of Scotland!, i live in Asia and married to an Asian, with proper Immigration controls where people have to earn a living and earn residence after so long etc..and certainly do not rely on Government hand outs!...but then again going back to the original word Bigoted!...yes you should certainly no about that in Scotland!

So what?

[Twa Cairpets]

I read it and didn't think it worthy of a reply.

I admire your effort with the analysis. It will be way over his head so I doubt any future posts will include anything worthy of debate or factual.

I was a little worried, to be fair. His exclamation mark to ellipses ratio has changed with a decrease in the former being balanced by an increase in the latter and I thought that may indicate a change to less hyperbole and more structured thought with joined up concepts and rationality.

Obviously, that's just not the case when you read his words.

I'd just love to know what it is that after years of living away (he's been away for years, if you missed that anywhere in the hundreds of times he's mentioned it), what it is about Scotland and the UK that makes him loathe it with such a passionate, all consuming fervour. It's got be hard work being that permanently furious. It's also interesting to read the views of such an openly unreconstructed bigot with almost no ability to formulate a coherent defence of his position above ranting madly.

[Betty Boop]

Atos has withdrawn from it's Government contract for work capability assessments. Brilliant work by protestors and campaigners in exposing the actions of Atos and the government, hope the thousands of victims get the justice they deserve.

[hibsbollah]

Atos has withdrawn from it's Government contract for work capability assessments. Brilliant work by protestors and campaigners in exposing the actions of Atos and the government, hope the thousands of victims get the justice they deserve.

I suppose it is good news. But its really just another example of coalition government passing the buck to delivery agents. In my opinion, ATOS in itself isnt the problem, its the demonising of an apocryphal 'disability benefit class' by the right wing press, the coalition and from time to time Labour ministers too. Until we accept that EVERYONE, no matter how clever, hard working and successful, can suffer disability and ill health that society has a duty to help, another fraudulent company like ATOS will simply take over the same broken system. The more victims of ATOS, (like the man who worked fulltime and paid his national insurance for thirty years only to contract bowel cancer and be told by assessors to find suitable employment or lose his DLA) that tell their story, the more we will hopefully all understand that we are all in this together, to coin a phrase.

[Betty Boop]

I suppose it is good news. But its really just another example of coalition government passing the buck to delivery agents. In my opinion, ATOS in itself isnt the problem, its the demonising of an apocryphal 'disability benefit class' by the right wing press, the coalition and from time to time Labour ministers too. Until we accept that EVERYONE, no matter how clever, hard working and successful, can suffer disability and ill health that society has a duty to help, another fraudulent company like ATOS will simply take over the same broken system. The more victims of ATOS, (like the man who worked fulltime and paid his national insurance for thirty years only to contract bowel cancer and be told by assessors to find suitable employment or lose his DLA) that tell their story, the more we will hopefully all understand that we are all in this together, to coin a phrase.

Absolutely agree.

[Jonnyboy]

I suppose it is good news. But its really just another example of coalition government passing the buck to delivery agents. In my opinion, ATOS in itself isnt the problem, its the demonising of an apocryphal 'disability benefit class' by the right wing press, the coalition and from time to time Labour ministers too. Until we accept that EVERYONE, no matter how clever, hard working and successful, can suffer disability and ill health that society has a duty to help, another fraudulent company like ATOS will simply take over the same broken system. The more victims of ATOS, (like the man who worked fulltime and paid his national insurance for thirty years only to contract bowel cancer and be told by assessors to find suitable employment or lose his DLA) that tell their story, the more we will hopefully all understand that we are all in this together, to coin a phrase.

Spot on Mr bollah :aok:

[RyeSloan]

I suppose it is good news. But its really just another example of coalition government passing the buck to delivery agents. In my opinion, ATOS in itself isnt the problem, its the demonising of an apocryphal 'disability benefit class' by the right wing press, the coalition and from time to time Labour ministers too. Until we accept that EVERYONE, no matter how clever, hard working and successful, can suffer disability and ill health that society has a duty to help, another fraudulent company like ATOS will simply take over the same broken system. The more victims of ATOS, (like the man who worked fulltime and paid his national insurance for thirty years only to contract bowel cancer and be told by assessors to find suitable employment or lose his DLA) that tell their story, the more we will hopefully all understand that we are all in this together, to coin a phrase.

Too right. Farcical logic behind the 'tests' that were clearly designed to get people to fail them (or should that be pass them..dunno!) to cut the benefit payout.

Absolutely no doubt disability benefit has been abused by claimants and governments alike but to throw the baby out with the bath water when reforming such a crucial lifeline to so many people incapable of working is just sick.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Just a few observations:

- the press, expressing disgust on this issue, are the same papers that have fed the hysteria about bogus claimants.

- it's easy to make insinuations about the reason for a claim being refused when confidentiality stops the other side from responding.

- I'd like the government to demonstrate the net gain from this exercise ( to the public, as opposed to the likes of Atos). Seems to me a costly and bulky process.

- it's out of order to question the morality/ability of nurses involved, they are still covered by the NMC code and still have a duty of care, even when working as disability assessor.

- some people have a vested interest in keeping people ill, and it may be said they have no interest in their recovery, or indeed incentivising or encouraging them to reach their full potential.

- there is no code of practice for those giving out free advice on benefits, they can send claimants on a wild goose chase and there is no come back.

- do people think that alcoholics should be given disability benefit?

- the tests and the way they are interpreted are available online, anybody can scrutinise them and see whether they seem fair or not.

Lots to discuss there, but exploring these issues might give a bit more depth to the debate.

Personally, I think it's right to help others in need. I just think our welfare system encourages people to be sick.

[Phil D. Rolls]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29465976

Some patronising **** from politicians and welfare organisations in this report. All using people with disabilities as weapons to further their own ends. The bit from the SNP spokes is particularly high on emotion and low on any factual content.

A friend working on PIP assessment tells me delays were a combination of crass inefficiency at the DWP end, exacerbated by a deluge of spurious claims from welfare organisations. Crocodile tears from CAB who have been particularly guilty of encouraging people to claim for things which they are not entitled.

[Stranraer]

Started by Labour I believe? They are hypocrites of the highest order.

[Phil D. Rolls]

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/benefits_w/benefits_sick_or_disabled_people_and_carers_ew/benefits_personal_independence_payment_e/benefits_the_pip_assessment_e/pip_activities_descriptors_and_points.htm

Picking up on a point from PB on another thread, this information might help bring clarity to the debate. I feel that opportunistic politicians are sloganising about this, with no real concern for those "effected", or workable alternative to DLA, which is quite frankly a farcical situation.

DLA was largely paid on the basis of a diagnosis. So, for example, everyone with Epilepsy was regarded the same. I use Epilepsy as an example, because there is a massive difference between the person whose fits are predictable and controlled, and those unfortunate enough to have no warning signs and for whom control is difficult to achieve. These two extremes will see massive variation in function and quality of life.

Under DLA those with no or minimal restriction were able to claim the benefit and were given the same award as those who were severely disabled by it. I worked with a girl who didn't have a fit from one year to the next, yet she was still on DLA, and getting all the fringe benefits available.

If people have a genuine disability, it shouldn't be too much trouble to explain what restrictions they experience as a result of it. The negative publicity surrounding assessments, plays right into the Tories hands, as all it will do is put off genuine claimants. Those brass necked enough to abuse the system have no concept of embarassment or shame and will continue to apply.

The questions that are asked are far less intrusive than you would expect your GP, or an admitting nurse in a hospital to ask. In fact some diagnoses like Depression are so easy to get - when GPs are incentivised to prescribe SSRIs, that you have to question whether it is being diagnosed correctly at all.

If you've lived with a disability long enough, what you are questioned about will be water off a ducks back. Seems to me the people who are doing the most complaining are the "Andy from Little Britain" type, or people using disabled people and their problems as a political football.

[Beefster]

If you've lived with a disability long enough, what you are questioned about will be water off a ducks back. Seems to me the people who are doing the most complaining are the "Andy from Little Britain" type, or people using disabled people and their problems as a political football.

Tend to agree. I have a relative [deservedly] on DLA (or its equivalent now). He had no problem with the reassessment, didn't find it humiliating and gets as agitated as anyone about the amount of folk claiming it who either fake or exaggerate their symptoms.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Tend to agree. I have a relative [deservedly] on DLA (or its equivalent now). He had no problem with the reassessment, didn't find it humiliating and gets as agitated as anyone about the amount of folk claiming it who either fake or exaggerate their symptoms.

Good to hear, of course the papers don't run stories like that. People want to hear the bad news, the problem is that puts off a lot of people from claiming. One of my friends is a PIP assessor, says that 90% of claims are genuine - and probably understate their restrictions. The other 10% are either the criminal type, or walking well (think they are worse than they actually are - the type that pitches up at A&E with a sprained ankle and thinks they should be seen in front of the guy who has just had a coronary).

Fact is the system isn't going to change, and rather than grab cheap headlines, the politicians should be trying to work out how they can get the many people who don't claim, but deserve it, to take their share.

[Squealing pig]

Have been diagnosed with a disability for life but a bit scared and apprehensive about applying for dla or whatever it is , don't know the ins and out of things but reading another thread no there are people out there in same boat just wondering how they cope

[Sir David Gray]

Tend to agree. I have a relative [deservedly] on DLA (or its equivalent now). He had no problem with the reassessment, didn't find it humiliating and gets as agitated as anyone about the amount of folk claiming it who either fake or exaggerate their symptoms.

I would totally agree with that.

As many people on here may already be aware, I have a permanent physical disability and I am confined to a wheelchair.

I receive DLA and I have no issues whatsoever with being asked about my disability. I know that the level of disability I have will mean that I won't need to worry about continuing to receive the benefit.

As you have said above about your relative, if the assessment means that even some of the people who "play" the system at the moment are found out and no longer receive payments that really aren't merited then that is good enough for me.

It's long overdue if you ask me.

[hibsbollah]

Tend to agree. I have a relative [deservedly] on DLA (or its equivalent now). He had no problem with the reassessment, didn't find it humiliating and gets as agitated as anyone about the amount of folk claiming it who either fake or exaggerate their symptoms.

