PIP Resignation

Dukie63

Duncan Smith has just quit over concerns around the changes to PIP, lets hope common sence now prevails and the changes are overturned. Not sure yet if hes quit under pressure to backtrack or because he wanted to press on while others think it should be over turned. Will be interesting to see what happens

Dukie63

more news he quit because he couldnt defend the cuts when high earners had been given extra tax breaks while those with out carry the cost at last someone with some Backbone

Ive been worried sick about the changes and what it would mean to me, that hasnt gone away but at least this sends a clear message the changes are a step too far aimed at the wrong section of the population The Disabled

[Deleted User]

Seems the govt has already kicked the budget proposals for PIP into the "long grass"

markmarkmark

I don't believe Duncan Smith for a moment, the review of the points system was his own departments' idea with the sole aim of saving money... pure hypocrisy.

He's resigned because

1 anti Europe and wants to kick Cameron/Osborne over the referendum, being one of John Majors original bas&erds over the Maastricht treaty.

2 wants to get out before the sh&t hits the fan over the fiasco that is Universal Credit with roll outs years and years behind schedule, no cost savings (just like ESA/PIP where the money went to Atos/Maximus), and IT system coc&ups worse than Labours' wasteful, useless, and binned national NHS computer system.

Richie-from-the-Boro

wants to get out before the sh&t hits the fan over the fiasco that is Universal Credit

4 years later IDS was still blocking the 2012 courts insistence that the FOI request [Tony Collins & John Slater] into the DWP implementation problems arising with UC should be released. He then lost his latest attempt to keep the potentially damning Universal Credit documents secret in the courts just last week.

Richie-from-the-Boro

5 hours and not a word from No 10, talk about a Geoffrey Howe moment. Whatever the 'horriblis' of Cameron or IDS we know who will now never be the next UK prime minister - Osbourne will never be crowned king - thankyou IDS you have done what all protests lobby's and the non-existant labour opposition could never do.

cyclonebri1

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

5 hours and not a word from No 10, talk about a Geoffrey Howe moment. Whatever the 'horriblis' of Cameron or IDS we know who will now never be the next UK prime minister - Osbourne will never be crowned king - thankyou IDS you have done what all protests lobby's and the non-existant labour opposition could never do.

Never thought I'd show any support for IDS but I really have to agree with you.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Any, any halt in the continual abuse of the disabled no matter who why or when is welcome. The original IDS & GlasweJen agenda was to have the additional cuts levied against the pensioners not the disabled, we will have to wait and see which of the two groups (working disabled or non-working pensioners) are put in the grinder. For now we wait .. .. ..Best of luck to you !

GlasweJen

I don't think there should be any protected groups but it's unfair to exclude pensioners from welfare reform based solely on age.

Under occupying pensioners who need a spare room for a carer could claim the same allowances as someone who is not a pensioner and need a carer but there is a large group of pensioners who are perfectly fine and don't need a 3 bed house with a dining room that could benefit a family.

I'd be happy to see a scheme where over occupying pensioners went to the top of the council list for suitable sized homes, get the right to 2 refusals and got to keep their entitlement until they moved or refused 3 homes at which point they'd be dropped to 1 room rate (2 if disabled and need care). Hell I'd even be fine with the council providing the men and the vans to move them in.

NeverInDebt

That's what he wants people to believe. he took great delight is bashing the sick/disabled. He left because he can see the writing on the wall for Cameron/Osbourne once we leave the EU, there positions will be untenable. Also the SNP will want to have another referendum.

Its simple unfair that certain people of society have taken the cuts far more than any other. Some departments are ring fenced which make any more cuts on those sections of the community even more worse in years to come. The saying that Cameron use to say "We all in in together" is simple a lie as is Osborne's " Northern powerhouse"

Dukie63 wrote: »

more news he quit because he couldnt defend the cuts when high earners had been given extra tax breaks while those with out carry the cost at last someone with some Backbone

Ive been worried sick about the changes and what it would mean to me, that hasnt gone away but at least this sends a clear message the changes are a step too far aimed at the wrong section of the population The Disabled

Richie-from-the-Boro

GlasweJen wrote: »

I don't think there should be any protected groups but it's unfair to exclude pensioners from welfare reform based solely on age.

Under occupying pensioners who need a spare room for a carer could claim the same allowances as someone who is not a pensioner and need a carer but there is a large group of pensioners who are perfectly fine and don't need a 3 bed house with a dining room that could benefit a family.

I'd be happy to see a scheme where over occupying pensioners went to the top of the council list for suitable sized homes, get the right to 2 refusals and got to keep their entitlement until they moved or refused 3 homes at which point they'd be dropped to 1 room rate (2 if disabled and need care). Hell I'd even be fine with the council providing the men and the vans to move them in.

You see that's what happens with the power of indoctrination. You can't see more than the two vulnerable groups they pre-select for you. What about the two groups called richer who will now only pay 20% tax, not 40%, on an extra £2,600 of their income & poorer working PIP who will lose up to £150 a week rather than two alternative average working / non-working poor who will be £375 a year worse off.



So the average poor will be - £375 a year and the average well off will gain + £235 a year, instead you insist [divide & conquer] the vulnerable pensioners rather than your equally vulnerable group should be penalised - my point is it should be neither of those two vulnerable groups - it should be between those who are more able / less able to pay.