The state benefits system mega-thread.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Osem

Yes of course I do. I especially want my own son, who's in that category, to suffer that indignity because he hasn't got enough to deal with already.

You always were one to just make stuff up weren't you. Pathetic.

It was said that this was supported because this measure would legitimise the claims of those truly entitled. This is what's pathetic.

Do you think it's appropriate to use the emicon "nutter"? I know people with learning difficulties who find this term insulting and hurtful.

Another one who "has me on ignore" yet sees and replies to my posts

Originally Posted by Damien

This thread has taken a bit of a tangent..

I assume that was Pips intenton as usual ie bringing in subjects and attitudes between completely different threads.

Most people are able to differentiate between different topics.

---------- Post added at 20:50 ---------- Previous post was at 20:43 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Mod comment - Richard, if you are going accuse someone of something heinous, please provide links/evidence - otherwise, you're just being offensive.

And being offensive can lead to infractions being incurred.

I'll try and find it Hugh.

I would never go out to be deliberately offensive, unlike a handful on the forum.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I assume that was Pips intenton as usual ie bringing in subjects and attitudes between completely different threads.

Merely proving you to be the liar when it suits you.

[Anypermitedroute]

I wonder how his searching is going?

[Chrysalis]

Definitely a step in the right direction, given the timing it makes you wonder how much of the previous policies were down to osborne and cameron.

The policy of reassessing everyone as regurly as possible completely overloaded the system and resulted in 'all' reassessments been suspended for a couple of years to clear the backlog.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Definitely a step in the right direction, given the timing it makes you wonder how much of the previous policies were down to osborne and cameron.

The policy of reassessing everyone as regurly as possible completely overloaded the system and resulted in 'all' reassessments been suspended for a couple of years to clear the backlog.

So who was responsible for the Welfare Reform 2007 that brought in ESA and the WCA? Who was responsible for the changes to the WCA introduced in 2011 that were suggested in 2009?

[denphone]

Labour were...

[dilli-theclaw]

I await it all with great interest, I'm due a re assessment any time now.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by denphone

Labour were...

So not Osborne and Cameron and IDS?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So not Osborne and Cameron and IDS?

Labour designed ESA and the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition expanded its scope from that and The WCA was started by Labour in 2007 and continued and expanded by subsequent governments since then..

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by denphone

Labour designed ESA and the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition expanded its scope from that and The WCA was started by Labour in 2007 and continued and expanded by subsequent governments since then..

"Expanded its scope"? In what way?
An internal review was published in Oct 2009.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So who was responsible for the Welfare Reform 2007 that brought in ESA and the WCA? Who was responsible for the changes to the WCA introduced in 2011 that were suggested in 2009?

This isnt a tory vs labour discussion whuch you seem to be trying to turn it into.

A ruling party can change things as we are seeing now.

Also PIP was introduced by IDS, cameron and osborne. ESA was adjusted by the three also, e.g. they introduced stricter systems for those in the WAG group such as making it mandatory to go on the work programme. On the flip side tho more people were qualifying for the SG after the tories came into power. They also toughened up the WCA test which was particularly hard on those with mobility issues. PIP mobility tests have had the same treatment on mobility as well.

The message given out by the previous people in charge was that the DWP budget always had to be cut as if it was some kind of unsustainable unaffordable baggage that had to be got rid off, this change appears to signal a reversal of that feeling.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by nomadking

"Expanded its scope"? In what way?
An internal review was published in Oct 2009.

This might explain things more then l can Nomad.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employ...port_Allowance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_C...ity_Assessment

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

This isnt a tory vs labour discussion whuch you seem to be trying to turn it into.

A ruling party can change things as we are seeing now.

Also PIP was introduced by IDS, cameron and osborne. ESA was adjusted by the three also, e.g. they introduced stricter systems for those in the WAG group such as making it mandatory to go on the work programme. On the flip side tho more people were qualifying for the SG after the tories came into power. They also toughened up the WCA test which was particularly hard on those with mobility issues. PIP mobility tests have had the same treatment on mobility as well.

The message given out by the previous people in charge was that the DWP budget always had to be cut as if it was some kind of unsustainable unaffordable baggage that had to be got rid off, this change appears to signal a reversal of that feeling.

I didn't initially bring Osborne and Cameron into it. I was just pointing out facts.

---------- Post added at 13:34 ---------- Previous post was at 13:29 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

This might explain things more then l can Nomad.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employ...port_Allowance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_C...ity_Assessment

But which of the 2011 changes weren't actually proposed in 2009?

[denphone]

One would have to delve deeper to find that out.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Merely proving you to be the liar when it suits you.

By fault or design you've twisted or misunderstood what I meant. You should be able to post without being rude.

To save you derailing a third thread regarding this, a thread about this exists:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/sh...2#post35862202

Originally Posted by denphone

Labour were...

Sort of true, the Blair Government changed the original tests started by the Thatcher Government in 1993 when she phased out Invalidity Benefit in favour of Incapacity Benefit.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

This isnt a tory vs labour discussion whuch you seem to be trying to turn it into.

A ruling party can change things as we are seeing now.

Also PIP was introduced by IDS, cameron and osborne. ESA was adjusted by the three also, e.g. they introduced stricter systems for those in the WAG group such as making it mandatory to go on the work programme. On the flip side tho more people were qualifying for the SG after the tories came into power. They also toughened up the WCA test which was particularly hard on those with mobility issues. PIP mobility tests have had the same treatment on mobility as well.

Totally correct.

As IDS said last Sunday, the system simply cannot cope with the constant testing and retesting of huge groups of people. Welfare Rights groups have evidence to suggest that at some points, people were being shoved into the Support Group due to time restraints and a lack of resources.

The reasoning given was that any not supposed to be in this group would be picked up on the next assessment when more time was available, but of course this never happens.

This defeats the purpose of these tests, which have caused many of our most vulnerable citizens unecessary worry and upset and, ironically, cost the taxpayer more than if they hadn't started doing this!