Unfortunately personal experience can only give you part of the picture. Its great that your relative didnt have their employment support allowance (or similar) withdrawn. I can say from my personal experience that 1. The work capability assessments are driven solely by the political desire to cut the welfare bill and (probably as a result) 2. these 'assessments' are sometimes a thinly disguised attempt to cheat genuine claimants out of sometimes tens of thousands of pounds over years, that they need to live on and are entitled to.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Unfortunately personal experience can only give you part of the picture. Its great that your relative didnt have their employment support allowance (or similar) withdrawn. I can say from my personal experience that 1. The work capability assessments are driven solely by the political desire to cut the welfare bill and (probably as a result) 2. these 'assessments' are sometimes a thinly disguised attempt to cheat genuine claimants out of sometimes tens of thousands of pounds over years, that they need to live on and are entitled to.

Without saying too much about your personal circumstances, can you give examples of how people are cheated? It's important that we get some context, because stories like yours are the sort of thing that puts people off claiming.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Have been diagnosed with a disability for life but a bit scared and apprehensive about applying for dla or whatever it is , don't know the ins and out of things but reading another thread no there are people out there in same boat just wondering how they cope

Make an appointment at your local Citizen's Advice Bureau, they know how the scores work, and will be able to help you with your application.

[hibsbollah]

Without saying too much about your personal circumstances, can you give examples of how people are cheated? It's important that we get some context, because stories like yours are the sort of thing that puts people off claiming.

I've been at a work capability assessment as a witness and ive done research into worklessness in my previous job where we reported to a Govt department. So i have personal AND some professional experience You're right, I dont want to get into my personal circumstances too much :greengrin

The assessments are carried out on a scoring system. If you score over 15 points you are deemed to be fit enough to work. The questions are straightforward ones usually; can you walk round the house unaided, do you experience pain that stops you using a computer/telephone etc. We saw clear evidence that scores were being given for inappropriate questions not related to that persons ability to work, and in my personal experience as a witness I sat through a process where someone failed the assessment despite clearly scoring under 5 points and being unable to work (I had the scoring criteria next to me on a piece of paper). We went to an appeal with a welfare rights officer attending a few months later, sitting in front of a formal magistrate (with all the associated costs involved) and won the appeal. The stress that this put the claimant under was genuinely severe (formal setting, magistrate, hand on the bible etc etc) and made their chronic depression worse.

As I said to beefster a while back in relation to his relative, get a witness to go with you to these assessments and write everything down. Because there is a political imperative to cut welfare payments and this will inevitably trickle down to affect how the assessors do their job. It should be for qualified medical professionals to make these decisions.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I've been at a work capability assessment as a witness and ive done research into worklessness in my previous job where we reported to a Govt department. So i have personal AND some professional experience You're right, I dont want to get into my personal circumstances too much :greengrin

The assessments are carried out on a scoring system. If you score over 15 points you are deemed to be fit enough to work. The questions are straightforward ones usually; can you walk round the house unaided, do you experience pain that stops you using a computer/telephone etc. We saw clear evidence that scores were being given for inappropriate questions not related to that persons ability to work, and in my personal experience as a witness I sat through a process where someone failed the assessment despite clearly scoring under 5 points and being unable to work (I had the scoring criteria next to me on a piece of paper). We went to an appeal with a welfare rights officer attending a few months later, sitting in front of a formal magistrate (with all the associated costs involved) and won the appeal. The stress that this put the claimant under was genuinely severe (formal setting, magistrate, hand on the bible etc etc) and made their chronic depression worse.

As I said to beefster a while back in relation to his relative, get a witness to go with you to these assessments and write everything down. Because there is a political imperative to cut welfare payments and this will inevitably trickle down to affect how the assessors do their job. It should be for qualified medical professionals to make these decisions.

I believe ESA is much harder to get than PIP. What were the inappropriate questions asked? I know people pitch up at PIP assessments claiming they can't hold a pot, but then reveal that they drive a car - contradicts their claim.

I do wonder how you can assess a person's mental state in 30 minutes though.

[hibsbollah]

The problem is the questions are uniform. If I remember rightly one of the inappropriate questions to assess mental health was 'have you used a telephone for a 5 minute conversation in the last month?'. You say 'yes', thats 2 points added to your 'score' on the assumption that you can deal with a customer service type job on the phone 8 hours a day. There were similar ones for musculo skeletal injuries about 'sitting at a table for ten minutes pain free'. Just for an example.

I take issue with your point about 'stories like these put people off claiming'. The reality is the person I witnessed for was previously earning 30k a year and being unable to work had racked up thousands of pounds of debt just to keep buying food and paying the bills and keeping up with mortgage repayments. Kids are involved, marriages break up, its a horrible process becoming ill and it can happen to anyone. These people don't go through the assessment process for a bit extra cash, they do it because if they genuinely cant work the alternative is destitution.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The problem is the questions are uniform. If I remember rightly one of the inappropriate questions to assess mental health was 'have you used a telephone for a 5 minute conversation in the last month?'. You say 'yes', thats 2 points added to your 'score' on the assumption that you can deal with a customer service type job on the phone 8 hours a day. There were similar ones for musculo skeletal injuries about 'sitting at a table for ten minutes pain free'. Just for an example.

I take issue with your point about 'stories like these put people off claiming'. The reality is the person I witnessed for was previously earning 30k a year and being unable to work had racked up thousands of pounds of debt just to keep buying food and paying the bills and keeping up with mortgage repayments. Kids are involved, marriages break up, its a horrible process becoming ill and it can happen to anyone. These people don't go through the assessment process for a bit extra cash, they do it because if they genuinely cant work the alternative is destitution.

No offence intended. I am aware of the hardships people suffer. I am also aware from my experience as a nurse, that many people are sometimes not as ill as they think.

Had to laugh about the guy in Wales that managed to fake being in a coma, and get benefits. A journalist had taken up his case, and when it was found out he was at the ham, he had the cheek to say "he looked ill to me" - I wasn't aware that courses for journalism had expanded to the extent a hack would be able to reliably assess a person's health!


And that is probably one of the bones of contention about the new system. The health professional is being asked to make an assessment of a person's function. Just as in hospital, people sometimes don't want to see that they can do more than they think. This is not any comment on your client by the way.

My friend works in PIP Assessment, and says that her claimants often remark on how much gentler the process is than ESA. Those sound pretty horrendous and formulaic questions.

Hear what you're saying about people needing to claim. However, what puzzles me is that, with a free health service, how can the number of people with disability increase 10 fold over a decade? It seems to me that DLA incentivised people to be sick, and got in the way of recovery.

I think some form of assessment is needed. It would be helpful if campaigners would at least acknowledge that some people have been screwing the system,wiflfuly or sub-consciously.

At the end of the day though, I think there are a lot more people who could be claiming, who don't. I'm sure publicity about the process puts some of them off.

[hibsbollah]

No offence taken at all. A lot of these things are down to individual experience.

[Squealing pig]

Make an appointment at your local Citizen's Advice Bureau, they know how the scores work, and will be able to help you with your application.

Thank you for advice

[RyeSloan]

No offence taken at all. A lot of these things are down to individual experience.

It's a difficult subject and designing a process to assess each individual fairly would seem almost an impossibility.

That said from my (limited) indirect experience it would appear that the process was very 'physical' orientated...mental illness is of course much harder to quantify and diagnose and I think the assessments were not fit for purpose on that front.

On the flip side there is no doubt that benefits can encourage claimants and there is nothing wrong in trying to ensure a benefit only goes to those who actually require it...quite how that is done in a fair and equitable way is of course the crux of the matter.

[HappyAsHellas]

I believe ESA is much harder to get than PIP. What were the inappropriate questions asked?



About a year ago I was put on ESA and the process seemed simple enough. However, the financial side is paltry compared to a normal working wage, so I was told to apply for PIP to supplement things. It takes about 6 or 7 months to get the interview, and it's so obvious that you don't have a hope in hell of passing this test that it really is laughable. As for the scoring system, I was under the impression I had to achieve 12 out of 15, or some such nonsense - but in the end I scored zero because I can cook a meal and plan a bus journey ( not go on a bus trip - just plan it) on my own. The fact I may keel over at any given moment whilst cooking the meal is irrelevant to them, but sadly very relevant for potential employers. I don't go out anywhere on my own socially, and haven't for over a year now, am not allowed to drive which was a big part of my job and have been advised against working with machinery. Bit of a bugger for a mechanic but hey ho. If one of these testers or health professionals could grow a set and sign me back to work I should be delighted as I find it's the financial side that is particularly draining, in more than one sense. I may try CAB as a last resort as the futility of the present scheme is depressing.

[Phil D. Rolls]

About a year ago I was put on ESA and the process seemed simple enough. However, the financial side is paltry compared to a normal working wage, so I was told to apply for PIP to supplement things. It takes about 6 or 7 months to get the interview, and it's so obvious that you don't have a hope in hell of passing this test that it really is laughable. As for the scoring system, I was under the impression I had to achieve 12 out of 15, or some such nonsense - but in the end I scored zero because I can cook a meal and plan a bus journey ( not go on a bus trip - just plan it) on my own. The fact I may keel over at any given moment whilst cooking the meal is irrelevant to them, but sadly very relevant for potential employers. I don't go out anywhere on my own socially, and haven't for over a year now, am not allowed to drive which was a big part of my job and have been advised against working with machinery. Bit of a bugger for a mechanic but hey ho. If one of these testers or health professionals could grow a set and sign me back to work I should be delighted as I find it's the financial side that is particularly draining, in more than one sense. I may try CAB as a last resort as the futility of the present scheme is depressing.

It is relevant, if you feel they have ignored this then you should appeal. Eligibility for PIP has nothing to do with fitness to work, you can work full time and get the benefit. It's not supposed to be a supplement to income, it's meant to be used to make your disability more bearable by giving you money to pay for assistance or buy aids.

[HappyAsHellas]

Quite frankly, the time involved in trying this puts me off straight away. The time to wait for the first interview was bad enough, but then again, maybe that's how the system is supposed to work now.

[oconnors_strip]

About a year ago I was put on ESA and the process seemed simple enough. However, the financial side is paltry compared to a normal working wage, so I was told to apply for PIP to supplement things. It takes about 6 or 7 months to get the interview, and it's so obvious that you don't have a hope in hell of passing this test that it really is laughable. As for the scoring system, I was under the impression I had to achieve 12 out of 15, or some such nonsense - but in the end I scored zero because I can cook a meal and plan a bus journey ( not go on a bus trip - just plan it) on my own. The fact I may keel over at any given moment whilst cooking the meal is irrelevant to them, but sadly very relevant for potential employers. I don't go out anywhere on my own socially, and haven't for over a year now, am not allowed to drive which was a big part of my job and have been advised against working with machinery. Bit of a bugger for a mechanic but hey ho. If one of these testers or health professionals could grow a set and sign me back to work I should be delighted as I find it's the financial side that is particularly draining, in more than one sense. I may try CAB as a last resort as the futility of the present scheme is depressing.

