The Miracle of St George

wotsthat

Moby wrote: »

Don't be naive....the reality is these people will just put further strain on other hard pressed services such as the NHS!

They've gone from disabled to not disabled - the only difference is the use of the word 'not' in front of an adjective. They're no more or less disabled than they were 2 months ago.

Why are they any more or less likely to use NHS services?

MS1950

Generali wrote: »

900,000 people have decided that they are well enough to work after all now they face being properly tested to see whether or not they can work.

Included in the 900,000 were 30 people with blisters and 60 with acne apparently!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9963012/900000-choose-to-come-off-sickness-benefit-ahead-of-tests.html

It's a miracle I tell you, a miracle. Almost a million people are suddenly well. Beatification and canonization are surely not far away. You normally only need 1 miracle to be beatified, 2 to be a saint.

I note that (unhelpfully) The Telegraph doesn't offer a source or link for these statistically surprising figures (apart from a vague reference to 'latest government figures'); despite the fact that the DWP website is awash with statistical sources?

So I searched.

Firstly there is nothing resembling the Telegraph's claims in the DWP's 'Recent statistics releases':

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/index.php?page=esa_ibr;

while their ‘News and announcements’ page reports that ‘Publication of National and Official Statistics on State Benefits: Delay to August 2012 statistics’:

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=news

So the most up to date statistics relevant to the Telegraph’s claims are the ‘Employment and Support Allowance - Incapacity Benefits Reassessment: Work Capability Assessments’ released in January 2013:

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/index.php?page=esa_ibr

These show that in the period April 2011 to May 2012 out of an overall ‘reassessment' caseload of 603600, 19700 are listed as ‘Closed before assessment’ (Table 1 of excel spreadsheet); while the accompanying pdf explains:

“2.5.1 Status of claims closed before assessment and those still in progress – Table 1

In the period from December 2011 to February 2012 9 per cent of incapacity benefits claims that were referred for reassessment had not completed the WCA process by August 2012; of these 3 per cent were closed before a decision was made and 6 per cent were still in progress”;

So at most 19700 were actually ‘closed before a decision was made’; and even of those, there’s no indication why they were closed.

None of which bears the slightest resemblance to the Telegraph’s sensational and unsupported claim that ‘878,300…decided not to have an official assessment’.

As I understand that you are some sort of professional economist, presumably with a commitment to accuracy, I’m sure you wouldn’t really want to be associated with what seems to be a piece of inaccurate politically motivated sensationalism – would you?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

MS1950 wrote: »

a piece of inaccurate politically motivated sensationalism

Just to be clear, which of the following are you accusing of just making this up?

- The Government

- The Telegraph

Or is it possible the most recent stats are not on the DWP website yet?

Moby

wotsthat wrote: »

They've gone from disabled to not disabled - the only difference is the use of the word 'not' in front of an adjective. They're no more or less disabled than they were 2 months ago.

Why are they any more or less likely to use NHS services?

Its not the word 'not'. Its the definition of 'disabled'. The Govmt have got ATOS to re-define the term to make the test more rigorous. The people that have been put off by the more rigorous test will just pop up at hard pressed casualty units or local alcohol, mental health units, drug units etc. I know because I supervise such people. They are just being pushed around the system really.

Dreadzone

Dam those tories. They really are the nasty party. Albeit with magic healing powers!

MS1950

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Just to be clear, which of the following are you accusing of just making this up?

- The Government

- The Telegraph

Or is it possible the most recent stats are not on the DWP website yet?

Well, without sources or further evidence - the finger points at the Telegraph.

As regards the possibility that 'the most recent stats are not on the DWP website yet' - you find them - I've searched (and if you do I'll happily retract).

However, a bit of common sense and primary school level arithmetic would suggest that if between April 2011 to May 2012, at most, only 19700 out of 603600 reassessed claims were ‘closed before a decision was made’, it is more than unlikely that a further 858600 (the Telegraph's claim of 878,300 minus 19700) would then have been ‘closed before a decision was made’ between May 2012 and some unspecified 'recent' date!?

zagubov

princeofpounds wrote: »

Those are utterly epic numbers of people.

I'm pretty impressed by IDS; I think the fact that he had a go often leadership and failed means that he now has the courage to actually take tough decisions rather than gain popularity for the top job.

