tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post7654211430548544586..comments2024-03-28T09:16:33.241+00:00Comments on Diary of a Benefit Scrounger: DWP - Spinning til they're dizzySue Marshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-79628050962767537222011-09-22T14:27:36.868+01:002011-09-22T14:27:36.868+01:00Peter - would you like to write a short 200 words ...Peter - would you like to write a short 200 words for me on it and I'll post it when I get back from Lab conf after 29th Sep?Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-78185619174567749572011-09-22T14:06:01.179+01:002011-09-22T14:06:01.179+01:00Which post ha ha?Which post ha ha?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-66366758746022658262011-09-22T13:43:14.507+01:002011-09-22T13:43:14.507+01:00Anonymous : Just substitute the words "inflat...Anonymous : Just substitute the words "inflation" for "flow rates" then it's fine. I'm way too busy fighting the things that matter to placate the Taxpayers Alliance.Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-7284190708423794492011-09-22T12:48:22.360+01:002011-09-22T12:48:22.360+01:00So this post is still completely wrong then?So this post is still completely wrong then?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-84989515750462377442011-09-21T22:09:37.226+01:002011-09-21T22:09:37.226+01:00I'm not sure where you have come from matt but...I'm not sure where you have come from matt but i would suspect as i don't know of you that you are only interested in certain topics when you reply to blog threads <br />What i do know thow is that your fit and well and and am sure you have posted in this topic in error ?<br /><br />I have known in my time many people who were fit and then become ill and couldn't hack it and committed suicide that regretfully is all to common in the hospital circles that i have been around over the past 30 years <br /><br />In fact it has been more common the wealthier, you are i have found<br />Rich people i have found have always been so focussed on themselves they have never ever given anyone else even a thought and then on becoming ill themselves they just implode and go on a selfish roller coaster ride downhillAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-10113820486620471092011-09-21T21:36:41.100+01:002011-09-21T21:36:41.100+01:00Black Guardian - Interesting, that.Black Guardian - Interesting, that.Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-40980317222308340442011-09-21T21:26:37.094+01:002011-09-21T21:26:37.094+01:00If you want to send the Lib Dems a message about c...If you want to send the Lib Dems a message about cuts in benefits and there total betrayal fo the sick and disabled and you live in Scotland you might like to come to Dunfermline on Saturday 8th October 2011. There will be a demo there. The Lib Dems are holding there Scottish conference in of all places the Vine Church in Dunfermline.We're planning the demo to start around 11 am.Peter Lockharthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08541478715220480055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-62967827618919655432011-09-21T19:53:55.298+01:002011-09-21T19:53:55.298+01:00The mighty Taxpayers' Alliance, here, is this ...The mighty Taxpayers' Alliance, here, is this quiet corner of the blogosphere? Interesting, that.Black Guardiannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-7338052801785668432011-09-21T19:52:32.001+01:002011-09-21T19:52:32.001+01:00Well done Mr Sinclair you have come out with exact...Well done Mr Sinclair you have come out with exactly the kind of twoddle and bumpf I expect from the TPA. The reality is that the government is faced with an increasingly ill nation (statistically proven, we are one of the illest nations in europe) and are refusing to see that an increase in illness and disability means more people need to claim. Keeping the figures static in the treasury is all well and good and yes on the surface people can say the same money is going into Disability benefits but a large percentage of that money is paid to contract ATOS to find people fit to work and to find them healthy so they are no longer able to claim benefits. The figures are highly skewed and not in the favour of claimants. <br /><br />I also may remind you that the bill for reform is still going through the house of lords. It is not yet law. I would also like to point out that everyone in my county who recieves DLA has been sent a form being asked to reapply, we are being weeded out already whether reforms pass or not. This is highly distressing for people who are incredibly ill for the vast majority of the time. Many of my good friends have long term health problems and disabilities, many of them like myself suffer from a degenerative condition meaning that we will only get worse, only need more care in the future and only be less able to do things. If weeded out we could loose every ounce of support we have. If we retain our benefits we will be claiming it the rest of our lives