Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Actually, I suspect he got lost on the way to the picnic :D

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Excellent :)

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Actually, he would probably not want to be invited to a failed social, political and economic picnic.

He would hold his own picnic, where everyone would arrive at a central airport with 300 landing strips, then travel by a fifteen mile long high-speed train (the fares would be £2 million pound each, but that's ok, as he would have put up everyone's wages to be able to afford them), and then he would decide what everyone was going to eat and where they would sit, as it would be an authoritarian democratic picnic, and if anyone did not attend this picnic, they would be treated as pariahs by the rest of the world.....;)

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

as long as there are no cucumber sandwiches ......and ants ,i hate ants

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

That is excellent :clap:

---------- Post added at 15:48 ---------- Previous post was at 15:46 ----------

Unfortunately if they have paid there taxes then they will be allowed. So check there tax status first.

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Can i just ask how many threads are going to keep getting derailed and sky rocketed off topic by the delusional rantings of one poster to be honest it is getting beyond a joke now.

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Been saying just that for weeks now.

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Then i guess the answer is as long as he can stomach posting on here and getting completely ridiculed for his views which he has the right to hold and express in appropriate threads not ever damn thread he can post in. Maybe he is allowed to stay and do it is because he then becomes an easy target for insults not always well veiled and ridicule by some of the more up themselves members of CF.

Being honest either tell him straight to stop it or just ban the account too many threads are getting disrupted by this continual drivel that for me at least i would rather spend my time on other forums where we don't have this one person.

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Could the words "failed", "social", "political", "economic" and "system" be put on the swear filter for a while perhaps?

Then we would find out if he knows any other words?

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

I would much prefer we put HIM in the swear filter or slow his internet down so he takes ages to post anything.

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Just found a survey on this figures done by leeds university its quite telling frank.

The figures actually dont tell the story.

Infact out those deemed fit for work only 13% are actually Fit for work. Now you might think hang on how does that work well its been found out many been put on temporary sick leave and even some been put on permanent sick leave. Which mean these unfit for work. This is review with some stats clearly have had access to the data.

Cracking read eye opener to really what going on. Why have we been seeing nit picked the information to suit political agenda.

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-st...rm%20Fraud.pdf

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Talking about nit-picking, I would have to admit I get concerned when I see a piece of research from a Russell Group University with emotive language in it like -

The title - The Billion Pound Welfare Reform Fraud

Phrases such as
Case studies have shown the inhumanity of a system based on government targets and the pain and misery of the increasing stringency of these tests
LiMAS asks a set of questions for which the applicant can (but increasingly can’t) score up to 15 points
The ‘fit for work’ myth does not convert into any form of reality.
This does not count the human anxiety, misery or stress of the test, nor the suicides that have resulted because of it.
the hallowed taxpayer
It is a publically sanctioned fraud that misrepresents and *******ises its claims to support people

And considering that the author is one the co-founders of DPAC (Disabled People Against Cuts), may I suggest there may be another less than hidden Political agenda in the paper; and her twitter (redjolly1) banner may provide some insight...
Update - My apologies, as the paper is not in fact a research paper, but based upon the academic's blog at the LSE?

I think she makes some very good points, but then weakens them by her partiality.

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Well i never would have seen that coming ;)

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

Why do you have to bring this into most of the threads you post in Alan?

It's not exactly on topic is it?

Re: Incapacity tests reject 37% of claimants
 

I think it's to do with them trying to cut pennies when there's millions in other places they haven't or won't look yet.