Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It's also now looking to take away my visually impaired wife's PIP. So you'll forgive my scepticism.
It's also now looking to take away my visually impaired wife's PIP. So you'll forgive my scepticism.I think they know that. This govt has raised NMW and brought in some of the biggest reforms for workers rights in my lifetime. They just don’t have a dot com bubble bonus paying for everything.
I'll bite. First off we need to get rid of this idea that British people don't want to work and there's huge numbers of people blagging it. The stats put our employment rate at 5th in the world. Realistically how many more people can be forced into the workforce?Back in adult land
Having to score 4 in one activity to get the highest benefit is probably too high and may need to be looked at
But things like making sure people won't lose their benefit if they try to take a job and they find it is too much, scrapping WCA's, more face to face meetings, no reassessments disabilities that will never improve an extra 1bn to try and help though who want to work back into work and to also help employers keep people in work are all good things that should be supported.
It's fucking stupid to think that the welfare system doesn't need improving and is fair for a lot of people in it, how you do so can be open to debate.
Open to genuine suggestions on what can be done though.
I'm half expecting them to revive the old Tory idea of making pensioners work to keep receiving their pension.I can see it now, somebody has lost an arm in Afghanistan. He'll be forced into work in making armaments for Kier's Ukrainian defence force.
Can only speak for myself but the time I was off work furloughed during covid, and I'm sure most people wouldn't class a pandemic as a great year of their lives, on every available metric my health was far better than any time I can remember. Went back to work and all the old issues came straight back. I'm going to take a lot of persuading that work and the like of work life balance I have is not massively contributing to my health issues.Wes streeting arguing that work is good for your mental health .. Wes streeting who uses the same sentence your boss would use .. difficult to understand why a Labour government are behaving like this really
But you act like other departments in government aren't doing these things already. Work is being done on waiting lists which are slowly starting to come down and workers rights and higher pay are at the core of what Angela Rayner is working on.I'll bite. First off we need to get rid of this idea that British people don't want to work and there's huge numbers of people blagging it. The stats put our employment rate at 5th in the world. Realistically how many more people can be forced into the workforce?
If you want to get people off benefits then target the cause. It's not rocket science, for example huge cuts to mental health provision followed by the number of people off work with mental health issues increasing. Any idiot should be able to see the link but instead we're going back to making out mental health issues aren't real.
We also have huge NHS waiting lists so people are getting sicker and staying sicker for longer, if not getting far worse. On the news today was a poor girl with endometriosis who had waited so long for treatment on the NHS she had permanent organ damage. The failures of the system are actively pushing people towards a life of being unable to work.
Also, make work pay! Living standards have stagnated for over a decade now. People who are working feel like they aren't being rewarded. Fix that and maybe some of those who don't have a job will think it's something that is worthwhile.
The number of vacancies has reduced every month for 30 months. The government has said it is cutting civil service jobs and I know for a fact they're cutting jobs in the NHS. What do you think happens when the government says it is cutting spending? You aren't this delusional surely?But you act like other departments in government aren't doing these things already. Work is being done on waiting lists which are slowly starting to come down and workers rights and higher pay are at the core of what Angela Rayner is working on.
I agree with you regarding Mental Health
No one should think that British people don't want to work. There are those that can but the system makes unrealistic or puts to my fear into them trying. That is why the back to measures can only be a good thing, is it ok that currently someone who wants to try and go back to work can't as they may lose their benefits if they find they can't work the job? Yes Britain needs more jobs but that is a plan of the government. You can't just look at the DWP plans in isolation, other departments are trying to address the issues you raise. Will they be successful? Only time can tell but that is happening.
Read what I said, the plan is to create an economy where there are more and better jobs. I also said no one really knows if that would successful. I'll charitable and think you just missed that instead of purposefully ignoring it.The number of vacancies has reduced every month for 30 months. The government has said it is cutting civil service jobs and I know for a fact they're cutting jobs in the NHS. What do you think happens when the government says it is cutting spending? You aren't this delusional surely?
