howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
a taster here of what should be an interesting programme.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19046447howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
starts in a few minutes, will be interesting to see how atos fare in it.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Who gives... ?
They are at the sharp end...mere henchmen.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Following Howards tip there I watched the programme. It certainly was interesting and displayed a catalogue of unfortunate cases, unfortunate people, who were given a hard time in this new system. Several of the people featured were told they were fit for work only to die shortly afterwards. The system is too rough and ready and getting it wrong much of the time. The process to reduce claimants is costing a phenomenol amount in itself, with many cases being referred to tribunals later all at great cost. The process of assessment goes on continuously with little or no time between each patients asessments.
Chris Grayling Conservative Minister..is not the hardest nosed creature about to be honest...but he did come across as uncaring on this. He looked somewhat out of character.
He is looking though to reduce the amount of time between assessments.
Professor Harrington the man in charge, who was featured on the programme, admitted the system was flawed. Latest news is that he will be frogmarched to the exit shortly !!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
chris grayling did make me smile when he said it was not about saving money.
as paul mentioned above there is not much money being saved anyway with the cost of tribunals.
the last government brought it in using pilot areas to see how it worked in practice, then the coalition made it nationwide.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Actually it is not about saving money as IDS successfully prevented any cuts falling on his budget. A wrong decision that was, the level of benefits should be reduce by increases at less than inflation.
The purpose is to make sure that only those get benefits who should get them and quite right too. I prefer a tough approach, benefits should never be an easy option and nobody should expect to be comfortable on them for life unless they are totally disabled and unable to do any kind of work at all and even then there are limits. People need to be encouraged to insure themselves against loss of income, and/or incentivise employers to do group cover and not rely on the state at all.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
The idea of the partially disabled working is fine if there are the jobs out there with all the extra aids that companies will have to provide, easy parking and building access, lifts and disabled toilets to name a few.
Forgot to add many of those jobs will have to be part-time as the physically disabled can tire very quickly.
I bet that this whole fiasco will not work out cost effective in the long run.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
If you think this is bad now.
Just you see what happens when the uk looses its AAA borrowing rating.
There will be mass layoffs of the public sector, and restrictions on NHS services, and
More
This country is running on borrowed money, prepare for a big drop in the way we have been living.
This is just politicians sticking there toe in the waters of reality.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic, the 2 posts above sum it up nicely.
greece is likely to be officially skint this week which will have a massive impact on the rest of us.
moving someone on chemotherapy to jobseekers allowance is just a distraction.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
im with post 7
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
The not so kind employment minister Chris Grayling has been accused of trying to
censor a Ministry of Justice courts service video that helps people appealing against
decisions to remove their disability and sickness benefit.
It is thought that the kindly `looking` Grayling will step up in to Ian Duncan Smith`s
ministry who is likely to take Ken Clarke`s Justice ministry in the coming reshruffle.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Keith at #8 is spot on, I've discussed this with Barry and others. Our govt spending is unsustainable, too many people believe its a bottomless pit.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
david
instead we put 4 million on the dole??
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Keith where do you think we get the money from to support our enormous debt?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
david,
whilst i appreciate your govts problem
is putting 4 million on the dole any less costly or the correct or best way forward?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Keith, I'm curious why you say "your" govt. This useless bunch happen to be "our" govt.
I didn't vote for either coalition party so my conscience is clear.
But anyhow back to the issue, I agree totally with Keith that we're heading for disaster yet on here and elsewhere I hear people whinging about cuts, they ain't seen nothing yet.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
alternatively david there could be default instead of cuts, once the first country does this the rest of the debt ridden are likely to follow.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Exactly howard, at which point moaning about a few quid here and there will seem a bit silly.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
OK Keith - look at it the other way around.
The government does not deal with the deficit and stops the planned spending cuts.
The deficit grows, debt grows and we get downgraded, interest rates shoot up. Businesses have higher costs, mortgage rates are up to perhaps 15% or even more, bankruptcies multiply, negative equity and repossessions soar. Inflation takes off because more and more QE is needed......
How will that help keep down unemployment? How will that help anyone?
You have to view this also in the background of the international problem, all caused by the same issues, debt and government deficit spending. It is true that in the Eurozone the problem is made even worse because they cannot inflate or devalue to ameliorate the problem. This makes it even more important for us to deal with the deficit, if we dont the problem will bet compounded up by the Eurozone impact.
If you want 8 million more on the dole then you will get them your way.
The fact is we are between a rock and a hard place.
The only responsible way forward is to do what is needed that will give the best base for the future and that is to reduce the rate at which we are borrowing as quickly as possible and repay debt. That means public spending cuts.
If you want to blame anyone then you have to blame those who thought they had banned boom and bust and as a result did not balance the current account during the economic growth phase leaving room now to be able to deficit spend. It is those who you need to blame.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
How has it got to this after Brown saved the world?