howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
In an interview with today's Daily Telegraph, the Work and Pensions Secretary says that he is determined to introduce radical reforms to disability benefits which will see more than two million claimants reassessed in the next four years.
Iain Duncan Smith says that the number of claimants has risen by 30 percent in recent years "rising well ahead of any other gauge you might make about illness, sickness, disability". Losing a limb should not automatically entitle people to a pay-out, he suggests.
The cost of disability living allowance, which is intended to help people meet the extra costs of mobility and care associated with their conditions, now outstrips unemployment benefit and will soon be £13 billion annually.
Under the reform plans, the existing benefit will be replaced with a simpler "more focused" allowance and only those medically assessed to be in genuine need of support will continue to qualify.
An official impact assessment of the plans, released this month, reveals the scheme will cut benefit payments by £2.24 billion annually - and lead to about 500,000 fewer claimants.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
We can't put up with this
says Iain Duncan-Smith
"Swap disability for bliss
to cut claimants by a fifth!"
Not since Eric Arthur Blair
has language seen such flair
half a million fewer claim
but disabled just the same
The future. Who can tell?
But choose, we can, whose ill
The future. Bad Orwell?
The broken? They get the bill.
The sick are ever dear
Shallow pockets never deeper
Illness, we all do fear
But, unemployment's cheaper.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
I was feeling pretty low anyway this morning as have appointment with kidney specialist tomorrow and can see dialysis for rest of my life looming. Then this is the first thread I read. Now I really need cheering up. The DLA is the only thing that makes my life worth living because without the possibility of paying for the odd trip out (mostly to Doctor, Hospital and rarely shops) I might just as well chuck in the towel. Having recently tried the trip to K & C by bus and been prostrated by it for about 3 days I do not know what I will do if my DLA is taken away.
When you consider that even with the Volunteer Bureau it costs £30 to get to Canterbury, it is not something I could afford on my pension alone. And nowadays most appointments are there or Ashford or Margate. I have paid that much for the privilege of being told that nothing much was going to be done yet (which could have been said over the phone by the way).
Eye appointments, X-Rays, Venograms, minor ops..... Just will not be able to afford it all.
So could some kind person think of something cheerful to tell me?
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
dispicable git,needs sacking straight away,no ifs or buts.like diana says thats the only money that keeps them going.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
The objective is to get rid of those merely 'swinging the lead'. People in genuine need should not be worried.
It is about time there was a toughening up on this. Well done IDS.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
agree with all the above, let's be clear on this we are not talking about incapacity benefit which is sometimes abused.
the assessment for disability living allowance is stringent and people who do get rely on it for daily living.
the company that will carry out the reassessments(think it is atos) will know that their job is to class people as fit to work in order to please the government and get their contract renewed.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Oh Dear! I'm afraid i wont be able to cheer you up with this one Diana, but hopefully you will be okay.
Ive had the following in from the Public Sector Executive....
Half a million people who currently receive disability living allowance (DLA) may be ineligible to get help under the replacement programme, personal independence payments (PIP).
The changes will help cut the annual cost of such payments by £2.24bn, according to work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith, who said far more people have been claiming under the current system than can possibly be explained by illness, sickness or disability.
Two million claimants will be reassessed in the next four years to ensure the benefit effectively gauges people's capability, and their need for extra support.
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Iain Duncan Smith said: "We are creating a new benefit, because the last benefit grew by something like 30% in the past few years.
"It's been rising well ahead of any other gauge you might make about illness, sickness, disability or for that matter, general trends in society".
He said a lot more but I think I will stop there.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Equaty Watchdog;Coalition failed to test ``Fairness`` of spending cuts.The Treasury failed to consider how crucial policies
would affect Women and Disabled before the 2010 spending reviews.Add it to the long list of ill-conceived policies....
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
I have no problem with this, after reassessments lets find out who does and who doesn't need help, its the duty of those who can to help those who cant.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the reassessments won't be about finding out who is disabled but about getting results i.e. lessening the benefits bill.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
#9 You are obviously one of the lucky ones who has no disability or is not short of money if you are disabled. My daughter-in-law who lost for her disability money some time before Easter she still has not had her re-assessment even though Social Services have given her a Care Package for when her husband is away. They live in rural Oxfordshire and she has had to give up her car and freedom because they can not afford two cars without her money.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Yes I am very lucky jan, and I'm also very keen that those who need help get it.
I'm sure we all know of people swinging the lead, by doing so they deprive those who really need it.
That is clearly true, and there are many anecdotes about people on DLA living the high life. Most of those, however, are not true. A little like expecting people on the dole to stay in with the curtains drawn unless actually out at an interview. It is obviously a bad thing when people draw a benefit to which they are not entitled, but disability is easily ignored, and many disabled people have "good" and "bad" days, some doctors are inept at assessing disability, some don't care much, and some disabilities are hidden. It isn't quite as simple as the deserving and the undeserving. And DLA and the rest can make the difference between quality of life and a living hell
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
It is all about making sure that those who get the money are the right ones and that is exactly what should happen.
No argument from me, but it really isn't as easy and clear cut as people are assuming. I am fearful that there will be many errors that impact badly on people. Obviously it will be a good thing if more money is re-directed to people who need it. I am also fearful that while it is a good thing to encourage people to work - not just for the economy but also because people actually feel better when they work, get some self esteem going and some pride - it is hugely negative to simply withdraw support without also enabling support for a back to work plan. Some people will have been out of the loop for a long time, their disability may have decreased their confidence, many other issues could impact. To just cut off support without ensuring a mechanism to replace it would be cruel and neglectful.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 11....when that happens you can become a recluse.Many of the 500,000 under review will lose their mobility funds,which
is so necessary to enable one to have a somewhat `normal` life.
Being in a rural setting also exagerates the problems.Some care packages can be superb but they do not give the disabled a
freedom of choice.
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
An earlier post said, "People in genuine need should not be worried" they are worried and with just cause, nothing I have seen or heard suggests they will be treated fairly and with compassion.
Audere est facere.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
stories abound of people being treated for serious, sometimes terminal conditions are being assessed and losing their benefits.
the main complaint is that they are told that if they turn up for the interview they must be fit enough to work and if they don't turn up they will lose their benefits.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
This is not a subject you are an expert in, proved by your comment "People in genuine need should not be worried"
I too believe that those who abuse this system should weeded out and dealt with.
However, the general consensus by a few on the forum, that the abuse is prolific, are wrong.
Having been through this personally, I can state that "genuine disabled people, do, need to be worried" because they are the easy prey.
Ask a genuine disable person to bend over and touch their toes, they will try their very best to do so.
Ask someone who is abusing the system the same question and they will not get out of bed and know exactly what to say to keep their benefits.
If the same thing happens as the last time, the private French firm, Atos Origin, will pay private doctors to go round to disabled households, with no medical history of the claimant to take reference from and unless they see some drastic visible signs of being disabled, then the doctor will sign genuine disabled people off he system, with the premise that if they are genuine, then they will appeal against the decision.
That leaves genuine disabled people fighting to get their benefits back, that can take up to a year. Whilst the abuser lives on with a happy little life.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
purely a numbers game gary, already announced how many will be struck off and money saved before any assessments are made,
this is about short term popularity - we all know someone abusing the system.
in the long run the mood will change when people see a family member, friend or neighbour with genuine problems left out to dry.
then we will see the renaissance of the "nasty party" label.