and more than likely will need increasing amounts of care just to have a very basic standard of living. <br /><br />At the end of the day we can talk about figures and we can talk about who is pulling the wool over whose eyes this week but disabled and sick people will be disproportionately affected by the cuts. At the heart of it this is a human rights issue. The bill of human rights set out by the UN states that those who are disabled have a right to dignity, a right to interact within society and without prejudice, a right to fair treatment and a right to a life. If the cuts go ahead, how much of those rights do you think those who will have their benefits cut will retain? None of them. <br /><br />I would very much like for you to try and live with a disability Mr Sinclair or look after a loved one who is disabled and sick, I would like to know how you would cope, I am sure you would not. It would very quickly change your mind about how fair those figures are. We who are sick and disabled and those who care for us, we are not weak just because our bodies have failed us, we cope with more pain, adversity and stress than you could ever imagine and we do so mostly alone, in quiet corners of society. We put on brave fronts or we try to stand up for ourselves but every single day for us is four times as hard than your day is for you. Where you would crumple if you coped with what we deal with we remain as strong as we can, we cope with it, we deal with it until it breaks us. I'm not broken yet but changes to benefit reform may just do it.BrokenOpheliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04677118290957688161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-73520174706849546012011-09-21T18:43:07.076+01:002011-09-21T18:43:07.076+01:00Lies, damned lies, and statistics
There’s a 1-in-...Lies, damned lies, and statistics <br />There’s a 1-in-3200 chance you'll be hit by fiery satellite chunks on Friday.<br />Is there a demand for “goat stares” or “horse whisperers”? I think I could do them as a job!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-43110292018097969822011-09-21T18:25:26.418+01:002011-09-21T18:25:26.418+01:00My illness is progressive.
I'll tell it to sto...My illness is progressive.<br />I'll tell it to stop as we can't afford it.<br />I apologise for the rise in demands I have made over the years.<br />I suppose it is a shame I wasn't born 20 years earlier really. I would already be dead at this stage. It would have saved a lot of people a lot of trouble.<br /><br />THIS is the way you start to feel when faced with comments on cost. Since I'm awkward though, I intend to live as long as I possibly can.Spoonydochttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530660179706960529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-69890943133598379532011-09-21T18:25:05.705+01:002011-09-21T18:25:05.705+01:00Something just occurred to me and I'm curious:...Something just occurred to me and I'm curious:<br /><br />"Sue and Mason,<br /><br />Your arguments all seem to be premised on pretty strong assumptions about the test, which I can't justify looking at the DWP plans."<br /><br />Would it make any difference to you if the test was fair or not?Mason Dixon, Autistichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01799959037314750427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-27912919929553193122011-09-21T17:00:50.132+01:002011-09-21T17:00:50.132+01:00I was asked by The National Autistic Society if I ...I was asked by The National Autistic Society if I wanted to take part in the trial runs for the PIP assessment. I thought about it an declined, but not only that; I urged the NAS to not send the DWP the list of volunteers they were asking for and I posted my correspondence over at The Files: http://masondixonautistic.blogspot.com/2011/06/case-3-digging-our-own-graves.html<br /><br />I do know several people who did agree to take part, people who have had Work Capability Assessments and they confirmed it: the PIP assessment is pretty much a WCA.Mason Dixon, Autistichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01799959037314750427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-45095603480214345552011-09-21T16:52:27.322+01:002011-09-21T16:52:27.322+01:00Mr Sinclair, the only part of my post that mention...Mr Sinclair, the only part of my post that mentioned the PIP assessment was the off the cuff remark about it being a Mickey Mouse test, which it is because it's virtually identical to the Work Capability Assessment except for the descriptors. <br /><br />My assertion on claimants having their benefit cut is based entirely on the mathematical reality that there will be future claimants, so in order for spending on DLA to remain the same either all of those future claims must be blocked or existing ones cut off. <br /><br />We've heard the one about 'better healthcare means less disability and severe sickness' before and it always seems to ignore the straight answer we give: no, better healthcare means