Are you an Edinburgh resident? If so go to the council office which helps with benefits advice, they will help fill out PIP form with you. I went there earlier this year and got a yes decision first time, this was because the guy knew exactly how to fill out form and what words to use. They have a guidance book with what points are required for each subject

[Hibernia&Alba]

The disability assessment and the sanctions applied to over 800,000 people on other benefits in the past twelve months are all part of a plan to abolish the welfare state, which the Tories hate. As others have mentioned, the demonization of those on welfare by their pals on Fleet Street has opened the way for these measures to be introduced in the name of 'fairness', when in fact their raison d'etre is to kick people off and cut costs. If the system was administered properly and was a genuine attempt to help those with some level of disability into work and also reduce fraudulent claims, that's fine, but it's clearly a box ticking exercise which is both clumsy and inhuman, causing destitution amongst some of society's most vulnerable. This enables the government to shout from the rooftops that it is hitting 'scroungers' and so make its traditional appeal to the mean spirited. Similarly, the JSA sanctions are a blatant method of causing hardship amongst those hare already barely surviving on a pittance. Abolition of the welfare state is the Tories' long term strategy, of that I'm convinced. What they never shout about is the studies made by several governments in the past few decades that have all concluded that the level of fraud in welfare claims is less than one per cent of budget.

That odious cretin Iain Duncan Smith, who claimed to have travelled the country to seriously examine the causes and solutions to poverty, was never going to be a friend of the needy. The world knew that his 'solution' would be welfare cuts from the get go. There was never a chance his recommendation to cabinet would be an increase in welfare payments. Also, how many hundreds of millions of public money have been written off during the Universal Credit development whilst he government takes a few quid from those who find life hardest?

Labour will be just a bad in office. They won't reverse sanctions for fear of being accused of leniency towards 'scroungers'. The political consensus is privatize, cut spending and taxes, promote ever more individualism and markets where possible. I really worry where we're heading - the American model of society beckons, sadly.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The disability assessment and the sanctions applied to over 800,000 people on other benefits in the past twelve months are all part of a plan to abolish the welfare state, which the Tories hate. As others have mentioned, the demonization of those on welfare by their pals on Fleet Street has opened the way for these measures to be introduced in the name of 'fairness', when in fact their raison d'etre is to kick people off and cut costs. If the system was administered properly and was a genuine attempt to help those with some level of disability into work and also reduce fraudulent claims, that's fine, but it's clearly a box ticking exercise which is both clumsy and inhuman, causing destitution amongst some of society's most vulnerable. This enables the government to shout from the rooftops that it is hitting 'scroungers' and so make its traditional appeal to the mean spirited. Similarly, the JSA sanctions are a blatant method of causing hardship amongst those hare already barely surviving on a pittance. Abolition of the welfare state is the Tories' long term strategy, of that I'm convinced. What they never shout about is the studies made by several governments in the past few decades that have all concluded that the level of fraud in welfare claims is less than one per cent of budget.

That odious cretin Iain Duncan Smith, who claimed to have travelled the country to seriously examine the causes and solutions to poverty, was never going to be a friend of the needy. The world knew that his 'solution' would be welfare cuts from the get go. There was never a chance his recommendation to cabinet would be an increase in welfare payments. Also, how many hundreds of millions of public money have been written off during the Universal Credit development whilst he government takes a few quid from those who find life hardest?

Labour will be just a bad in office. They won't reverse sanctions for fear of being accused of leniency towards 'scroungers'. The political consensus is privatize, cut spending and taxes, promote ever more individualism and markets where possible. I really worry where we're heading - the American model of society beckons, sadly.


Can't see much about disabled people's problems in this post. Still bringing them into the wider public debate seems to be a great tactic for gaining sympathy for whatever point you are trying to make.

The number of fraud claims is so low because the criteria were so ridiculously easy to satisfy. The same reason that the number of claims went up 10 fold over 10 years.

I agree that most people getting benefits need them. It would be naive to think that there aren't whole towns where poverty is endemic, where claiming disability is the only option people have to supplement their income.

It would also be naive to think that there aren't a lot of people whose poverty is due to lifestyle choices, and that claiming an illness or disability is the alternative to changing their lives around.

I keep coming back to this question - why is it that in a country with free health care, we have less people fit to work than we did 15 years ago? Is the NHS really that bad, or is it because rapid developments in medicine have resulted in more lives being saved, albeit with disability afterwards. If it is down to that, what are these miracle cures that have been developed in the last 15 years?

Blessed are the lame because they can't kick us in the balls. It's much better to keep the poor screwed down and dependent on hand outs than treat them like humans and help them achieve full enjoyment.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Can't see much about disabled people's problems in this post. Still bringing them into the wider public debate seems to be a great tactic for gaining sympathy for whatever point you are trying to make.

The number of fraud claims is so low because the criteria were so ridiculously easy to satisfy. The same reason that the number of claims went up 10 fold over 10 years.

I agree that most people getting benefits need them. It would be naive to think that there aren't whole towns where poverty is endemic, where claiming disability is the only option people have to supplement their income.

It would also be naive to think that there aren't a lot of people whose poverty is due to lifestyle choices, and that claiming an illness or disability is the alternative to changing their lives around.

I keep coming back to this question - why is it that in a country with free health care, we have less people fit to work than we did 15 years ago? Is the NHS really that bad, or is it because rapid developments in medicine have resulted in more lives being saved, albeit with disability afterwards. If it is down to that, what are these miracle cures that have been developed in the last 15 years?

Blessed are the lame because they can't kick us in the balls. It's much better to keep the poor screwed down and dependent on hand outs than treat them like humans and help them achieve full enjoyment.

In the eighties the Thatcher government implemented a deliberate policy of shifting the unemployed onto sickness benefit in order to diddle the unemployment figures, which had gone through the roof. They also changed the criteria of what qualified as being unemployed. Lo and behold, they then decry same said huge leap in numbers.

I'm also baffled by what you mean by poverty being a 'lifestyle choice'. Ah yes, the undeserving poor; the feckless and the lazy. I would imagine living in poverty isn't something many people of sound mind would actively choose. It's strange that those who make such statements are themselves invariably very comfortable thank you. I would bet my bottom dollar that academic studies of the causes and perpetuation of poverty would have 'lifestyle choice' very low down in its list. Are we talking real choice here or trying to survive as best we can with the hand life has dealt us? Social mobility has been on the decline year on year since 1977. Choice is for those who can afford it. Booted off disability or JSA by an arbitrary process that seems to work on the basis of guilty until proven innocent, and into the world of zero hour contracts and the weakest employment rights in EU, no social housing and unaffordable house prices, huge spending cuts in public amenities from libraries to police to re-pay a massive deficit created by the greed and folly of the banks. In short remove your benefit and let market forces decide whether you sink or swim. Where's the policy of helping the disabled to find work that is genuinely within their capabilities, that provides dignity and protection and is backed up by properly functioning social services, which many require?

We're heading towards the American model of ghettoization of the poor and unapologetic plutarchy. The callous implementation of disability assessment is but one strand of the grand plan.

[Phil D. Rolls]

In the eighties the Thatcher government implemented a deliberate policy of shifting the unemployed onto sickness benefit in order to diddle the unemployment figures, which had gone through the roof. They also changed the criteria of what qualified as being unemployed. Lo and behold, they then decry same said huge leap in numbers.

I'm also baffled by what you mean by poverty being a 'lifestyle choice'. Ah yes, the undeserving poor; the feckless and the lazy. I would imagine living in poverty isn't something many people of sound mind would actively choose. It's strange that those who make such statements are themselves invariably very comfortable thank you. I would bet my bottom dollar that academic studies of the causes and perpetuation of poverty would have 'lifestyle choice' very low down in its list. Are we talking real choice here or trying to survive as best we can with the hand life has dealt us? Social mobility has been on the decline year on year since 1977. Choice is for those who can afford it. Booted off disability or JSA by an arbitrary process that seems to work on the basis of guilty until proven innocent, and into the world of zero hour contracts and the weakest employment rights in EU, no social housing and unaffordable house prices, huge spending cuts in public amenities from libraries to police to re-pay a massive deficit created by the greed and folly of the banks. In short remove your benefit and let market forces decide whether you sink or swim. Where's the policy of helping the disabled to find work that is genuinely within their capabilities, that provides dignity and protection and is backed up by properly functioning social services, which many require?

We're heading towards the American model of ghettoization of the poor and unapologetic plutarchy. The callous implementation of disability assessment is but one strand of the grand plan.

You tell me what we're talking about. If you think that every person on benefit is genuinely sick, or that the benefit is not one of the reasons they don't have the incentive to get better, I think you are being naive.

I don't really care to talk about the broader political implications, I want to discuss the reality of claiming disability benefits. I also think it's worth exposing some of the hypocrisy about caring for the poor by people who have a vested interest in them remaining poor and sick and helpless.

Your broad brush approach to poverty and disability is patronising. I am not for one minute saying that people don't deserve to be helped if they need it, I am saying that the one size fits all approach to aid cannot be justified.

Do you think putting a 16 year old child onto disability benefit because they have depression is going to help them to overcome the depression. I think it is just the ticket that any adolescent would take to give up on life. Far from helping the kid to work out how to deal with their restriction, you are giving them a monetary incentive to remain ill.

Politics and health care are hypocritical bed fellows IMO.

[Hibernia&Alba]

You tell me what we're talking about. If you think that every person on benefit is genuinely sick, or that the benefit is not one of the reasons they don't have the incentive to get better, I think you are being naive.

I don't really care to talk about the broader political implications, I want to discuss the reality of claiming disability benefits. I also think it's worth exposing some of the hypocrisy about caring for the poor by people who have a vested interest in them remaining poor and sick and helpless.

Your broad brush approach to poverty and disability is patronising. I am not for one minute saying that people don't deserve to be helped if they need it, I am saying that the one size fits all approach to aid cannot be justified.

Do you think putting a 16 year old child onto disability benefit because they have depression is going to help them to overcome the depression. I think it is just the ticket that any adolescent would take to give up on life. Far from helping the kid to work out how to deal with their restriction, you are giving them a monetary incentive to remain ill.

Politics and health care are hypocritical bed fellows IMO.

