teresa may was on telly yesterday saying that “her government was determined to help the most vulnerable in society”.
who are these vulnerable people?
ah yes, it’s the obscenely wealthy who are worried that they will lose their mountains of dosh!
made me sick in my mouth!
grrrrr!
In a way I’m having trouble raising any indignation about this latest attack on the disabled. Every single thing this government (and the previous government, and the one before that) do to disability benefits, and in fact to benefits in general, is designed to make it harder to claim. And of course, harder to qualify for the benefits. Don’t forget that those two things are not the same.
Over the past 15-20 years, as more benefits have been invented and more have been replaced by others, and regulations have been put in place to make the rules ever more obscure and difficult to understand, it has become harder to get any financial assistance from the state.
This latest attack is just another example of how the government perceive benefit claimants. As if we wouldn’t all (or at least most claimants) be happier, healthier, and financially better off without our illnesses, disabilities, our need to claim benefits. I for one would be off to work like a shot had I never had MS and not become disabled. Once upon a time I had a job that I actually liked. I earned reasonable money, paid a lot in tax and NI and had a nice life. Equally, the people who are sitting around at home popping the odd pill because they have social and/or psychological problems that make life extremely difficult, would probably be rid of their ailments and trotting off to support themselves were it possible.
In fact attacking those people who suffer from anxiety disorders, psychological problems, mental illnesses and other cognitive difficulties is one of the worst things possible because they are the very people who find applying for benefits to be the most problematic.
But as I said, it’s hard to keep on mustering the ire necessary to lambast the government for their thoughtless, uncaring, and cruel attacks on benefit claimants. After all, there have been so many of them.
Sue
Well put Sue
I propose we shoot one Tory MP a week until they change their mind.
Well, I have written to my MP.
That’s all we can do.
Mrs May’s response to Jeremy Corbyn’s questions about the changes to PIP had more holes in it than a giant colander.
Her reply was carefully worded implying that no existing claimants would see their benefits reduced. That’s ok then and I doff my cap in deference.
Of course, the devil is in what she did not say.
PIPs do have a shelf life; some longer than others. When the expiry date arrives, a new full assessment will be required under current rules and criteria. Therefore existing claimants will clearly be affected at some point.
DLA claimants migrating to PIP will be subject to a full assessment, also under current criteria. We already know that a significant percentage have lost the full mobility award under DLA after morphing to PIP. This is well documented. Claimants are bound to be affected by assessment changes.
She was careful not to make any mention of new claimants, for obvious political reasons.
This is all very depressing but, as Sue articulately points out, we should not be surprised. This is yet another salvo in the onslaught against the disabled and benefit seekers.
Pip! Pip! Chaps.
Alun
You would have thought Corbyn would have had the intelligence or wit to jump on the fact that she kept referring to “those currently in receipt of an award”, but he didn’t. Now, that makes me suspicious coz if, in a parallel universe, Labour got into power (I know you are laughing at this point) would they reinstate that which the Torys have taken away or would they, as always, just blame them and keep things as they are. Every government does it. I know I was shouting at the tv when she kept referring to current awards. The easiest way to back her into a corner would have been to ask her to confirm that they wouldnt lose out when reapplying, should their circumstances be the same, or even worse. Makes me suspicious of the whole rotten lot of them.
Gary
whammel
shoot one MP per day?
i’d rather hit them hard with a brick!
but it would go against my claim for a mandatory reconsideration if i showed the strength to wield a brick!