Perhaps then we could offer universal childcare to help mums back into full time work sooner.also everyone seems to ignore that i have said i think the level for highest dip would be too high
i just also think trying to get people who can and want to work back into work is a good thing as well
yeah, that's an ideaPerhaps then we could offer universal childcare to help mums back into full time work sooner.
Well simply put there's a huge economic disincentive for people to have children because of childcare and especially so for women trying to return to the workplace. So while they're busy targeting disabled people's PIP, perhaps they could offer more generous paternity leave and universal childcare.yeah, that's an idea
having seen how much friends have to pay to have their pre school age kids looked after I agree that this can make you worse off in work
we could also stop the stupid slide back to having to go into the office to work, we could also look to incentivise flexible hours and job sharing to empoyers
I read it but it's just words by you, and the government. Just saying growth doesn't mean it's going to happen and cutting spending certainly has the opposite effect.Read what I said, the plan is to create an economy where there are more and better jobs. I also said no one really knows if that would successful. I'll charitable and think you just missed that instead of purposefully ignoring it.
yes good idea, more of an idea for Rayner's department or maybe the Philipson's department if you want to link preschool care with the education than the DWP but a good ideaWell simply put there's a huge economic disincentive for people to have children because of childcare and especially so for women trying to return to the workplace. So while they're busy targeting disabled people's PIP, perhaps they could offer more generous paternity leave and universal childcare.
Yes it would cost the state more up front but in exchange you've gained another worker for the economy in the long run and done something to address the low birth rate.
So let that play out rather than rushing this through. This seems more like a way to plug the gap in the finances they've created for themselves with self imposed fiscal rules. If they're making work more attractive then that will have an impact, if they're cutting waiting lists that will reflect in the number of people being off work sick.But you act like other departments in government aren't doing these things already. Work is being done on waiting lists which are slowly starting to come down and workers rights and higher pay are at the core of what Angela Rayner is working on.
There's literally a government review of this in progress, Mayfield is due to give his first report later this week. But the government have decided rather than wait for the review they will just do whatever they feel like on a whim. What the fuck is the point of spending money on a review if you're going to pre-empt it and make the whole thing a waste of time?No one should think that British people don't want to work. There are those that can but the system makes unrealistic or puts to my fear into them trying. That is why the back to measures can only be a good thing, is it ok that currently someone who wants to try and go back to work can't as they may lose their benefits if they find they can't work the job?
How is my disabled wife exploiting the system Dom?Cutting spending in areas that are being exploited is the right thing to do. Do you just want things to keep getting exploited and our country lose more and more money? Oh yeah let’s also tax the richest company owners more and more so they end up taking business elsewhere and leaving us worse off
Obviously not for people that are using it correctly in your situation, but people that are exploiting it needs to be fixed. A balance needs to be found so the people that need the most help get it but also the ones exploiting it can’t do any longerHow is my disabled wife exploiting the system Dom?
Surely you look at things like this, things which have been known issues for a while, which have data and evidence to back them up, things which can relatively easily be acted upon.having seen how much friends have to pay to have their pre school age kids looked after I agree that this can make you worse off in work
we could also stop the stupid slide back to having to go into the office to work, we could also look to incentivise flexible hours and job sharing to empoyers
How many people are exploiting it? How many genuine cases is it acceptable to be collateral damage in stopping that exploitation? How much money should we spend stopping that exploitation?Obviously not for people that are using it correctly in your situation, but people that are exploiting it needs to be fixed
This is where the government needs to put a team together to find out about each individual case, it’s a disgrace how people that genuinely need all the support end up suffering because of people exploiting it.How many people are exploiting it? How many genuine cases is it acceptable to be collateral damage in stopping that exploitation? How much money should we spend stopping that exploitation?
I think the number of people exploiting the system is much lower than the number people perceive it to be. As it happens it looks like my wife will lose her PIP despite having a lifelong physical disability in the interest of saving a pretty tiny sum of money off the welfare bill.Obviously not for people that are using it correctly in your situation, but people that are exploiting it needs to be fixed. A balance needs to be found so the people that need the most help get it but also the ones exploiting it can’t do any longer
thats fine but if you're doing that as a matter of principal you need to accept that you will be spending far more than the amount being paid to the small number of people exploiting the system to 'fix' the problem.This is where the government needs to put a team together to find out about each individual case, it’s a disgrace how people that genuinely need all the support end up suffering because of people exploiting it.