That's a decision for the clinicians based upon the evidence. You're in danger of going down the Iain Duncan Smith route of claiming that getting the disabled off benefit and into work is all about enriching their lives, when as I said previously, the reality all too often, according to those who have their benefit stopped is "Booted off disability or JSA by an arbitrary process that seems to work on the basis of guilty until proven innocent, and into the world of zero hour contracts and the weakest employment rights in EU, no social housing and unaffordable house prices, huge spending cuts in public amenities from libraries to police to re-pay a massive deficit created by the greed and folly of the banks. In short remove your benefit and let market forces decide whether you sink or swim. Where's the policy of helping the disabled to find work that is genuinely within their capabilities, that provides dignity and protection and is backed up by properly functioning social services, which many require"?

The rhetoric and the policy are a million miles apart. It's cynical and inhuman in all too many cases. Where's the meaningful employment, tailored to capability, backed up with social services? Social services have been decimate by cuts, with more to come. I think you're being naïve if you think the current policy isn't about cutting costs to re-pay the deficit.

[RyeSloan]

That's a decision for the clinicians based upon the evidence. You're in danger of going down the Iain Duncan Smith route of claiming that getting the disabled off benefit and into work is all about enriching their lives, when as I said previously, the reality all too often, according to those who have their benefit stopped is "Booted off disability or JSA by an arbitrary process that seems to work on the basis of guilty until proven innocent, and into the world of zero hour contracts and the weakest employment rights in EU, no social housing and unaffordable house prices, huge spending cuts in public amenities from libraries to police to re-pay a massive deficit created by the greed and folly of the banks. In short remove your benefit and let market forces decide whether you sink or swim. Where's the policy of helping the disabled to find work that is genuinely within their capabilities, that provides dignity and protection and is backed up by properly functioning social services, which many require"? The rhetoric and the policy are a million miles apart. It's cynical and inhuman in all too many cases. Where's the meaningful employment, tailored to capability, backed up with social services? Social services have been decimate by cuts, with more to come. I think you're being naïve if you think the current policy isn't about cutting costs to re-pay the deficit.

Your full of rhetoric but seem to have little grasp of public finances (not to mention your baseless supposition that there is 'no social housing') and seemed to have swallowed the whole austerity line completely...yet the government continues to spend over £110bn on welfare, a bill that was only £60bn in 2002. £130bn on healthcare, more than double 2002 figures. £140bn on pensions, again more than double compared to 2002.

The simple fact is that government spending was ramped too high and beyond any sensible level that the country could afford. Blame the banks if that makes it easier for you but the fact remains we spent about £90bn more this year than tax receipts alone, is that the banks fault as well?

Somehow and somewhere the nation needs to wake up and smell the coffee here. Every recipient of government money will justify their cause yet no one seems to be able to explain why these huge increases in spending have done nothing to improve the nations lot.

I would suggest that people need to stop thinking politicians can answer all the problems and understand that more and more government spending is not the answer.

Absolutely we should look to protect the vulnerable in our society but constant rants about the unfairness of it all need to be put into a bit of perspective here.

[hibsbollah]

The problem with your assessment of the public finances is the austerity solution isn't working, as the chancellor's autumn statement itself made clear. The scenario the social democrat economists warned about has come true; when the government keeps wages low, there's not enough taxation income to make the drop in consumption and spending worthwhile. So you're in a loophole of eternal austerity until someone has the cojones to promote a growth driven model. Economics isnt a zero sum game. FDR understood this in the 1930s, hardly a loony lefty, and his policies built the foundations of American power today.

H&A is also spot on about social housing. There IS virtually none available for most people who need it. Taking empty homes into public ownership is probably the policy that could bring most immediate benefit across a range of areas but no party wants to take it on.

I do think you have a point about generational worklessness though. As someone who worked in this field during the Blair years I know for a fact that millions were poured into retraining and skills in some of the poorest wards in Britain, and the sad fact for the do gooder types like me who worked in this field is all that money made absolutely no difference to the figures on poverty and unemployment. There is a substantial group who genuinely have given up hope/interest in work, and are often living in houses where two or three generations have never worked. It will take a long time to change that mindset. Some of the old industrial areas are too far gone in terms of regeneration. How you solve this problem, and what you do about paying benefits to these people, I have absolutely no idea. Everything has failed up to now.

None of this really changes the issue with ATOS and the assessments though. If people are sick, they are ENTITLED to benefits because of the national insurance system. I worked out in my working life I have paid somewhere around £20, 000 in NI. That entitles me to benefits if i became ill, in the same way as any insurance or savings policy would. I wish this system was spelled out more often; it might dispel the 'benefits scrounger' stigma forever.

[Phil D. Rolls]

That's a decision for the clinicians based upon the evidence. You're in danger of going down the Iain Duncan Smith route of claiming that getting the disabled off benefit and into work is all about enriching their lives, when as I said previously, the reality all too often, according to those who have their benefit stopped is "Booted off disability or JSA by an arbitrary process that seems to work on the basis of guilty until proven innocent, and into the world of zero hour contracts and the weakest employment rights in EU, no social housing and unaffordable house prices, huge spending cuts in public amenities from libraries to police to re-pay a massive deficit created by the greed and folly of the banks. In short remove your benefit and let market forces decide whether you sink or swim. Where's the policy of helping the disabled to find work that is genuinely within their capabilities, that provides dignity and protection and is backed up by properly functioning social services, which many require"?

The rhetoric and the policy are a million miles apart. It's cynical and inhuman in all too many cases. Where's the meaningful employment, tailored to capability, backed up with social services? Social services have been decimate by cuts, with more to come. I think you're being naïve if you think the current policy isn't about cutting costs to re-pay the deficit.

I get the impression you know very little about helping people enrich their lives, otherwise you'd be a bit less judgemental of people who see the shades of grey. You also clearly know very little about the assessment process or the people who work in it.

Clinicians are making decisions based on the evidence. A lot of them are suffering harassment from the rent a mobs who object to everything, but never ever change anything. Others are being abused and threatened by people who have played the system for years.

I didn't say for a minute that the current thing is not a Tory ruse for cutting the benefit bill. It doesn't mean that the previous system didn't push people onto benefit. A point you seem to have ignored, the number of claimants went up in the last 15 years because Labour brought in a lazy system which a dog could qualify for.

Don't think for a minute that Labour weren't equally cynical. It was easier to pay out benefit than to create a meaningful existence for the poor. Their answer was to say, you're not poor you're sick.

DLA had very little of the clinical decision making you are so keen on. The new system does. DLA had no system of checking whether people had gotten better, instead some claimants are still getting benefit for conditions they would be expected to recover from years ago.

Now please tell me what aspects of the process are inhuman. I'd be interested to hear, because I think simply accepting a diagnosis as proof that a person is no use to anybody is inhuman.

Words you might like to google are "occupational therapist". Do you think that an OT or a nurse who tells somebody that their condition is beatable is acting in an inhuman way? On the other hand is putting a 16 year old onto benefit and removing any hope they will ever have of living a fulfilling life with a sense of achievement humanistic?

I don't. But I'm not interested in politics, I'm interested in helping people achieve full enjoyment. This bleating about "the disabled" is as cynical and heartless as people who talk about "hard working families". They don't give a ****, they are just using other people's problems to further their own ends.

Shades of grey, think about it. Not everything is black and white.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The problem with your assessment of the public finances is the austerity solution isn't working, as the chancellor's autumn statement itself made clear. The scenario the social democrat economists warned about has come true; when the government keeps wages low, there's not enough taxation income to make the drop in consumption and spending worthwhile. So you're in a loophole of eternal austerity until someone has the cojones to promote a growth driven model. Economics isnt a zero sum game. FDR understood this in the 1930s, hardly a loony lefty, and his policies built the foundations of American power today.

H&A is also spot on about social housing. There IS virtually none available for most people who need it. Taking empty homes into public ownership is probably the policy that could bring most immediate benefit across a range of areas but no party wants to take it on.

I do think you have a point about generational worklessness though. As someone who worked in this field during the Blair years I know for a fact that millions were poured into retraining and skills in some of the poorest wards in Britain, and the sad fact for the do gooder types like me who worked in this field is all that money made absolutely no difference to the figures on poverty and unemployment. There is a substantial group who genuinely have given up hope/interest in work, and are often living in houses where two or three generations have never worked. It will take a long time to change that mindset. Some of the old industrial areas are too far gone in terms of regeneration. How you solve this problem, and what you do about paying benefits to these people, I have absolutely no idea. Everything has failed up to now.

None of this really changes the issue with ATOS and the assessments though. If people are sick, they are ENTITLED to benefits because of the national insurance system. I worked out in my working life I have paid somewhere around £20, 000 in NI. That entitles me to benefits if i became ill, in the same way as any insurance or savings policy would. I wish this system was spelled out more often; it might dispel the 'benefits scrounger' stigma forever.

What about people who are faking illness, or are not as ill as they think they are?

[hibsbollah]

What about people who are faking illness, or are not as ill as they think they are?

Thats why I said 'IF people are sick'.

[RyeSloan]

The problem with your assessment of the public finances is the austerity solution isn't working, as the chancellor's autumn statement itself made clear. The scenario the social democrat economists warned about has come true; when the government keeps wages low, there's not enough taxation income to make the drop in consumption and spending worthwhile. So you're in a loophole of eternal austerity until someone has the cojones to promote a growth driven model. Economics isnt a zero sum game. FDR understood this in the 1930s, hardly a loony lefty, and his policies built the foundations of American power today. H&A is also spot on about social housing. There IS virtually none available for most people who need it. Taking empty homes into public ownership is probably the policy that could bring most immediate benefit across a range of areas but no party wants to take it on. I do think you have a point about generational worklessness though. As someone who worked in this field during the Blair years I know for a fact that millions were poured into retraining and skills in some of the poorest wards in Britain, and the sad fact for the do gooder types like me who worked in this field is all that money made absolutely no difference to the figures on poverty and unemployment. There is a substantial group who genuinely have given up hope/interest in work, and are often living in houses where two or three generations have never worked. It will take a long time to change that mindset. Some of the old industrial areas are too far gone in terms of regeneration. How you solve this problem, and what you do about paying benefits to these people, I have absolutely no idea. Everything has failed up to now. None of this really changes the issue with ATOS and the assessments though. If people are sick, they are ENTITLED to benefits because of the national insurance system. I worked out in my working life I have paid somewhere around £20, 000 in NI. That entitles me to benefits if i became ill, in the same way as any insurance or savings policy would. I wish this system was spelled out more often; it might dispel the 'benefits scrounger' stigma forever.

My assessment of the austerity solution is that iti is largely a mirage! Whether or not it would actually work or not I've no idea (well I do...a quick sharp shock would be the most effective, if rather brutal route) but my point was that really over any sensible timescale there has been no austerity what so ever.