people that would have otherwise died instead survive and carry on claiming. <br /><br />Sue only mentioned the source of the largest part of the increase in DLA, there is the other one: pension-age claimants. When DLA was introduced this positive forcing mechanism was put in that effectively siphons claimants from the pensioner-only Attendance Allowance. If someone claiming DLA reaches retirement age and still meets the qualifying criteria, they can keep claiming DLA rather than moving to AA. As a result, pension-age claimants have gone from making up 33% of the total DLA claims eight years ago to 38% of it now and they account for almost half of the total increase. <br /><br />DLA is having a spike because people are getting older. When DLA has finished the upward trend due to the working-age claimant count catching up with what Incapacity Benefit was in 2005, almost all of the upward drive on DLA will be from pension-age claimants until 2020.Mason Dixon, Autistichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01799959037314750427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-28022868181516082372011-09-21T16:33:53.614+01:002011-09-21T16:33:53.614+01:00Here is a quote from Declan :
the £1.08bn cut an...Here is a quote from Declan : <br /><br />the £1.08bn cut announced in the 2010 June was to projected expenditure without the changes i.e. what would have happened as a result (mainly) of demographic change if DLA had been left alone. It's not inflation, it's demography (plus the built in growth due to people being able to keep DLA when they retire, which will continue to push up caseload to about 2020 on DWP projections). <br /><br />The 20% figure relates to caseload and comes from gov. I'm a bit confused as to where the 20% cut in expenditure comes from**,even though I've used that figure myself and I'm sure the source is gov. 1.07bn is somewhat less than 9% of total DLA spend of 12.3bn. <br /><br />So without changes, DLA spend would have risen by 1.08bn in real terms, bit less than a 9% change over five years. Of course the changes are cuts. We would have no hesitation in saying the NHS was being cut if government decided to stop treating extra cases arising from population ageing or decided to treat those cases at the expense of younger patients. For a former professor of social policy who has also worked for the Institute for Fiscal Studies to try to spin things this way is shameful.<br /><br /><br />there are four and only four sources of DLA caseload and expenditure growth<br /><br />(1) people who are receiving DLA on retirement can keep the award: otherwise they would be receiving attendance allowance. This will continue to push numbers up until about 2020. it is not driving up overall expenditure as people would be receiving other benefits.<br /><br />(2) demographic change: the working age population is larger and older. When we take account of this it is clear that only mental health and learning difficulties have grown more than would be predicted on the basis of population change<br /><br />(3) young people: mainly learning difficulties - deisrable and intended policy change<br /><br />(4) mental health- the major growth area. Some evidence of rising prevalence among older women, otherwise mostly probably due to policy<br /><br />That's it, nothing else going on around here. So, TPA, which bit do you want to denounce? The pensioners, the kids with learning disabilities, the mentally ill or population ageing?<br /><br />The cut is a cut: it means that on the basis of government's projection of need (driven by demography) there will be 9% less and it looks as if all of this will be absorbed by the working age populaton<br /><br />**Figure originally quoted by Osborne in the CSR, but appears from be to be unachievable.Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-2506587765977132742011-09-21T16:30:01.604+01:002011-09-21T16:30:01.604+01:00Sorry, forgot link http://www.leftfootforward.org/...Sorry, forgot link http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/07/the-three-things-cameron-should-know-about-sickness-and-disability-benefits/Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-29627966276279370782011-09-21T16:28:08.100+01:002011-09-21T16:28:08.100+01:00I'm afraid on this, you are simply wrong. A wo...I'm afraid on this, you are simply wrong. A wonderful post by Decaln Gaffney will give you a clearer picture and another, funnily enough, due to go up on LFF soon adds more information. <br /><br />I pointed out in an earlier comment, that actually according to Declan the figure seems to be 9% but we can't verify at this stage. <br /><br />One of the problems with both these reforms and the ESA reforms is that they are based on assumption about disability trends Matt. <br /><br />Both the accepted wisdom that "millions are languishing on unemployment benefits to massage the job figures" (An effect now totally proven wrong in today's figures)<br /><br />Also the assumptions on severity of disability will ultimately be proven wrong. Did you know there has been no major study on this since 1984?? Shocking isn't it?<br /><br />I don't really care if you trust my figures or not Matt. I don't trust the DWP figures in 90% of cases, but they don't alter them for me, even when I prove them wrong. <br /><br />I am still incredibly suspicious of a new line of spin that is suddenly and clearly being used to argue that DLA is not being cut. If it was indeed a coincidence that you, S Webb and others all started to make this claim within a few days, well, how abut that!!Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-45530585443586505162011-09-21T15:39:03.430+01:002011-09-21T15:39:03.430+01:00Sue and Mason,
