Sign up to save AA and DLA

spikeysoul

skcollobcat10 - that is most certainly somethiing to bring up with one of the interested charities - maybe Age Concern or Help the Aged? (I don't know if there are any that deal with the younger retired under 60/65)

The more points that are raied that need clarifying during this stage the better - and the more charities/organisations are aware of peoples worries the more accountable the process will be. At least that's the theory as I understand it.

rosemaryuk

I hope it is okay to post this link as it relates to the discussions taking place.

Campaign to protect disability benefits http://carerwatch.com/cuts/

Carer Watch are a campaign group for carers across the UK run by independent, unpaid carers.We are mothers/husbands/sons/daughters etc.
We found one another on the web so we decided to join together to make ourselves heard.

Many individuals/groups/organisations have been contacted so they can clarify their stance on this.You will note B&W is on there too.The blog will increase as replies are received.

Noone should be worrying about their benefits.Any changes will be a long time in coming especially with a general election coming soon (ish ) .

However, far better to raise voices now rather than too late so that not only the present govt but the next one is also made aware of how people feel about this.

There can be no doubt that funding of care needs discussing but using options we all want to debate, not just those the govt decide to put in a Green paper.

Should taxation have been left on the table??
What do you think?

By leaving this option out is the govt actually seeking to rubber stamp something they have already decided. Surely ALL options should have been left in so the very people this affects and also the general public could decide.

Some of the 'statements' received for the above campaign are..

I therefore strongly support your campaign

The Government is trying to create a consensus that a
tax-funded approach is out-of-bounds, but it seems only to be a consensus within
Government!

Disability Wales firmly opposes the incorporation of AA and DLA

We disagree that AA/DLA should be integrated into a social care budget

I am seriously concerned that the option of
it being paid for out of general taxation (which is why the AA/DLA issue
has been raised) was ruled out by the green paper although many people who it consulted with, felt it was the best and fairest system

You can read the rest yourself on the link given above.

Please feel free to post comments on the campaign blog or email them to [EMAIL="admin@carerwatch.com"]admin@carerwatch.com[/EMAIL]


Thank you
Rosemary

spikeysoul

Thank you for that rosemaryuk - it's exactly what this thread is about, and it's good to see the swell of people getting involved. It's going to effect unpaid carers as much as the people they care for.

rosemaryuk

Thanks SpikeySoul. Fellow geordie??

The internet can be a marvellous tool to use when raising awareness of issues going on that will affect many people, akin to dropping a pebble in the sea and watching the ripples go on and on till out of sight

My heart goes out to those offline who wont know anything about these issues until possibly too late.The whole scenario surrounding Welfare Reform and Social Care is a nightmare but there can be no doubt that they both do need changes.

Just now there are many issues surrounding the WR Bill especially regarding the sanctions and conditions the govt are bringing in.Some of them will affect vulnerable people and so few to do battle on their behalf.

I know this thread about AA/DLA but some of you may find this link of interest regarding ESA http://carerwatch.com/mhealth/ several pages to read

Channel 4 is running a series from next week called...Benefit Busters, details can be found http://www.channel4.com/programmes/benefit-busters/episode-guide/series-1

You can also add comments.

There is a lot of controvesy as to whether private companies should be making such obscene profits and that if a job exists, why is it not paid at the going rate, rather than workfare .

Apologies for going slightly off topic,so I understand if this post gets removed.

NASA_2

Why are people so against ESA?

Bogof_Babe

skcollobcat10 wrote: »

Hello,

I think that it is a good idea because it might just leave the genuine disabled folk on the benefit payroll.

I'd say a better rationale for it being a good idea is that it might just get those capable of work back to work. Nothing wrong with your answer as such, but yet again it doesn't really address the whole point of changing from one system to another.

lisaj_3

NASA wrote: »

Why are people so against ESA?

ESA replaced IB. It is the income you can claim if you are out of work and sick or disabled.

It is part of a comprehensive program of welfare reform and one of the first stages. So it is a sign of things to come.

Under IB anyone who was assessed as sick or disabled was entitled to this benefit. Under ESA they are not. The benefit is conditional on being judged to be making enough effort to get back to work. The Minister says no one must be comfortable claiming benefit. Baroness Hollis who was one of the Ministers at DWP who brought in this new regime said it was aimed at fit !!!!less 22 year old men who chose not to work. The public perception is that most of the sick and disabled who claim benefits are really malingering and that the boot camp regime of ESA which will make them do work related activity under the threat of losing their benefit will get them to stop pretending to be ill and get back to work.

Look at the CarerWatch website and the campaign against ESA on behalf of the severely mentally ill.

We are not commenting on whether boot camp for !!!!less 22 year old fit men who are not really ill is a good or bad thing. At Carerwatch we are only concerned with the really sick and disabled and their carers and we think that they should not be caught up in this.

The tests as to whether you are sick or not are being done by private health providers at ATOS using a computer system that was invented by the US private health insurance industry to refuse to pay out too many claims. It doesn't take the judgement of NHS doctors and is currently rejecting a lot of very sick people. So that is one of the things we don't like.