National insurance is a misnomer though isn't it...your money may buy you some entitlement but it's not saved into a pot to pay for it...it's spent like every other tax and your entitlement is based only on the promise of future taxation revenues, if and when you call on that entitlement someone has to pay for it.

As for social housing, you can't use availability as a measure of its existence. A quick google shows almost 4m social renters in England, roughly the same as private rental. I get the drift of your point tho but it will come as no surprise to you that I don't see being a landlord as within the core skills of government, national or local. Housing affordability is the key driver not who the landlord is but until we remove the outdated and outmoded greenbelt restrictions were all stuffed on that front!

Otherwise your insight into your work in the Blair years is appreciated...who knows what the answer is but as I alluded to earlier governments just spending more does not always (rarely?) bring about anywhere near the benefits some allude to.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I get the impression you know very little about helping people enrich their lives, otherwise you'd be a bit less judgemental of people who see the shades of grey. You also clearly know very little about the assessment process or the people who work in it.

Clinicians are making decisions based on the evidence. A lot of them are suffering harassment from the rent a mobs who object to everything, but never ever change anything. Others are being abused and threatened by people who have played the system for years.

I didn't say for a minute that the current thing is not a Tory ruse for cutting the benefit bill. It doesn't mean that the previous system didn't push people onto benefit. A point you seem to have ignored, the number of claimants went up in the last 15 years because Labour brought in a lazy system which a dog could qualify for.

Don't think for a minute that Labour weren't equally cynical. It was easier to pay out benefit than to create a meaningful existence for the poor. Their answer was to say, you're not poor you're sick.

DLA had very little of the clinical decision making you are so keen on. The new system does. DLA had no system of checking whether people had gotten better, instead some claimants are still getting benefit for conditions they would be expected to recover from years ago.

Now please tell me what aspects of the process are inhuman. I'd be interested to hear, because I think simply accepting a diagnosis as proof that a person is no use to anybody is inhuman.

Words you might like to google are "occupational therapist". Do you think that an OT or a nurse who tells somebody that their condition is beatable is acting in an inhuman way? On the other hand is putting a 16 year old onto benefit and removing any hope they will ever have of living a fulfilling life with a sense of achievement humanistic?

I don't. But I'm not interested in politics, I'm interested in helping people achieve full enjoyment. This bleating about "the disabled" is as cynical and heartless as people who talk about "hard working families". They don't give a ****, they are just using other people's problems to further their own ends.

Shades of grey, think about it. Not everything is black and white.


The shades of grey is exactly what I was talking about in relation to comprehensive welfare to work programme based upon rigorous assessment of the capabilities of each claimant he type of work and the specialized facilities they may need. Backed up with a policy of there being jobs available that give the dignity we all want those living with disabilities to have and the support network in place in social services where needed. This IS NOT what is happening in public policy. Simply sending claimants for a brief medical assessment and then sending a letter in the post stating they're on their own is not the answer. That's inhuman! Also, nobody is talking about putting 16 year olds with minor ailments on benefits for life. That's just sensationalist talk. We're talking about a compassionate assessment procedure as part of joined up social policy - reflecting those shades of grey of which you speak. The current assessment procedure is very crude, but it's cheap to administer! We can only have a meaningful existence for those on DLA and other benefits in that context. It requires access to training, the availability of jobs that are meaningful, pay a wage that can be lived on (average wages have fallen by £1400 since 2008) and long term, properly funded social services to provide the needed support.

How many clinicians are being 'harassed and by whom'? Where are the figures? Sounds like a Daily Mail reader's dream story.

We all want those living with disability to have the maximum level of independence and control of their own lives, but it's a question of the right system of assessment and the right social policies. How do we achieve this, if we're serious about it? I don't believe this government is seriously tackling the poverty issue.I believe this government's welfare 'reforms' are not the answer but are a cynical cost cutting exercise. The current assessment process seems geared to the achievement an arbitrary cut in the number of claimants come what may, which is creating inhuman stress and destitution. Iain Duncan-Smith sanctimoniously and glibly talks of dignity and independence as his government remove those very things from the most vulnerable in our society with its policies. He doesn't give a toss what becomes of those whose benefits are withdrawn. Don't swallow his inane claptrap. He isn't interested in dignity and independence but wants to be in a position to brag about how many people have been removed from claiming come an election campaign.

By the way does anyone know how much has been written off hitherto on implementing Universal Credit? It's costing £13 billion, yes billion, is three years behind schedule and so far has been rolled out to just seven thousand people.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Thats why I said 'IF people are sick'.

Sorry. :aok:


The shades of grey is exactly what I was talking about in relation to comprehensive welfare to work programme based upon rigorous assessment of the capabilities of each claimant he type of work and the specialized facilities they may need. Backed up with a policy of there being jobs available that give the dignity we all want those living with disabilities to have and the support network in place in social services where needed. This IS NOT what is happening in public policy. Simply sending claimants for a brief medical assessment and then sending a letter in the post stating they're on their own is not the answer. That's inhuman! Also, nobody is talking about putting 16 year olds with minor ailments on benefits for life. That's just sensationalist talk. We're talking about a compassionate assessment procedure as part of joined up social policy - reflecting those shades of grey of which you speak. The current assessment procedure is very crude, but it's cheap to administer! We can only have a meaningful existence for those on DLA and other benefits in that context. It requires access to training, the availability of jobs that are meaningful, pay a wage that can be lived on (average wages have fallen by £1400 since 2008) and long term, properly funded social services to provide the needed support.

How many clinicians are being 'harassed and by whom'? Where are the figures? Sounds like a Daily Mail reader's dream story.

We all want those living with disability to have the maximum level of independence and control of their own lives, but it's a question of the right system of assessment and the right social policies. How do we achieve this, if we're serious about it? I don't believe this government is seriously tackling the poverty issue.I believe this government's welfare 'reforms' are not the answer but are a cynical cost cutting exercise. The current assessment process seems geared to the achievement an arbitrary cut in the number of claimants come what may, which is creating inhuman stress and destitution. Iain Duncan-Smith sanctimoniously and glibly talks of dignity and independence as his government remove those very things from the most vulnerable in our society with its policies. He doesn't give a toss what becomes of those whose benefits are withdrawn. Don't swallow his inane claptrap. He isn't interested in dignity and independence but wants to be in a position to brag about how many people have been removed from claiming come an election campaign.

By the way does anyone know how much has been written off hitherto on implementing Universal Credit? It's costing £13 billion, yes billion, is three years behind schedule and so far has been rolled out to just seven thousand people.

A couple of things, I know somebody who was attacked doing the job, charges are now being pressed. Same person has arrived at work, in Edinburgh, twice in a month to find obscene posters pasted to the windows of their office. A man was arrested after smashing a centre in Dunfermline, and there are monthly protests outside offices in Glasgow.

I live in the real world mate, I don't get my information from newspapers. The fact that you think a letter gets sent for the decision says it all, as far as PIP is concerned it's a phone call. So don't come on here and lecture people about how the system can be better run, when it's clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

I suspect you are guilty of making up much of your criticisms based on prejudice and a political agenda. Which is precisely my criticism of many people taking pots at the system.

Furthermore, you seem to be playing a game that is pretty popular on here. Namely, ignoring questions which you can't answer, and disguising your lack of substance in rhetoric. (For example, what has universal credit got to do with this particular discussion?)

I asked you two times if you felt that putting a 16 year old with a condition like Depression onto benefit was going to help them get better, or totally end any chance of working their way through it. You said it was sensationalist talk (I think that means you think it's a bad idea).Let me explain how it works.

Mum has been getting carer's allowance for their child who has a diagnosis of "mental illness", typically ADHD, but failing that other diagnoses are easily obtained. Child is approaching 16th birthday, and carer's allowance / plus fringe benefits is now under threat. Mother takes child along for PIP or ESA.

Child now has now graduated to the world of benefits, with no perception that they have problems they can overcome, and no incentive to push on. Result low self esteem,low mood, Depression continues to be treated, so benefits keep getting paid. Another wasted life, that will no doubt be bringing their own 16 year old along in 16 years' time.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that's what friends working with young people are seeing all of the time. People who see young lives discarded before they have fully begun, in much the same way as beggars in Egypt used to break their children's legs so that they'd earn more due their deformities.

I keep telling you I am not on here to debate the objectives of the Tory government, or the failures of the Labour government to change the system. I personally want to discuss people's experiences of the system. You seem to have little to add to that other than what you have read in the Socialist Worker.

It's people like you with your scaremongering that are making the whole process more difficult for claimants. You deliberately create a climate of fear and suspicion that sees people so scared to go for assessment that they don't bother showing up. Well played, doing the governments dirty work for them.

I am not going to say people haven't had bad experiences - I believe that feed back is available if you go looking for it. The majority of people being assessed, according to my sources, leave the process relieved that it was conducted with compassion and understanding.

Doesn't really suit your agenda to make it easier for them though does it? Hence the Spartist polemics.

It ain't working pal.

[Bristolhibby]

Your full of rhetoric but seem to have little grasp of public finances (not to mention your baseless supposition that there is 'no social housing') and seemed to have swallowed the whole austerity line completely...yet the government continues to spend over £110bn on welfare, a bill that was only £60bn in 2002. £130bn on healthcare, more than double 2002 figures. £140bn on pensions, again more than double compared to 2002.

The simple fact is that government spending was ramped too high and beyond any sensible level that the country could afford. Blame the banks if that makes it easier for you but the fact remains we spent about £90bn more this year than tax receipts alone, is that the banks fault as well?

Somehow and somewhere the nation needs to wake up and smell the coffee here. Every recipient of government money will justify their cause yet no one seems to be able to explain why these huge increases in spending have done nothing to improve the nations lot.

I would suggest that people need to stop thinking politicians can answer all the problems and understand that more and more government spending is not the answer.

Absolutely we should look to protect the vulnerable in our society but constant rants about the unfairness of it all need to be put into a bit of perspective here.

We should be spending more not less.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pump-priming.asp

Growth is the key, trickle down ain't working as it ain't trickling down, it's sitting in the stratosphere of the economy making the uber rich richer.

Quantative Easing hasn't worked how about QE for the people?

