Gov't support

savers_united

The 2 contradictory statements are the need for wage restraint to ensure inflation does not spiral, we are basically being told not to go asking for a pay rise and are now being told by a future PM that any further support will be limited. So they are happy for people to be poorer and see their living standards fall, as Working from home is going to cost more this year compared to last year, as is travelling to work with higher petrol pump prices. If they are not going to support people with these increases then wage increases are going to be demanded by trade unions and individuals, whether successful or not people are not just going to sit back and see their disposable incomes fall, that could mean people giving up work if it's not viable due to these costs or changing jobs and leaving alot of lower paid but essential jobs vacant. This is what I mean by a wider impact on society and thr economy, whatever happens there will be consequences, its just trying to minimise any impact. 

Spoonie_Turtle

https://www.brit-thoracic.org.uk/news/2022/impact-of-the-rising-cost-of-electricity-on-home-mechanical-ventilation-patients/

Reimbursement appears only to be if using an oxygen concentrator; the article mentions suction machines, airway clearance devices, beds, hoists, feeding machines, wheelchairs etc. as other items not reimbursed, as well as ventilators.

[I don't know how much energy those items use, but feeding machines for example can often be needed for virtually 24hours a day.]

pochase

I assume this is why there is the divided answer to the petition. For some things you are reimbursed, and for the rest you get the £150 for disability. 

sienew

pochase said:

I think more along the lines that there should be a government help that gives you the basic needs for energy at a subsidised rate, and I mean basic. I don't think gaming on a high end PC or other hobbies fall under basic needs. I see it more like have a fridge freezer, electricity to cook, light, washing machine and watch TV to keep up to date. If you want more, you have to pay for it. If there is specific energy  need like medical appliances it could come through NHS as an additional entitlement to cheaper energy, or even fully been subsidised, there should not be any difference between a medication or operation I need, and the cost of running a medical appliance at home.

I like this idea too.

Spoonie_Turtle

pochase said:

I assume this is why there is the divided answer to the petition. For some things you are reimbursed, and for the rest you get the £150 for disability. 

But the government's idea of what needs to be covered doesn't always match reality.

Scope did a study 3 years ago, before runaway price rises.  On average, disabled people faced extra costs of £583 per month; 20% faced extra costs of over £1,000 per month. 
https://www.scope.org.uk/campaigns/extra-costs/disability-price-tag/
Do you know how much the highest rate of adult disability benefit is?  It's £627.60.  How many people currently have been awarded that rate*?  35%.  So for those 20% with extra costs of over £1,000, tough … 
(The second highest possible rate is £505.40)
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/personal-independence-payment-statistics-to-april-2022/personal-independence-payment-official-statistics-to-april-2022
*Not that everyone actually gets the award they should qualify for


There's a conception that 'the vulnerable' will get what they need, and I see this a LOT on this board, but it's clearly not an idea informed by the reality of how inaccessible and hostile the benefits and healthcare systems can be.  It's a fight to get medical attention, diagnosis, treatment, appropriate benefits (there are far too many disabled people crippling themselves trying to work because they either don't quite meet the high threshold for benefits, or they do but they don't have the energy to fight the decision), and it's a fight to get the help and care needed. 
Then we have people on low incomes, working hard but for any of a myriad reasons can't find or get to a higher-paying job, struggling to make ends meet.  They might qualify for a pittance from an income-related benefit, or they might not.  And if they don't, they miss out on any ongoing or one-off passported help as well.

People who are seen as 'bad with money' may often have underlying but undiagnosed and unhelped mental health issues, and/or have never been taught financial literacy - and sufficient help just is not there.  [Even the help available on the MSE website and this forum still requires internet literacy, then there are many people who can't learn effectively from reading, they need someone to explain it to them in person.]


I'm not here to get into a discussion (I don't have the energy, and there are plenty of resources to be found on the internet to learn more) I'm just mentioning these things to show that what the government thinks is needed doesn't always reflect reality, and that the idea 'the vulnerable' will be looked after is actually not that simple.

The_Green_Hornet

What politicians say during a leadership election and what they actually do once they are elected are two different things.

I suspect that additional money will be forthcoming through the existing channels just to get us through winter. Yes, it will be a can kicking exercise but then when have governments done long term thinking.

pickledonionspaceraider

It is obvious that this country is going to see ++++ deaths this winter. From the cold and malnutrition - and it will be our most vulnerable

Some of the comments I have read on here such as 'this will be a wake up call to people who waste energy' - are you serious - this person is obviously living a very privileged life to be coming out with blinkered comments like that.  Literally no grass roots understanding of how people on the breadline were already living, before the COLCrisis

It is absolutely abysmal that people begrudge folk something like the £20 U/C uplift, when prices have skyrocketed. 

Why do some people actually begrudge the very existence of the most vulnerable in our society,  saying we cannot afford to give handouts.  
How can we afford £billions to a war -  but we cannot feed our poor?

There is a humanitarian crisis looming here  - only have to look on the old style threads to witness, if you have the luxury of living in a mansion and do not know any real life paupers

It is about time we got our priorities right, as we seem to treat our own citizens like garbage 

[Deleted User]

Fishing much??

Nobody "begrudges the very existence of the most vulnerable" - but you must accept that "give some people free stuff" isn't a good way to fix a systemic problem?  That won't help at the next rise, or the next winter, or anything other than hide the problem for now.

Crea

This is an unprecedented energy shortage. We can't just let the full burden of it fall on people unmitigated. The ramifications of that are too large. People need some support, more than is currently on the table. 

Average household bills for many middle income families of £5k (which is where we're heading very soon) will, very simply, completely destroy discretionary spending in this country, both directly via energy bills and through driving up the cost of everything else. We are a consumer-spending driven economy. We cannot afford to let that happen. 

We should be doing several things:

• We need to urgently push to increase domestic energy production any way we can. The best time to do this was 10 years ago, the next best time is right this second. I'd be looking at fracking, revised planning laws to bias in favour of energy generation of all kinds, whatever will move the needle and get capacity online ASAP.   
• We need to mitigate the impact as much as we can, but crucially, we need to preserve the price signal. We need to encourage producers to produce as much as possible (which means profits), and we need consumers to be lower their usage (which means they must be exposed to some of this increase).  

As a side note, I would also like anyone directly involved in government strategic energy policy in this country in the last decade to be placed under arrest for dereliction of duty. 

littleteapot

People also forget that handouts or artificially supressing energy prices to the consumer simply results in continued high usage, which in turn feeds into price inflation, which again costs more taxpayer/government money. As well as the transfer of money from the state into private corporations. Can most people not see that or is my analysis wrong?

Of course the energy *production*, not retail, giants have the market largely stitched up and hence a high degree of control over the price, but if regional consumption (by regional I mean all of Western Europe + UK)  reduces significantly it will dent their revenue enough to make prices fall to some extent.