campaign against welfare cuts and poverty

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Transcript of today's debate

http://www.parliament.uk/business/p...s/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/431/#ht

 

[Jackobi]

Oh, didn't know about this

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/17812

Apparently these changes relate directly to The Employment and Support Allowance (Amendment) Regulations 2012 which are effective from 28th January 2013.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

Apparently these changes relate directly to The Employment and Support Allowance (Amendment) Regulations 2012 which are effective from 28th January 2013.

Yeah I know. It just gets worse and worse

I wonder if they can call people in for re-assessment to take into account these need regulations? Will loads of people who have already made it into the WRAG or SG now need to be reassessed?

 

[teqniq]

Bit of good news for people in Wales:

Council Tax Benefit Cuts Called Off As Welsh Government Finds £22Million

Cuts to council tax benefit which would have meant bills for 230,000 people for the first time will not go ahead as the Welsh government finds another £22m.

Source: BBC News

Ministers in Cardiff had previously said they could not afford to do so.

Opposition parties welcomed the “U-turn”, but said the Welsh government’s handling of the issue was “shambolic”.

The UK government has put devolved administrations and local councils in charge of the benefit, while also cutting the funding....
.......The £22m, available for the 2013-14 financial year, has been found thanks to some budget “flexibility”....

'Flexibility' eh? Where was it, down the back of the sofa?

Whose cash is that money?

 

[stuff_it]

ATOS style assessments for all, even working people...

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/lord-fraud-announces-atos-for-everyone/

Renaming of sicknotes in 1984 lulztroll: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/fitnote/

 

[cesare]

The government omitted to register all the domains for the new universal job match scheme:

http://universaljobmatch.eu/

 

[8115]

The government’s proposals include withdrawal of benefit if an assessor believes that medication would reduce the risks posed by a claimant's condition, seemingly without regard for whether it would be appropriate in a work context.

I don't understand why they mention risk?

Also, that's disrespectful of people's right to make a choice about their own treatment.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I don't understand why they mention risk?

I suspect that in this context, they mean risk of exacerbation of condition(s)/further damage. Basically, they'll be wanting to avoid results that mean that a firm of ambulance-chasers could get you a good payday off the DWP for making your health worse.

Also, that's disrespectful of people's right to make a choice about their own treatment.

Of course it is, but it's of a piece with everything else they've been using to build their narrative about people with disabilities. Compulsion to work is an obvious next step that's already being trialed.

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

I suspect that in this context, they mean risk of exacerbation of condition(s)/further damage. Basically, they'll be wanting to avoid results that mean that a firm of ambulance-chasers could get you a good payday off the DWP for making your health worse.



Of course it is, but it's of a piece with everything else they've been using to build their narrative about people with disabilities. Compulsion to work is an obvious next step that's already being trialed.

But won't that make more sick people (even with maybe minor illnesses) unemployable and therefore sent by JSA to ESA for ESA to say "get a job you skiver"?

 

[equationgirl]

I suspect that in this context, they mean risk of exacerbation of condition(s)/further damage. Basically, they'll be wanting to avoid results that mean that a firm of ambulance-chasers could get you a good payday off the DWP for making your health worse.

Of course it is, but it's of a piece with everything else they've been using to build their narrative about people with disabilities. Compulsion to work is an obvious next step that's already being trialed.

I suspect they run a very good chance of that if they insist on people using meds or aids that haven't been prescribed by the GP. And serve them right if they are sued.

 

[ViolentPanda]

But won't that make more sick people (even with maybe minor illnesses) unemployable and therefore sent by JSA to ESA for ESA to say "get a job you skiver"?

What do they care, as long as they can play any temporary drop in claimant count as "getting the scrounging cripples back to work"?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I suspect they run a very good chance of that if they insist on people using meds or aids that haven't been prescribed by the GP. And serve them right if they are sued.

Damn right.

 

[stuff_it]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...ised-to-five-years-after-you-die-201006252851

PEOPLE will be expected to work for a minimum of five years as a zombie under new government plans to raise the retirement age.

 

[Bakunin]

'Hell-oooo everybody!'

 

[Minnie_the_Minx]

New Stateman write-up on the WCA Parliamentary Debate

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/01/shadow-state-atos-and-work-capability-assessment

 

[Frankie Jack]

The utter shambles PIP is going to be as seen by the evidence given to the Work and Pensions Committee by Esther McVey MP, Simon Dawson and Dr Bill Gunnyeon on 21st January.

The answers to questions were farcical. Worth reading just for Sheila Gilmore getting stuck into McVey

Oh and this....

Q122 Sheila Gilmore: Could I just ask about older people? It appears that people who turn 65, when this all starts, will be reassessed. Is that correct, even though the assessment will not start until later?

Simon Dawson: Yes. People who turn 65 and are in receipt of DLA after 8 April this year will be still in the reassessment pool, so will be selected for reassessment at some point between then and when those reassessments start in October 2015 and October 2017.

Q123 Sheila Gilmore: We were originally told that that age group would not be affected.

Simon Dawson: I think we have always made clear that for people over age of 65 who are in receipt of DLA, from April, PIP will not be applied to them. It is those in the reassessment pool, I think, to whom this applies.

Q124 Sheila Gilmore: If you are 65 in May this year, or when this starts, you can be reassessed.