One such radical measure is too controversial for any policymaker to mention publicly, although some have discussed it in private: Instead of giving newly created money to bond traders, central banks could distribute it directly to the public. Technically such cash handouts could be described as tax rebates or citizens’ dividends, and they would contribute to government deficits in national accounting. But these accounting deficits would not increase national debt burdens, since they would be financed by issuing new money, at zero cost to government or to future generations, instead of selling interest-bearing government bonds.
Giving away free money may sound too good to be true or wildly irresponsible, but it is exactly what the Fed and the BoE have been doing for bond traders and bankers since 2009. Directing QE to the general public would not only be much fairer but also more effective.
Suppose the new money created since 2009, instead of propping up bond prices, had simply been added to the bank accounts of all U.S. and British households. In the U.S., $2 trillion of QE could have financed a cash windfall of $6,500 for every man, woman and child, or $26,000 for a family of four. Britain’s QE of £375 billion is worth £6,000 per head or £24,000 per family. Even if only half the new money created were distributed in this way, these sums would be easily large enough to transform economic conditions, whether the people receiving these windfalls decided to spend them on extra consumption or save them and reduce debts.
Distributing money to the general public was the one response to intractable recessions and liquidity traps that united Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes. Their main difference was that Friedman proposed dropping dollar bills out of helicopters, while Keynes suggested burying pound notes in chests that unemployed workers could dig up. Unfortunately modern economics, based as it is on simplistic and misleading assumptions about self-stabilizing markets, has forgotten the insights of these great students of deep economic slumps. In today’s world of electronic money, we would not even need Friedman’s helicopters or Keynes’s ditchdiggers. Just a few lines of computer code – plus some imagination and courage from our central banks.

J

[Phil D. Rolls]

We should be spending more not less.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pump-priming.asp

Growth is the key, trickle down ain't working as it ain't trickling down, it's sitting in the stratosphere of the economy making the uber rich richer.

Quantative Easing hasn't worked how about QE for the people?

One such radical measure is too controversial for any policymaker to mention publicly, although some have discussed it in private: Instead of giving newly created money to bond traders, central banks could distribute it directly to the public. Technically such cash handouts could be described as tax rebates or citizens’ dividends, and they would contribute to government deficits in national accounting. But these accounting deficits would not increase national debt burdens, since they would be financed by issuing new money, at zero cost to government or to future generations, instead of selling interest-bearing government bonds.
Giving away free money may sound too good to be true or wildly irresponsible, but it is exactly what the Fed and the BoE have been doing for bond traders and bankers since 2009. Directing QE to the general public would not only be much fairer but also more effective.
Suppose the new money created since 2009, instead of propping up bond prices, had simply been added to the bank accounts of all U.S. and British households. In the U.S., $2 trillion of QE could have financed a cash windfall of $6,500 for every man, woman and child, or $26,000 for a family of four. Britain’s QE of £375 billion is worth £6,000 per head or £24,000 per family. Even if only half the new money created were distributed in this way, these sums would be easily large enough to transform economic conditions, whether the people receiving these windfalls decided to spend them on extra consumption or save them and reduce debts.
Distributing money to the general public was the one response to intractable recessions and liquidity traps that united Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes. Their main difference was that Friedman proposed dropping dollar bills out of helicopters, while Keynes suggested burying pound notes in chests that unemployed workers could dig up. Unfortunately modern economics, based as it is on simplistic and misleading assumptions about self-stabilizing markets, has forgotten the insights of these great students of deep economic slumps. In today’s world of electronic money, we would not even need Friedman’s helicopters or Keynes’s ditchdiggers. Just a few lines of computer code – plus some imagination and courage from our central banks.

J

You've taken this to a new level, you haven't mentioned disability once.

[Bristolhibby]

You've taken this to a new level, you haven't mentioned disability once.

LOL. I thought this was Tory economic policy 101?

The disability assessment is shambolic and cruel. Intresting that Atos quit the contract early, because of the terrible PR.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/27/atos-quite-work-capability-assessment-contract-early

J

[Phil D. Rolls]

LOL. I thought this was Tory economic policy 101?

The disability assessment is shambolic and cruel. Intresting that Atos quit the contract early, because of the terrible PR.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/27/atos-quite-work-capability-assessment-contract-early

J

The assessment for that particular benefit appears to be based on pretty strict criteria. I heard that a person with no hands would still be deemed fit to lift a box if they could do it with their elbows. That has to be the work of a twisted mind and I agree that does seem cruel.

The fact that Atos has chosen to cut their losses and get out, says a lot about about ESA, and possibly the government needs to rethink that one radically. They are going to be hard pushed to get anybody to take the gig.


Last year the work and pensions select committee said the government's handling of the assessment was damaging public confidence and causing claimants "considerable distress".
The committee said the problems with the computer-led, points-based assessment "lay firmly with the DWP", but added that the department was failing to apply "sufficient rigour or challenge to Atos".


Any idea what the bit in bold actually means? Does it relate to turn around, treatment of claimants, standard of information provided? Who knows, but it appears to be the only link to Atos the journo could build into the story.

It's important to distinguish fitness for work (ESA) from payments made to help people deal with their disability (PIP). Seperate assessments are required for each, and people shouldn't be put off one because the other didn't work out for them.

[RyeSloan]

The shades of grey is exactly what I was talking about in relation to comprehensive welfare to work programme based upon rigorous assessment of the capabilities of each claimant he type of work and the specialized facilities they may need. Backed up with a policy of there being jobs available that give the dignity we all want those living with disabilities to have and the support network in place in social services where needed. This IS NOT what is happening in public policy. Simply sending claimants for a brief medical assessment and then sending a letter in the post stating they're on their own is not the answer. That's inhuman! Also, nobody is talking about putting 16 year olds with minor ailments on benefits for life. That's just sensationalist talk. We're talking about a compassionate assessment procedure as part of joined up social policy - reflecting those shades of grey of which you speak. The current assessment procedure is very crude, but it's cheap to administer! We can only have a meaningful existence for those on DLA and other benefits in that context. It requires access to training, the availability of jobs that are meaningful, pay a wage that can be lived on (average wages have fallen by £1400 since 2008) and long term, properly funded social services to provide the needed support. How many clinicians are being 'harassed and by whom'? Where are the figures? Sounds like a Daily Mail reader's dream story. We all want those living with disability to have the maximum level of independence and control of their own lives, but it's a question of the right system of assessment and the right social policies. How do we achieve this, if we're serious about it? I don't believe this government is seriously tackling the poverty issue.I believe this government's welfare 'reforms' are not the answer but are a cynical cost cutting exercise. The current assessment process seems geared to the achievement an arbitrary cut in the number of claimants come what may, which is creating inhuman stress and destitution. Iain Duncan-Smith sanctimoniously and glibly talks of dignity and independence as his government remove those very things from the most vulnerable in our society with its policies. He doesn't give a toss what becomes of those whose benefits are withdrawn. Don't swallow his inane claptrap. He isn't interested in dignity and independence but wants to be in a position to brag about how many people have been removed from claiming come an election campaign. By the way does anyone know how much has been written off hitherto on implementing Universal Credit? It's costing £13 billion, yes billion, is three years behind schedule and so far has been rolled out to just seven thousand people.

Sensationalist would be taking an estimated whole of life cost for a system and claiming that it has been 'written off'

IDS should be applauded for at least trying to reform a benefit system that had become so tangled and convoluted but sadly the implementation has summed up so many public sector technology projects (to be fair though the private sector is not a stranger to huge tech over runs either!)

I'm not doubting your desire for a fairer system nor even your stated outcomes of that new way but I would suggest that simply blaming the Tories or a specific politician is rather under estimating just how incapable central governments are in providing such things.

Sadly cost savings need to come somewhere...with such large budgets already ring fenced then what is the alternative bit to reduce spending in other areas? As I said before every recipient of government cash will demand that they are a special case. Unfortunately as your posts possibly highlight the British public is not ready to listen to the fact that spending reductions are actually needed so it is no wonder none of the politicians are owning up to that fact either....

[RyeSloan]

We should be spending more not less. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pump-priming.asp Growth is the key, trickle down ain't working as it ain't trickling down, it's sitting in the stratosphere of the economy making the uber rich richer. Quantative Easing hasn't worked how about QE for the people? One such radical measure is too controversial for any policymaker to mention publicly, although some have discussed it in private: Instead of giving newly created money to bond traders, central banks could distribute it directly to the public. Technically such cash handouts could be described as tax rebates or citizens’ dividends, and they would contribute to government deficits in national accounting. But these accounting deficits would not increase national debt burdens, since they would be financed by issuing new money, at zero cost to government or to future generations, instead of selling interest-bearing government bonds. Giving away free money may sound too good to be true or wildly irresponsible, but it is exactly what the Fed and the BoE have been doing for bond traders and bankers since 2009. Directing QE to the general public would not only be much fairer but also more effective. Suppose the new money created since 2009, instead of propping up bond prices, had simply been added to the bank accounts of all U.S. and British households. In the U.S., $2 trillion of QE could have financed a cash windfall of $6,500 for every man, woman and child, or $26,000 for a family of four. Britain’s QE of £375 billion is worth £6,000 per head or £24,000 per family. Even if only half the new money created were distributed in this way, these sums would be easily large enough to transform economic conditions, whether the people receiving these windfalls decided to spend them on extra consumption or save them and reduce debts. Distributing money to the general public was the one response to intractable recessions and liquidity traps that united Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes. Their main difference was that Friedman proposed dropping dollar bills out of helicopters, while Keynes suggested burying pound notes in chests that unemployed workers could dig up. Unfortunately modern economics, based as it is on simplistic and misleading assumptions about self-stabilizing markets, has forgotten the insights of these great students of deep economic slumps. In today’s world of electronic money, we would not even need Friedman’s helicopters or Keynes’s ditchdiggers. Just a few lines of computer code – plus some imagination and courage from our central banks. J

Interesting points but I'm. It sure you can say QE hasn't worked...we don't know what would have happens without it so such an arbitrary statement is simply not possible.

QE has had many benefits for those capital rich rather than income rich (or poor!) but let's be honest the main reason for QE was to prop up the government finances and drive down gilt yields...to that end it's done a fine job.

Many many ways to look at this and I doubt any can really be proven to be right or wrong. Helicopter cash is an alluring concept but unfortunately probably not one that would have the consequences intended and probably many unintended consequences...which to be fair is probably what you could say about conventional unconventional QE! ;-)

[Hibernia&Alba]

Sorry. :aok:



A couple of things, I know somebody who was attacked doing the job, charges are now being pressed. Same person has arrived at work, in Edinburgh, twice in a month to find obscene posters pasted to the windows of their office. A man was arrested after smashing a centre in Dunfermline, and there are monthly protests outside offices in Glasgow.

