Baroness Thatcher passed away

CRISPIANNE3

ukcarper wrote: »

That's a bit condescending isn't it.

Was not meant to be but you have the most vulnerable of society who/lived in council houses.

Murphy_Gooner

But getting back to the subject.
Im not going to be two faced and suddenly go on about how she was a great person. Because to me, no i couldn't stand the woman.

It clear, especially from this thread on its own, that she caused alot of divide in this country. An us and them society which this government seems to like about aswell.

But if im honest i couldn't care less she is dead. So people should just move on.
Be glad when this is all forgotten about.

Jennifer_Jane

PaulF81 wrote: »

I also suspect its a lot higher than 0.7% too. That's only the detectable fraud.

Yes, it's actually the "detected" fraud, as it's a survey (with 95% Confidence levels) from DWP departments.

There is a time delay as well. We will see these figures get higher as more people get off benefits and into work as things get tighter for those abusing the system.

PaulF81

Murphy_Gooner wrote: »

Whats makes you think there is no testing for DLA? What about people with mental health issues who i suspect would have great difficulty being put infront of people for a test.

From the bbc:

Mr Duncan Smith told the Daily Mail: "Seventy per cent of people on it have lifetime awards which means no-one sees you ever again. It doesn't matter if you get better or your condition worsens - it's quite ridiculous."

"Taxpayers pay out £50bn in sickness and disability benefits - we're ahead of pretty much every other major country in the G20," he said.

"So this is not exactly what you would call harsh - this is quite reasonable to get it back under control and stop the unnecessary growth levels".

Minister for Disabled People Esther McVey said the PIP would give more targeted support than DLA.

"Disability Living Allowance is an outdated benefit... and needs reform to better reflect today's understanding of disability," she said.

grizzly1911

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

It's not simply the welfare bill stolen from the Country, but the opportunity cost of lost contribution to Society - in terms of tax and effort.

Aren't we always going to have a pool of unemployed? I agree that out and out scrounges and abusers should be targeted.

Even if we get then into gainful employment they can actually hold it down arguably they will just displace someone else. We don't have an an economy that can provide "full" employment.

There is also a balance to be struck between policing work and employment and the cost of it,.

CRISPIANNE3

Mozette wrote: »

So actually in your opinion ex-council tenants (who you seem to have a dim view of) don't really have much to thank her for?
Certainly people today who might need social housing, but oh, there isn't any, have bog all to thank her for.

The ex council house tenants have everything to thank her unlike the people who are on the waiting list hoping one day they will be able to join in the party.

PaulF81

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Aren't we always going to have a pool of unemployed? I agree that out and out scrounges and abusers should be targeted.

Even if we get then into gainful employment they can actually hold it down arguably they will just displace someone else. We don't have an an economy that can provide "full" employment.

There is also a balance to be struck between policing work and employment and the cost of it,.

If this is the case, why do we have such a large immigrant workforce, working in low paid service sector work such as agriculture and healthcare?

There is the work, people need a bit more stick and a lot less carrot to entice them to work.

MS1950

PaulF81 wrote: »

Want to explain the 600,000 who aren't going for testing since the test came into effect? Want to explain the huge variance in claimants by region? (Some areas have almost 25% claiming dla, all labour, whilst others have less than 2%)

In short, I don't trust any stats created by the same department as the stas are based upon. When you have benefits paid with no entitlement testing whatsoever, like dla, you can bet your backside the scum are going to abuse the system. And labour constituencies don't do anything about it, as they don't want to nark off their core vote.

I’ve already explained Grant Schapps ‘Big Lie’ about “600,000 who aren't going for testing since the test came into effect” (actually he claimed 878,300) in post # 88 on this thread;

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/60370871#Comment_60370871

in detail (and unlike you) citing sources and evidence demonstrating “Schapps’ deliberate deceit that there were 878,300 long term claimants who suddenly decided they were ‘better’ when they were called in for a test”:

As for your distrust of “any stats created by the same department as the stas are based upon”. If you’d bothered to look at the link provided in my post you would have seen that the report ‘Fraud and Error in the Benefit System: 2011/12’ was compiled by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) – not the DWP.