Simon Dawson: If you are in receipt of DLA.

Sheila Gilmore: Yes, if you are in receipt of DLA now, if we had not had this change, you would go on getting DLA into retirement. You are now saying that that group will be reassessed, which is, I think, different from what people had understood to be the situation.

Simon Dawson: Can we take that one away?

Q125 Chair: Can you take that one away, because that is actually quite important. Does that mean that somebody who is 60 today, who is already in receipt of DLA, will-no, I suppose everybody would be assessed anyway. It might be worth clarifying exactly what is happening.

Simon Dawson: We will clarify that.

 

[weepiper]

Can anyone confirm that I am reading this right, that under Universal Credit mothers are going to be subject to work-related requirements from when the youngest child is not even 4 months old? What happened to 6 months maternity leave?

Claimants subject to no work-related requirements
89.—(1) A claimant falls within section 19 of the Act (claimants subject to no work-related requirements) if—.


(c)the claimant is pregnant and it is 11 weeks or less before her expected week of confinement, or was pregnant and it is 15 weeks or less since the date of her confinement

From here, Part 8 Chapter 1

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111531938/contents

 

[captainmission]

That's in line with existing income support legislation which only grants eligability on ground of pregnancy for cover 11 weeks before and 15 weeks after.

You're reading the regulations , which need to be read alongside the act itself. The act states;

19 Claimants subject to no work-related requirements

(1) The Secretary of State may not impose any work-related requirement on a​

claimant falling within this section.​

(2) A claimant falls within this section if—​

(c) the claimant is the responsible carer for a child under the age of 1, or​

 

[weepiper]

That's in line with existing income support legislation which only grants eligability on ground of pregnancy for cover 11 weeks before and 15 weeks after.

You're reading the regulations , which need to be read alongside the act itself. The act states;

19 Claimants subject to no work-related requirements

(1) The Secretary of State may not impose any work-related requirement on a​

claimant falling within this section.​

(2) A claimant falls within this section if—​

(c) the claimant is the responsible carer for a child under the age of 1, or​

I did wonder because I've seen the 'child under one' part elsewhere but all I could find in the regulations as an exemption was 'foster parent of a child under one'. Thanks. I see though that lone parents of a foster child have no requirement to look for work beyond work-focused interviews (i.e. they can't be sanctioned for refusing an interview or refusing a job on childcare grounds etc) if they have a child in their care under 16, whereas if it's your own child it's only til they reach 5.

 

[Fedayn]

That's in line with existing income support legislation which only grants eligability on ground of pregnancy for cover 11 weeks before and 15 weeks after.

You're reading the regulations , which need to be read alongside the act itself. The act states;

19 Claimants subject to no work-related requirements

(1) The Secretary of State may not impose any work-related requirement on a​

claimant falling within this section.​

(2) A claimant falls within this section if—​

(c) the claimant is the responsible carer for a child under the age of 1, or​

That is in regards to a woman who is part of a couple, ie living with her partner. A single pregnant woman is eligible for IS from 11 wks before the EDC but will remain on IS, at present, until the youngest child is 5.

 

[captainmission]

that wouldn't be on the grounds of pregnancy though, it'd be on the ground being a single parent with a child under 5. Although for a single claimant the distinction wouldn't make any practical difference.

 

[Fedayn]

that wouldn't be on the grounds of pregnancy though, it'd be on the ground being a single parent with a child under 5. Although for a single claimant the distinction wouldn't make any practical difference.

Not quite, if a woman is either on JSA, or ESA or in work but not going to bet Maternity Allowance or Statutory Maternity Pay she can claim IS, from 11 weeks before the EDC (taken from the Sunday before the EDC), as exceptional conditions 01, ie expecting. The entitlement does not end 15wks after the EDC however as she 'becomes', under IS regs, a lone parent.

 

[captainmission]

ok, i'm not seeing your 'not quite' there, but i'd rather not engage in this level of pedantry on a thread about campagining

 

[stuff_it]

Work harder you plebs!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9825271/Cut-in-tax-credits-increase-workers-hours.html

 

[stuff_it]

.

 

[stuff_it]

Under the new system Jobcentre staff with less than full time hours will have to sanction themselves.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/jobcentre-staff-to-be-forced-to-sanction-themselves/

 

[BigTom]

Under the new system Jobcentre staff with less than full time hours will have to sanction themselves.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/jobcentre-staff-to-be-forced-to-sanction-themselves/

I agree with what he said at the end though - that this may present an opportunity to build collective action with job centre staff. However, I'm partly just laughing at the thought of some cuntish advisor somewhere on part time hours seeing the other end of the system. Tempted to make a leaflet for JCP staff based on this post though...

 

[Firky]

A year ago they were devastated by the loss of their little girl to cancer. And to help them cope they turned seven year-old Becky Bell's room into a shrine. But now the family, from Hartlepool, face paying hundreds of pounds extra in rent - because of new Government rules which mean tenants have to pay more if they have a spare room. Some call it the "bedroom tax". Becky's family say it's "disgusting." Watch the full story on tonight's Look North - 6.30pm on BBC One.

:\

 

[8115]

Panorama on now, who's getting rich off welfare reform.

 

[Greebo]

Panorama on now, who's getting rich off welfare reform.

Gosh, could the content have been any more predictable?