I live in the real world mate, I don't get my information from newspapers. The fact that you think a letter gets sent for the decision says it all, as far as PIP is concerned it's a phone call. So don't come on here and lecture people about how the system can be better run, when it's clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

I suspect you are guilty of making up much of your criticisms based on prejudice and a political agenda. Which is precisely my criticism of many people taking pots at the system.

Furthermore, you seem to be playing a game that is pretty popular on here. Namely, ignoring questions which you can't answer, and disguising your lack of substance in rhetoric. (For example, what has universal credit got to do with this particular discussion?)

I asked you two times if you felt that putting a 16 year old with a condition like Depression onto benefit was going to help them get better, or totally end any chance of working their way through it. You said it was sensationalist talk (I think that means you think it's a bad idea).Let me explain how it works.

Mum has been getting carer's allowance for their child who has a diagnosis of "mental illness", typically ADHD, but failing that other diagnoses are easily obtained. Child is approaching 16th birthday, and carer's allowance / plus fringe benefits is now under threat. Mother takes child along for PIP or ESA.

Child now has now graduated to the world of benefits, with no perception that they have problems they can overcome, and no incentive to push on. Result low self esteem,low mood, Depression continues to be treated, so benefits keep getting paid. Another wasted life, that will no doubt be bringing their own 16 year old along in 16 years' time.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that's what friends working with young people are seeing all of the time. People who see young lives discarded before they have fully begun, in much the same way as beggars in Egypt used to break their children's legs so that they'd earn more due their deformities.

I keep telling you I am not on here to debate the objectives of the Tory government, or the failures of the Labour government to change the system. I personally want to discuss people's experiences of the system. You seem to have little to add to that other than what you have read in the Socialist Worker.

It's people like you with your scaremongering that are making the whole process more difficult for claimants. You deliberately create a climate of fear and suspicion that sees people so scared to go for assessment that they don't bother showing up. Well played, doing the governments dirty work for them.

I am not going to say people haven't had bad experiences - I believe that feed back is available if you go looking for it. The majority of people being assessed, according to my sources, leave the process relieved that it was conducted with compassion and understanding.

Doesn't really suit your agenda to make it easier for them though does it? Hence the Spartist polemics.

It ain't working pal.

First point, your assumption I have know idea how the systems works. I attended a disability medical assessment with my own dad last year. My dad felt the experience was cold and cynical and he felt dehumanized that a doctor he had never met before could, on the basis of a brief meeting, decide his fate and potentially tell him that he and his GP had been wrong about his level of disability and his chronic condition. In the weeks leading up to the assessment he was worried sick he would be declared a benefit cheat and left destitute. He was in such a state I had to take a day off work to accompany him. The exam lasted about 45 minutes and he was told he would receive a LETTER, which duly arrived about two weeks later, during which time he was worried sick again and dreaded the delivery of the post. Thankfully he was declared 'genuine' and kept his benefit, but the process was torture for him. Was he scaremongering?

So please don't tell me have no idea of the process and get all my information from newspapers. I too live in the real world.

Second point I have a political agenda. You're damn right I do, because this is a political issue. It's about how we as a society protect the vulnerable, and the policies and systems we have in place. This government's strategy is overtly political. As about shrinking the size of the state and dismantling public provision in favour of individual cover. Osborne's autumn statement this week, according to the Office Of Budget Responsibility (which he set up) and the Institute Of Fiscal Studies - neither of which, I believe, get their information from Socialist Worker! - have said "the cuts in the next parliament would be colossal and would reconfigure the relationship of citizens and the state in this country. The level of GDP spent by government would be at its lowest since the 1930s". That is to say we would be looking at a pre welfare state society, which would have huge consequences for the sick and unemployed. You're telling me this isn't political! Don't be naïve.

As for your example of the sixteen year old, how many claimants are in that situation? Why did you choose that one case from all the tens of thousands? Not being political?

As for the £13 billion of Universal Credit not being relevant, it certainly is when it will replace six existing benefits and is central to the government's welfare policy. It makes a mockery of cutting costs.

I'm sure we both want the same thing: the chance for those with disability to have as much control over their own lives as possible. To work where they can and to maximize their dignity and role in society. Yet I maintain this government has no plan for doing so. I think their motivation is simply to cut costs and their is no joined up policy to achieve the end we think is desirable. That is my personal experience. It costs money do this properly. It requires properly funded social services, training and skills programmes, help wth travel etc. Simply kicking people off the welfare rolls isn't a thought through policy.

So perhaps you could tell us your plan of how getting those on disability benefits would work in practice? I will support a well planned programme of helping those with disability who can work into the world of work, which at the same time properly looks after those who cannot. So what's your plan?

[hibsbollah]

My assessment of the austerity solution is that iti is largely a mirage! Whether or not it would actually work or not I've no idea (well I do...a quick sharp shock would be the most effective, if rather brutal route) but my point was that really over any sensible timescale there has been no austerity what so ever.

National insurance is a misnomer though isn't it...your money may buy you some entitlement but it's not saved into a pot to pay for it...it's spent like every other tax and your entitlement is based only on the promise of future taxation revenues, if and when you call on that entitlement someone has to pay for it.

As for social housing, you can't use availability as a measure of its existence. A quick google shows almost 4m social renters in England, roughly the same as private rental. I get the drift of your point tho but it will come as no surprise to you that I don't see being a landlord as within the core skills of government, national or local. Housing affordability is the key driver not who the landlord is but until we remove the outdated and outmoded greenbelt restrictions were all stuffed on that front!

Otherwise your insight into your work in the Blair years is appreciated...who knows what the answer is but as I alluded to earlier governments just spending more does not always (rarely?) bring about anywhere near the benefits some allude to.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/07/taxation-civilised-society-increasing-income-tax

Will Hutton puts it better than I could. I dont want to take the thread away to a general economic discussion because the disability assessment is important on its own.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Honest to god. You come on here hoping to discuss people's experiences of the world, how things are effecting them in practice. You leave covered in verbal diahorreah. Is it any wonder people hate politicians so much?

[hibsbollah]

Honest to god. You come on here hoping to discuss people's experiences of the world, how things are effecting them in practice. You leave covered in verbal diahorreah. Is it any wonder people hate politicians so much?

Politics matter. If you think you can just ignore what the powerful are doing you wake up one morning and they've cut the funding to allow you to do your job. Or annexed the Sudetenland or whatever.

[Phil D. Rolls]

First point, your assumption I have know idea how the systems works. I attended a disability medical assessment with my own dad last year. My dad felt the experience was cold and cynical and he felt dehumanized that a doctor he had never met before could, on the basis of a brief meeting, decide his fate and potentially tell him that he and his GP had been wrong about his level of disability and his chronic condition. In the weeks leading up to the assessment he was worried sick he would be declared a benefit cheat and left destitute. He was in such a state I had to take a day off work to accompany him. The exam lasted about 45 minutes and he was told he would receive a LETTER, which duly arrived about two weeks later, during which time he was worried sick again and dreaded the delivery of the post. Thankfully he was declared 'genuine' and kept his benefit, but the process was torture for him. Was he scaremongering?

You go into A&E, a doctor you have never met before makes an assessment of you. That's what doctors and nurses are supposed to do. I know a lot of people are scared they'll be declared cheats - surely the fact that there is a screening process is the fault of the cheats? .

So please don't tell me have no idea of the process and get all my information from newspapers. I too live in the real world.

Could have fooled me. Every post you make is full of soap box rhetoric. Your experience is based on one case, and yet you have the arrogance to assume that your own personal experiences mirror those of every other person who has gone through the process. I'm actually really surprised your father saw a doctor because the majority of assessments for ESA and PIP are carried out by nurses or physios. Still, I guess we might be talking about the same thing.

Who knows, I suspect you don't.

Second point I have a political agenda. You're damn right I do, because this is a political issue. It's about how we as a society protect the vulnerable, and the policies and systems we have in place. This government's strategy is overtly political. As about shrinking the size of the state and dismantling public provision in favour of individual cover. Osborne's autumn statement this week, according to the Office Of Budget Responsibility (which he set up) and the Institute Of Fiscal Studies - neither of which, I believe, get their information from Socialist Worker! - have said "the cuts in the next parliament would be colossal and would reconfigure the relationship of citizens and the state in this country. The level of GDP spent by government would be at its lowest since the 1930s". That is to say we would be looking at a pre welfare state society, which would have huge consequences for the sick and unemployed. You're telling me this isn't political! Don't be naïve.

I think that people with a political agenda are hijacking people with disabilities lives. Where is the evidence that the majority of claimants are having a hard time? It's paragraphs like this one where you stray well off the point and resort to your personal agenda.

As for your example of the sixteen year old, how many claimants are in that situation? Why did you choose that one case from all the tens of thousands? Not being political?

I think, at the last count, 40015. I chose it to illustrate to people in ivory towers like yours what the reality of poverty is on the ground. Which is what I hate the most, generations of families are chosing sickness as their career choice. I think you have definitely agreed that is a bad thing because you seem to refuse to admit it exists.

As for the £13 billion of Universal Credit not being relevant, it certainly is when it will replace six existing benefits and is central to the government's welfare policy. It makes a mockery of cutting costs.


And that makes the assessment process more/less humane why?


I'm sure we both want the same thing: the chance for those with disability to have as much control over their own lives as possible. To work where they can and to maximize their dignity and role in society. Yet I maintain this government has no plan for doing so. I think their motivation is simply to cut costs and their is no joined up policy to achieve the end we think is desirable. That is my personal experience. It costs money do this properly. It requires properly funded social services, training and skills programmes, help wth travel etc. Simply kicking people off the welfare rolls isn't a thought through policy.

The only things I want are to know what people's experiences of the assessment process have been, and whether anybody else feels it is right that people can claim sickness benefits without an assessment. The rest has been in your head since the discussion opened.

So perhaps you could tell us your plan of how getting those on disability benefits would work in practice? I will support a well planned programme of helping those with disability who can work into the world of work, which at the same time properly looks after those who cannot. So what's your plan?


What plan is that? I never said I wanted people on benefits to work, what I said was that too many people are condemned to meaningless lives because they are forced to use being sick as a career option.



Mate, you are spectacularly missing the points I'm trying to make. I have told you enough times I am not interested in discussing the government's objectives. I am interested in discussing whether people's perceptions of the assessment process are well founded.

You ask me what my plan is, I think the current process is a start. I think the existing system encouraged people to be sick, by making the benefit too easy to claim. I think a system which assesses people's function instead of their diagnosis is fairer than one that gives the benefit to people who were treated for a condition that they have now recovered from. Just as we accept selection and scrutiny of claims in life assurance and health insurance, there is no reason we can't accept the same principles for National Insurance.