Your arguments all seem to be prem...Sue and Mason,<br /><br />Your arguments all seem to be premised on pretty strong assumptions about the test, which I can't justify looking at the DWP plans.<br /><br />And I don't think there has to be an inevitable rise in severe disability. Overall health is improving not declining and for it to be impossible to finance large numbers of existing claimants from existing resources (in real terms) implies an incredibly drastic rise in disability in just a few years. Changes in underlying health tend to play out a lot more slowly than a 20% rise in four years.<br /><br />You had the empirical basis of your calculations wrong by 20% but now come to the same answer. And the original accusation - including that I was selectively briefed the numbers - is still unedited in your post. I think you need to show your working before I can have confidence in your sums at this stage.<br /><br />Best,<br />MattMatthew Sinclairhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05948452770723874618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-49946905841486113682011-09-21T15:33:52.163+01:002011-09-21T15:33:52.163+01:00Anonymous - I definitely will not be forgetting th...Anonymous - I definitely will not be forgetting the thing I hinted at over ESA50 forms. Just need to see actual FOI request with my own eyes first. I can't believe it's true otherwise and I certainly can't believe it's legal. <br /><br />(See Matt, I do try to verify everything first)Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-30144192275566452622011-09-21T15:18:21.683+01:002011-09-21T15:18:21.683+01:00Matt - So from know on we say "A 20% cut in e...Matt - So from know on we say "A 20% cut in existing claimants" rather than "cutting DLA by 20%". I'm not sure many lay people will care. <br /><br />I have a responsibility to the people who will be affected by the changes. <br /><br />It worries me rather that if government officials - and indeed yourselves - realise that there is a rise in severe disability leading to an increase in DLA claims, then "arresting the rise in cost" would surely be denying those in serious need the help they need? If the rise is for genuine disability what government with a conscience would look to arrest the rise?<br /><br />If they cannot "arrest the rise" in disability, then they cannot "arrest the rise in DLA???"<br /><br />Perhaps government don't know that severity of disability is rising? In that case I argue that before they implement changes that will affect 3 million of our most vulnerable, they OUGHT to know. <br /><br />You say that spending is essentially being frozen, but that hides the human cost. The 20% who will be cut adrift. Hide them wherever you will, smooth them over with whichever particular line the DWP come up with to spin compassion. <br /><br />They'll still be cut off.Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-78799754293130989082011-09-21T15:09:24.052+01:002011-09-21T15:09:24.052+01:00Mr Sinclair, to 'arrest the rise' (even th...Mr Sinclair, to 'arrest the rise' (even though it will virtually arrest itself for the same reasons Incapacity Benefit did in 2005 in just a few years) then cuts must be made to existing claimants. It's unavoidable and to say it isn't a cut is semantics. Tell the people booted off the benefit and disqualified for PIP because of the Mickey Mouse 'objective' test that they haven't received a cut. <br /><br />I've never understood why so-called conservatives make an issue out of "the government are actually spending more money" as if what we want is for the government to spend more money and therefore this is somehow a convincing argument to us 'special interests'. It's the end result that matters which just happens to cost money and people like you do some pretty disingenuous mental gymnastics to avoid discussing the end result. <br /><br />Can the disabled afford the deficit better than the Treasury? Strictly speaking, you can't cut anything, only shift the balance. You want to shift the balance to disabled people, so I suppose you have a formula somewhere demonstrating how they can afford it better than the Treasury.Mason Dixon, Autistichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01799959037314750427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-67105981758242577492011-09-21T12:54:17.179+01:002011-09-21T12:54:17.179+01:00Sue,