Periodically Mrs BSB's eyesight isn't even assessed by a medical professional, it's by someone with a clipboard in an assessment centre with an eyechart. So whether or not she is still disabled isn't even verified by someone with medical qualificationsthats fine but if you're doing that as a matter of principal you need to accept that you will be spending far more than the amount being paid to the small number of people exploiting the system to 'fix' the problem.
I think people are under the impression that you just rock up to the doctors and you're set for life. These type of benefits are very hard to get as it is, and the amount people get is barely enough for most to live on.
Sounds like that'll cost a few quid DomThis is where the government needs to put a team together to find out about each individual case, it’s a disgrace how people that genuinely need all the support end up suffering because of people exploiting it.
The old Labourites were saying that in the era of jobs for life, strong union membership to protect pay and conditions, more secure employment and housing far closer to wages in cost than today.
Work does not pay if your employment is insecure, wages not keeping up with living costs and pension schemes a shadow of their former selves. I cannot speak much for Gen Z, but among my millennial friends now all in our 30s, 3 of us have/are having children, the rest aren't and it's for economic reasons. The consequences of this declining birth rate we are already seeing and it will either be that you need to be rich to have children or get the state to drastically increase the level of financial support for new parents.
People need to look beyond the up front cost of anything as a reason not to do it. 14 years of the Tories underfunding most things in the name of saving money has ultimately left us with a system in very bad shape needing even more money to fix it than if we'd made the commitments in the first place.
I just don't think we'll ever see eye to eye on this or similar issues MMB. Thankfully we're in much closer agreement on the important stuff-football!The attitudes of old Labour grandees toward long term benefit claimants would be considered ‘far right’ today. This something people like Frank Field who still had that vague connection to Old Labour actually understood.
The problem I have when talking to people of the ‘left’ generally, is that this idea of public services is ‘underfunded’ is repeated ad nausem. Firstly, it’s a manipulation based ‘real terms’ and the principle that running costs need to be matched to inflation is a faulty idea. If private sector companies operated like that, we’d be in trouble - they typically don’t.
In any case, if all the issues around pensions, welfare, the NHS, schooling (and so on) could be fixed with ‘x’ more funding, the government would just do that. Especially a Labour government. The reason they can’t just magically increase the funding is a) the cost of servicing debt increases and b) it creates a death trap for taxpayers of ever ending tax to fund public services.
I just don't think we'll ever see eye to eye on this or similar issues MMB. Thankfully we're in much closer agreement on the important stuff-football!
Agreed on all counts.Haha yes indeed, most people’s political outlooks are generally a sum of their past experiences and are well meaning! Both sides of the aisle.
As long as it’s never personal, the disagreements are fine by me! The off topic section can get quite personal at times!
There's the actual green paper if anyone actually wants to see what the plans actually are. Lot more "further consultation" than the press reports make out.
Removing your benefits is supporting you into workOur starting point is simple: disabled people and people with health conditions, who are able to, should have the same access to opportunities, choices and chances as everyone else. That is what we mean by an equal society. Many disabled people and people with health conditions want to work but are not supported to do so
Just wondering why they should get locked in increases that could be well beyond inflation while others are having their means of living removed entirely?Those pesky old people eh
So how's that going?Read what I said, the plan is to create an economy where there are more and better jobs. I also said no one really knows if that would successful. I'll charitable and think you just missed that instead of purposefully ignoring it.
it's a long term project designed over the life of a parliament, no one knows how things will be in 2029So how's that going?
Making cuts and getting rid of staff in the public sector seems an odd way of doing it. And when you then consider that these wages then won't be spent in the private sector and so jobs will be lost there too. Who in turn then won't be spending their wages and so more jobs are lost etc. etc. If they want a plan to create more jobs why not start in the public sector where they can actually control the number of jobs? Because they're more focused on bullshit economics of 'balancing books', which their current policies are destined to fail to do anyway as they always have in the past.
And how are there going to be better jobs when so much is geared towards low skilled, low pay service jobs?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?