Then you are passed over to be managed by a contractor from Indus Delta (see their website) in the new welfare to work industry who is on a target and knows alomost nothing about sick people. That is another thing we don't like.

But what we really don't like is that Professor Gregg who invented this system said that seriously sick and disabled people should be put in the 'support' group where they could have any help they wanted to get back to work but where they would not be threatened with the removal of their benefit as a sanction for not trying hard enought to get work. And this to us seems a fair and reasonable way to treat people with severe and eneduring sickness and disability. In particular we want people with severe and enduring mental illness like schizophrenia to get this protection because their behaviour and failure to comply with 'direction' may always be due to their illness.

We think severely sick people should be respected - we think their illness should be respected - and they should be free to make their own choices about how to manage their illness and their lives. Most of the public agree. The public doesn't imagine that the government is bullying really sick people.

That is why we don't like ESA.

lisaj_3

skcollobcat10 wrote: »

Hello,

I am not against it at all.

I am on DLA and IB, IIDB but I think that it is a good idea because it might just leave the genuine disabled folk on the benefit payroll.

There are as you know a lot of chancers out there, it pi**es me off as well. I worked and never claimed any benefit including dole before I had an accident at work. I was and still am in fact annoyed and ashamed to be getting the above benefits but I don't have a choice now. I think that this government has made it too easy for people to abuse the system. Benefits were only for people in real need, it has for some become a career option.

I really wish you luck on ESA.

But wouldn't you rather that you and other people past a certain level of known disability or sickness would still have an unconditional right to benefit instead of it being conditional on your compliance and cooperation with what they decide you can do.

I really can't see that people can be diagnosed with schizophrenia or Parkinsons or any severe condition fraudulently. It isn't possible and so there is no need to include them in this regime that is designed to put pressure on fraudsters.

Fountaine

From an earlier thread ....

"I realise it is not perfect but would hope that those in real need would get more help from Social Services if the change happens.

Note I said hope because the money from peoples DLA could just disappear into a big black hole."

Agreed, I have been trying to arrange an OT (Occupational Therapy) assessment for a relative. Various departments seem to not know what the other is doing or resonsible for, you get passed from OT at the hospital to Social Services, referred for bits of your needs back to your GP, then start the loop again! to then be told the wait is between 8 and 12 months for an assessment as they haven't been able to recruit additional staff. What will happen when / if the bow-wave hits them ? I worked for two years within a Social Services Department of a large council and it was a real eye-opener.

Off now to sign the save DLA/AA petition given at the top of this thread .... XX

healy

lisaj wrote: »

ESA replaced IB. It is the income you can claim if you are out of work and sick or disabled.

It is part of a comprehensive program of welfare reform and one of the first stages. So it is a sign of things to come.

Under IB anyone who was assessed as sick or disabled was entitled to this benefit. Under ESA they are not. The benefit is conditional on being judged to be making enough effort to get back to work. The Minister says no one must be comfortable claiming benefit. Baroness Hollis who was one of the Ministers at DWP who brought in this new regime said it was aimed at fit !!!!less 22 year old men who chose not to work. The public perception is that most of the sick and disabled who claim benefits are really malingering and that the boot camp regime of ESA which will make them do work related activity under the threat of losing their benefit will get them to stop pretending to be ill and get back to work.

Look at the CarerWatch website and the campaign against ESA on behalf of the severely mentally ill.

We are not commenting on whether boot camp for !!!!less 22 year old fit men who are not really ill is a good or bad thing. At Carerwatch we are only concerned with the really sick and disabled and their carers and we think that they should not be caught up in this.

The tests as to whether you are sick or not are being done by private health providers at ATOS using a computer system that was invented by the US private health insurance industry to refuse to pay out too many claims. It doesn't take the judgement of NHS doctors and is currently rejecting a lot of very sick people. So that is one of the things we don't like.

Then you are passed over to be managed by a contractor from Indus Delta (see their website) in the new welfare to work industry who is on a target and knows alomost nothing about sick people. That is another thing we don't like.

But what we really don't like is that Professor Gregg who invented this system said that seriously sick and disabled people should be put in the 'support' group where they could have any help they wanted to get back to work but where they would not be threatened with the removal of their benefit as a sanction for not trying hard enought to get work. And this to us seems a fair and reasonable way to treat people with severe and eneduring sickness and disability. In particular we want people with severe and enduring mental illness like schizophrenia to get this protection because their behaviour and failure to comply with 'direction' may always be due to their illness.

We think severely sick people should be respected - we think their illness should be respected - and they should be free to make their own choices about how to manage their illness and their lives. Most of the public agree. The public doesn't imagine that the government is bullying really sick people.

That is why we don't like ESA.

At the moment people claiming ESA do not have to do anything other than attend work focused interviews. The benefit is not judged on the amount of effort made to get back to work. Claimants do not have to take part in work related activity with the threat of sanctions if they do not. Nobody is being forced to take a job.