I think arresting the rise in the cost of th...Sue,<br /><br />I think arresting the rise in the cost of the benefit is quite different to a drastic cut of the sort many campaigners have claimed.<br /><br />What you are essentially arguing now is that, like with the NHS, the rise in demand or fall in productivity outstrips the funding available with a budget frozen in real terms. If there is a trend to greater disability then I think that does create cost concerns that could be best addressed with a more objective test of the kind DWP are planning. In the same way that rising demand for health spending means we need to be particularly careful about productivity.<br /><br />While that is a legitimate issue to raise, and one we can debate, I think it's important the terms are clear. There is no cut in funding as most people would understand it, spending is essentially being frozen in real terms over this Parliament. As a result, I stand by what I said at that event.<br /><br />Best,<br />MattMatthew Sinclairhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05948452770723874618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-37649996493530382412011-09-21T12:29:56.963+01:002011-09-21T12:29:56.963+01:00What planet are these guys on. The nasty Condem go...What planet are these guys on. The nasty Condem government.Visually Impairedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01203797388170233857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-46273711284069225982011-09-21T12:24:14.285+01:002011-09-21T12:24:14.285+01:00Matt - Thanks for that.
In fact, you're righ...Matt - Thanks for that. <br /><br />In fact, you're right. And I'm right. <br /><br />I had initially assumed the smoke and mirrors were flow rates. Yesterday, Steve Webb either spoke or was quoted so carelessly that I went with inflation. <br /><br />A brilliant wonk friend pointed out, just as you have, that it's not inflation. <br /><br />However, the post above could be left almost the same if I substitute the words "flow rates" with "inflation"<br /><br />Now, few people would know what that meant, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't explain it. It seems there might be a little silver lining for my readers as try as he might, my wonk friend can only find a 9% cut in existing claimants and a corresponding 9% rise in new cases. <br /><br />I will write the post for you and others like you Matt, but hopefully most people will still clearly understand that existing claims are being cut, but that due to the rise in DLA, the figure will stay static. <br /><br />If you understand this already, then it is disingenuous to use the line that DLA is being cut. Still, it doesn't stop people like Fraser Nelson arguing that Osborne isn't cutting either for exactly the same reason. A conservative friend of mine cut up his membership over that one!! He called it dishonest and said we should be making genuine cases for cuts, not trying to hide behind obfuscation. <br /><br />Now then, I just wonder how long it will take for governments (of any colour) to accept that severity of disability is increasing (hence the 9% rise in DLA) and that far from cutting sickness and disability benefits, we should be preparing for a future where the bill rises. <br /><br />Matt, a year ago I was just a very unwell Mum with two children, I'm afraid I do make mistakes because it's just me and a laptop. Last year I didn't know what a flow rate was. But I do aim to avoid them, unlike the DWP who appear to consider a default position of inaccuracy as vital.Sue Marshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14849801822216267250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4568034298343558962.post-90454180873401731412011-09-21T10:51:03.161+01:002011-09-21T10:51:03.161+01:00Sue,
I'm afraid your post is inaccurate. You...Sue,<br /><br />I'm afraid your post is inaccurate. You have assumed that those spending figures are in nominal terms, and therefore need to be adjusted for inflation, but they are in real terms - i.e. already adjusted for inflation.<br /><br />I've written about this misconception before:<br />http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/campaign/2011/07/disability-living-allowance-spending.html<br /><br />As I said in that post: "At the end of the [forecast] period spending will still be higher than it was last year". I understand your concerns over Disability Living Allowance but there is no sense scaring people by pretending the benefit is being slashed, when it isn't.<br /><br />Hope that clears this up. I'm not using some secret source of data, it's just the basic benefit expenditure tables. If I've got things wrong, I apologise, but those tables are the source that should show the impact of decisions made up to and including Budget 2011.<br /><br />Best,<br />Matt SinclairMatthew Sinclairhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05948452770723874618noreply@blogger.com