If you would be decent enough to concede that there are people cheating the system and they need to be weeded out, not only to cut down the number of spurious claims, but also to prevent young people from buying into a life of sickness, then you'd earn my respect. As it is you continue to ignore anything which goes against your simplistic view of health care and welfare.

It's particularly nauseating that you won't admit that the stated tactics of some groups, namely to intimidate the people who run the process is, er, intimadatory. Once again, your eyes and ears are covered.

You have nothing else to tell me. If you really want to help people with disabilities get off your soap box and start to do some real work with them. I keep saying it, but all people like you do is transfer your own agendas and experiences onto other people then insist that what you are doing is for their own good.

It's enough to make anybody sick.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Politics matter. If you think you can just ignore what the powerful are doing you wake up one morning and they've cut the funding to allow you to do your job. Or annexed the Sudetenland or whatever.

Of course politics matter. But imagine a discussion about why the 26 bus has been running late meandering into why the Tory governments roads policy isn't working, culminating in an argument about Keynsian economic theory.

All you want to say is that you were late getting to the shops on Princes Street, and you end up sitting through a lecture.

What pisses me off is when people with a little knowledge on a particular subject talk like they are experts, when they refuse to concede that there is holes in their argument, and when they divert the discussion to talk about their agenda.

[Hibernia&Alba]

We'll just have to agree to differ on this, Phil. The fact you even talk about poverty as a 'lifestyle choice' makes me think you've no experience of living on the breadline and don't understand how childhood, education, unemployment, housing, crime, welfare all interplay in poverty. You also say you're only interested in the impact of the disability assessment process - which is politically driven - but aren't interested in politics, as if governments have nothing to do with welfare policy. You're either naive or uninterested in that case.

I think the assessment process, from my own family experience and what I've read (not only in Socialist Worker by the way) is that it's being done on the cheap, is impersonal and leaves many people frightened. This seems to be the norm for all benefits now, much maligned by much of the press and always debated in terms of its abuse. I'll say again, I want those with disability who are capable of some form of work to be helped to do so, but I don't think the current assessment process and its consequences is doing that; it's merely about cutting costs.

The current assessment process needs fundamental change from its current cruel incarnation and we need a fully thought out policy on welfare to work. Simply kicking those who have bee classed as unfit for work off the rolls and leaving it there isn't a serious policy to address the issue.

No point repeating ourselves or exchanging insults. I think we agree on the desired outcome but disagree about whether the current assessment process is the way to help achieve it.

I'll get back to my Socialist Worker and you can get back to your Daily Mail. ;-)

[Phil D. Rolls]

We'll just have to agree to differ on this, Phil. The fact you even talk about poverty as a 'lifestyle choice' makes me think you've no experience of living on the breadline and don't understand how childhood, education, unemployment, housing, crime, welfare all interplay in poverty. You also say you're only interested in the impact of the disability assessment process - which is politically driven - but aren't interested in politics, as if governments have nothing to do with welfare policy. You're either naive or uninterested in that case.

I think the assessment process, from my own family experience and what I've read (not only in Socialist Worker by the way) is that it's being done on the cheap, is impersonal and leaves many people frightened. This seems to be the norm for all benefits now, much maligned by much of the press and always debated in terms of its abuse. I'll say again, I want those with disability who are capable of some form of work to be helped to do so, but I don't think the current assessment process and its consequences is doing that; it's merely about cutting costs.

The current assessment process needs fundamental change from its current cruel incarnation and we need a fully thought out policy on welfare to work. Simply kicking those who have bee classed as unfit for work off the rolls and leaving it there isn't a serious policy to address the issue.

No point repeating ourselves or exchanging insults. I think we agree on the desired outcome but disagree about whether the current assessment process is the way to help achieve it.

I'll get back to my Socialist Worker and you can get back to your Daily Mail. ;-)

Ok then. I think I've given you better evidence about assessment than you. Namely that I know people involved in the assessment process, who see 25 people a week, and who have a good insight into how many people are at the ham, and how many are genuinely ill.

Please tell me why the process is cruel. I'm really starting to worry that I am missing something here, and that my friend - an experienced nurse who is one of the most caring and compassionate people I know, is telling me porkies.

I just wonder what qualifies you, or the people you say you speak to, to make any judgement on a health professional going about their work.

Sorry if the discussion hasn't been as productive as it should. I feel if you had stuck to the issues and questions I asked, rather than patronising me lecturing about the Biopsychosocial model we might have made progress.

Likewise the fact that you constantly interchange poverty and disabiity as if they are the same thing points to just the sort of sloganism that has pissed me off with the political class.

I certainly didn't say poverty was a lifestyle choice, I said some "disabilities" are a lifestyle choice. I was thinking particularly of the people who claim they can't function properly because of a drink problem.

You'd also do well to have a read of some disability web sites. Many people with disabilities resent being lumped in with the sick. In particular have a read of the Citizens Advice Bureau website. You'll note that whilst they are frustrated with the *****y admin of the benefits, they are happy with the way the benefit is assessed. They also report minimal difficulties experienced by people being assessed.

And as for having no experience of living on the breadline, or being a Daily Mail reader, you couldn't be more wrong.

[hibsbollah]

Phil, I think you need to accept that your career, although relevant to the discussion, doesn't give you a monopoly on wisdom on this subject. There are plenty of examples of people who have terrible experiences of the assessment process. Both historically and currently. Some of them are mentioned on this thread, other examples can easily be found by reading their stories, on blogs or in the media or via campaigning groups. Its also fairly clear that lots of NHS services are almost at the point of collapse for people at the point of need, whether through underfunding or bad management I have no idea, which can't be helping either the assessment process or the sick. This is a fundamentally political problem, so talking politics is very relevant.

Also, you seem to be getting more and more irritated with another poster on here for no obvious reason, apart from maybe your dislike for a particular political position :dunno:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Phil, I think you need to accept that your career, although relevant to the discussion, doesn't give you a monopoly on wisdom on this subject. There are plenty of examples of people who have terrible experiences of the assessment process. Both historically and currently. Some of them are mentioned on this thread, other examples can easily be found by reading their stories, on blogs or in the media or via campaigning groups. Its also fairly clear that lots of NHS services are almost at the point of collapse for people at the point of need, whether through underfunding or bad management I have no idea, which can't be helping either the assessment process or the sick. This is a fundamentally political problem, so talking politics is very relevant.

Also, you seem to be getting more and more irritated with another poster on here for no obvious reason, apart from maybe your dislike for a particular political position :dunno:

Fine, I am happy to be given credible examples of how it has gone wrong. I appreciated the information you shared with me earlier.

My irritation with the other guy isn't based on his politics. It's because he's made assumptions about me, he's refused to respond to what I consider legitimate evidence based point, and because I think he typifies the sort of person with minimal information on the topic who latches onto it to support their broader political agenda.

It particularly gets my goat that there has been no acknowledgment of the disgusting harassment of individuals going about their jobs.

I think we are all talking about the same thing. I prefer to focus on the micro whereas I see politics as being part of the macro.

[hibsbollah]

Fine, I am happy to be given credible examples of how it has gone wrong. I appreciated the information you shared with me earlier.

My irritation with the other guy isn't based on his politics. It's because he's made assumptions about me, he's refused to respond to what I consider legitimate evidence based point, and because I think he typifies the sort of person with minimal information on the topic who latches onto it to support their broader political agenda.

It particularly gets my goat that there has been no acknowledgment of the disgusting harassment of individuals going about their jobs.

I think we are all talking about the same thing. I prefer to focus on the micro whereas I see politics as being part of the macro.

Ok, that makes sense :agree:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Bit of light relief here. Anybody else wonder if this guy really needs the crutch he's waving around in the air?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyFXEHp-u-o

[Hibernia&Alba]

Fine, I am happy to be given credible examples of how it has gone wrong. I appreciated the information you shared with me earlier.

My irritation with the other guy isn't based on his politics. It's because he's made assumptions about me, he's refused to respond to what I consider legitimate evidence based point, and because I think he typifies the sort of person with minimal information on the topic who latches onto it to support their broader political agenda.

It particularly gets my goat that there has been no acknowledgment of the disgusting harassment of individuals going about their jobs.

I think we are all talking about the same thing. I prefer to focus on the micro whereas I see politics as being part of the macro.

For the removal of any doubt, Phil, I deplore any attacks upon civil servants or those health professionals carrying out disability assessments. It's never acceptable to attack a person doing their job - this goes without saying. They are implementing the rules as given to them by politicians, not setting the rules. I don't believe for a moment the doctors and nurses performing the assessments are cruel but the system itself can be cruel, as was the experience of my dad, who said the ordeal left him feeling like a criminal. I believe the current process is more about cutting costs than helping the disabled, an the same applies to sanctions in relation to the unemployed. You're free to disagree with either assertion.

For all the propaganda we are fed about the unsustainable cost of welfare, let's remember that 46% of welfare spending (12% of total public spending) goes on old age pensions. Sickness and disability benefits accounts for only 10% of the welfare budget. By far the biggest strain upon welfare is our ageing population, yet I worry the public discourse has been shifted to a starting point of hoards of working age shirkers milking the system. Let's really help those with disability get work where possible, rather than just kick many off the register subsequent to a medical and then leaving them to sink or swim, when many need additional help. Proper jobs within their capabilities and with the state providing proper support where needed to those who return to work . It isn't easy for anyone looking for work at the moment - there are estimated to be 2.5 million people for half a million vacancies just now - and the disabled have extra barriers facing them. Those who can do some work need jobs available to go into. It's a complex issue which requires an integrated plan, nuanced policy making and compassionate implementation. Sadly, there are many, many examples of claimants who have been through the process who say they were left feeling they were simply a cost to be cut, as Hibsbollah mentioned.

We all want jobs for as many people as possible. We just need the right systems in place to achieve it, which I'm sure we agree on.

[500miles]

Bit of light relief here. Anybody else wonder if this guy really needs the crutch he's waving around in the air?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyFXEHp-u-o

I dunno. How many legs has he got?

[Swedish hibee]

Boris & his mockery of the poor on that s*** show at the weekend was as expected. If they had their way the Tory party would have children of poor parents live on gruel, wear sacks and walk about in bare feet.

Let the poor feed the poor and the rich indulge in the cremation of care. Shocking.

[Beefster]

If they had their way the Tory party would have children of poor parents live on gruel, wear sacks and walk about in bare feet.

That's not really true now, is it?

[Swedish hibee]

That's not really true now, is it?

Yes. Otherwise I would never have said it. I stand by everything I say on here.