He's going through what John Swinney went through at Holyrood. Rubbish as party leader. Reappointed to the Finance post and pretty much redeeemed himself bigtime.

MS1950

MS1950 wrote: »

Well, without sources or further evidence - the finger points at the Telegraph.

As regards the possibility that 'the most recent stats are not on the DWP website yet' - you find them - I've searched (and if you do I'll happily retract).

However, a bit of common sense and primary school level arithmetic would suggest that if between April 2011 to May 2012, at most, only 19700 out of 603600 reassessed claims were ‘closed before a decision was made’, it is more than unlikely that a further 858600 (the Telegraph's claim of 878,300 minus 19700) would then have been ‘closed before a decision was made’ between May 2012 and some unspecified 'recent' date!?

I don't really want to 'quote' myself - but after posting I found that the Telegraph's 'latest government figures' - published on March 30 2013 - bear an uncanny resemblance (ie they're exactly the same) as figures contained in an article from the Sun published 28th April 2011:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...es-reveal.html

which claimed (like the Telegraph with no link to a source) that:

"ALMOST 900,000 Brits trying to claim sickness benefit are fit to work, shock figures reveal....In all 887,300 scroungers were snared"

Spot the similarity....?

I do hope some of the posters on here who rushed to post or support the Telegraph's latest claim will now have the decency to retract?

Generali

MS1950 wrote: »

I note that (unhelpfully) The Telegraph doesn't offer a source or link for these statistically surprising figures (apart from a vague reference to 'latest government figures'); despite the fact that the DWP website is awash with statistical sources?

So I searched.

Firstly there is nothing resembling the Telegraph's claims in the DWP's 'Recent statistics releases':

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/index.php?page=esa_ibr;

while their ‘News and announcements’ page reports that ‘Publication of National and Official Statistics on State Benefits: Delay to August 2012 statistics’:

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=news

So the most up to date statistics relevant to the Telegraph’s claims are the ‘Employment and Support Allowance - Incapacity Benefits Reassessment: Work Capability Assessments’ released in January 2013:

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/index.php?page=esa_ibr

These show that in the period April 2011 to May 2012 out of an overall ‘reassessment' caseload of 603600, 19700 are listed as ‘Closed before assessment’ (Table 1 of excel spreadsheet); while the accompanying pdf explains:

“2.5.1 Status of claims closed before assessment and those still in progress – Table 1

In the period from December 2011 to February 2012 9 per cent of incapacity benefits claims that were referred for reassessment had not completed the WCA process by August 2012; of these 3 per cent were closed before a decision was made and 6 per cent were still in progress”;

So at most 19700 were actually ‘closed before a decision was made’; and even of those, there’s no indication why they were closed.

None of which bears the slightest resemblance to the Telegraph’s sensational and unsupported claim that ‘878,300…decided not to have an official assessment’.

As I understand that you are some sort of professional economist, presumably with a commitment to accuracy, I’m sure you wouldn’t really want to be associated with what seems to be a piece of inaccurate politically motivated sensationalism – would you?

I'll ignore your rather impressive level of pomposity and point you to the fact that The Guardian has also referred to this data:

http://m.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/31/churches-ministers-perpetuating-myths-poverty

MS1950

MS1950 wrote: »

I don't really want to 'quote' myself - but after posting I found that the Telegraph's 'latest government figures' - published on March 30 2013 - bear an uncanny resemblance (ie they're exactly the same) as figures contained in an article from the Sun published 28th April 2011:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...es-reveal.html

which claimed (like the Telegraph with no link to a source) that:

"ALMOST 900,000 Brits trying to claim sickness benefit are fit to work, shock figures reveal....In all 887,300 scroungers were snared"

Spot the similarity....?

I do hope some of the posters on here who rushed to post or support the Telegraph's latest claim will now have the decency to retract?

Quoting myself again….

No takers then from those so keen to post and support this piece of fabricated nonsense from the Telegraph?

So I’ll be direct.

‘Generali’ you originally posted the link to the Telegraph article (together with your own ‘editorial’ observations) from Australia, I believe?

And from your ‘Signature’ it seems you like quotes from Churchill, so I’ll offer you another well known Churchill quote which I think sums up your ‘contribution’ to this particular ‘discussion’:

“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”