Your approach to ‘facts’ and ‘evidence’ seems to resemble that of Humpty Dumpty in Alice Through the Looking Glass:

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - - that's all."

(Through the Looking Glass, (Chapter 6)

Mind you don’t fall….

Jennifer_Jane

Murphy_Gooner wrote: »

But getting back to the subject.
Im not going to be two faced and suddenly go on about how she was a great person. Because to me, no i couldn't stand the woman.

It clear, especially from this thread on its own, that she caused alot of divide in this country. An us and them society which this government seems to like about aswell.

But if im honest i couldn't care less she is dead. So people should just move on.
Be glad when this is all forgotten about.

Yes, I agree with you. She's been out of power for 23 years, plenty of time for her "legacy" if any to be changed.

grizzly1911

PaulF81 wrote: »

Want to explain the 600,000 who aren't going for testing since the test came into effect? Want to explain the huge variance in claimants by region? (Some areas have almost 25% claiming dla, all labour, whilst others have less than 2%)

I think MS1950 has already shown that headline to be tosh.
[QUOTE=MS1950}
Over the weekend Conservative Chairman Grant Schapps was busy giving interviews claiming that almost 900,000 claimants had withdrawn their claims rather than undergo the DWP’s ‘Work Capability Assessment’

One link was posted on here as the ‘The Miracle of St George’ thread with the headline “900,000 choose to come off sickness benefit ahead of tests”:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=4525577

while this other link makes it clear that Schapps was the source of what even the Telegraph describes as “a startlingly high number - more than one third of all such claimants”:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...m-the-pub.html

Common sense said it was improbable (whatever one’s views on welfare) but now the source of this “a startlingly high number” seems clear.

Table 1a in the excel spreadsheet on this DWP link gives figures for the overall caseload and status of Employment Support Allowance (the Incapacity Benefit replacement) claims annually, quarterly and monthly from October 2008 to May 2012:

http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/worki...p?page=esa_wca

A column called ‘Closed before assessment’ shows that since October 2008 (out of an overall caseload of around 2.5 million) roughly 20 thousand claims each month are closed before they reach the stage of full assessment.

What Schapps has done is to take the cumulative total of these monthly figures from October 2008 to May 2012 (878,300) to arrive at his claim - peddled to a receptive media - that 900,000 choose to come off sickness benefit ahead of tests.

However, what anyone with any experience of the labour market or an iota of honesty would realize (I’m not sure if Schapps has either), is that these monthly figures for claims that ended before they were called to assessment are part of the normal ‘churn’ of such claims.

If someone has a serious accident or develops a illness – if they are in work they will receive ‘Statutory Sick Pay’ for 6 months after which they would need to claim ESA – and if they were unemployed they would need to claim ESA immediately as they could no longer sign on as ‘available for work’ to get JSA.

But people recover from such things (or die) and so their claim ends before the bureaucratic machinery of the DWP call them in for an assessment (there is a big backlog).

And the only research into ‘Closed or withdrawn ESA claims’ (conducted by DWP) concluded:

“Customers reported a number of reasons why their ESA claims had ended before being assessed: for some this was a conscious decision, for others it was less so. Many people taking part in the research reported that their health condition had improved and their claim for ESA was no longer relevant: they either pro-actively told Jobcentre Plus they wanted to withdraw their ESA claim, or stopped sending in medical certificates or did not return the ESA50 form in the knowledge that Jobcentre Plus would close their claim”

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd...12/rrep762.pdf (page 41)

None of which supports Schapps deliberate deceit that this cumulative 878,300 were long term claimants who suddenly decided they were ‘better’ when they were called in for a test (or justifies the sneering comments about ‘miraculous' recoveries that some posted on this site).

We are (sadly) used to politicians ‘spinning’ statistics to suit their purposes but I would suggest that this goes beyond ‘spin’ and is such a misrepresentation and distortion of the truth that it is better described as a deliberate lie.

[/QUOTE]