Time limiting ESA will cost WORKING families £4,661 a year

Today, I'm launching my new campaign.

During the CSR, George Osborne announced that he would be time-limiting ESA (Employment Support Allowance, previously Incapacity Benefit) to one year. This means, that anyone with a working partner found capable of doing any kind of work at all will only receive state support for one year. Once that year is up they will receive no help at all, a loss of £4661. This is three times as much as higher rate taxpayers will lose in child benefit. 


Under the much tougher assessment system of ESA, just 7% of those with an illness or disability are being found incapable of working at all, so it doesn't take a mathematician to realise that most people with long term illnesses such as Parkinson's, Cancer, Bowel Disease, Lupus, Kidney failure, Heart disease, MS, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Mental illness, Lung disease and many, many more are being found "Fit to Work". These work assessments have been found "unfit for purpose" by Compass, the Citizens Advice Bureau, the professor who designed the system and even the government's own advisory committee.

Extraordinarily, this is a cut that will only affect WORKING couples and families. It will only affect households who have had to suffer the misfortune of someone becoming too ill to work. If they have a working partner they will lose every penny. 

This is why I oppose time limiting ESA.

ESA is a contributory benefit. We all pay National Insurance. We pay 11% of our wages every month for this insurance. (Next month it goes up to 12%) This is not an inconsiderable amount! 12% a month every month for years and years.

One of the covenants of this insurance is that you will receive a modest payment if you become too sick to work.  (ESA is £388.45 a month.) If you have a working partner, then it is the only income you receive. You have to pay for prescriptions and medical aids and travel. You get no housing benefit or council tax benefit,  £388.45 is your total payment from that vast insurance fund we all pay into. 

ESA is by no way imaginable a "lifestyle choice". You cannot live on £388.45 a month. You are a drain on your family. The state acknowledges this in a modest way but by no means makes life so comfortable that you don't want to work if you could. 

***********************

I worked for nine years. I have a degree and nearly killed myself trying to forge a career in the face of terrible illness. In the end I had no choice. Working was killing me. Friends and family pleaded, begged even, but it took me a long time to accept that I could no longer work. Giving up on my hopes and dreams was the single hardest thing I ever had to come to terms with. 

We had our own house for years - a beautiful beamed fisherman's cottage by the sea - but we had to sell it before it was repossessed, as our income fell from £46,000 a year to 21k a year. The equity we did manage to save is eaten away a little every month as we have to make up the shortfall in our income. But we are trapped. I can't work. More accurately, no-one will employ me.

My husband Dave is my carer and has to support us financially whilst coping with the trauma my illness brings into our lives and the lives of our children. Partners like Dave, who are carers too, often need to take lower paying jobs to look after us, jobs where they can work 9 to 5 and get time off at very short notice. Their careers suffer too. 

I've lost count of the times people have urged him to give up work too, begged him to stop stretching himself so thin. Dave has had two breakdowns trying to hold our family together, but for him, working is the most important thing he can do for us. It gives him pride and it stops us all from feeling like total and utter failures. 

For my family (and DWP estimates show that another 700,000 families like mine will be affected) the impact of losing that £388.45 a month will be devastating. We already live below the official poverty line and can't pay our bills. 

Soon we will have no savings left and taking away £4,661 a year from us will mean we lose everything. As I mentioned, it is three times more than higher rate tax payers will lose in child benefit yet this is a cut that will affect some of the poorest households in Britain.

My family would end up costing the state 5 times more in total than we do now (around 26,000 a year) just because it will force us to give up on the idea of work. We never wanted it to be that way. We wanted to remain a working family. We wanted to pay our way, but the assessments failed us and successive "policies" failed us and now the cuts will fail us. This one policy alone - time limiting ESA for working couples or families  -will fail us so spectacularly that it will bankrupt us. We will become entirely dependent on the state for everything.

That's why our partners often keep working, despite it being 100 times harder than giving up. We don't want to become 100% dependent on the state. 

Remember, this cut ONLY affects WORKING couples or families who have had the misfortune of someone becoming too ill to work.  It is a disincentive to work that goes against everything the coalition says they want to achieve. 

I urge all politicians from every political party to reconsider time limiting ESA. 

** Please help me by sending this to your MP here http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

By clicking on the Facebook and Twitter sites on this blog, you can help to spread the message. 

Feel free to link to this article wherever you can.
As ever, the Broken of Britain have a wealth of great information and advice on the next steps here : http://thebrokenofbritain.blogspot.com/2011/03/where-do-we-go-from-here.html

Open email to Maria Miller

Hi,

I wrote to Maria Miller, Minister for Disabilities, using this address nearly a month ago. 16th of February in fact. 

I've had no response whatsoever. 

It was a reasonable email, full of suggestions on how the coalition's disability reforms might be improved. 

It was packed with useful links to information and testimonials. 

It pleaded with ministers to engage on these issues while the Welfare Reform Bill is still in the committee stage. 

I never get a response. Nor do my colleagues from other very prominent campaigning groups. We know that you receive many approaches from our supporters too, but they never receive a response either. Not one reply from anyone connected with the government on welfare reform. 

I wrote to tell her that I'd written her an open letter on my website http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2011/02/open-letter-to-maria-miller.html Thousands of people have read it in the meantime. Sadly, I have no idea if she's read it herself.

Despite many people forwarding it to her, they never received replies either. 

Democracy is in a terrible state here in the UK isn't it? 

Please respond to my original email as I believe that we CAN work together to make reforms work for sick and disabled people in the UK. 

Regards

Sue Marsh

Economics for Sickies 5

At his Spring Conference, Nick Clegg tells all 7 remaining members that Labour left behind

"A country on the brink of bankruptcy; banks running amok;"

Now, you see, this is the bit that makes me trust him the least. In fact, Labour left behind an economy much the same as every other country affected by the credit crunch. It left behind an economy that didn't fall totally off a cliff into depression. It left behind banks that were still on their feet, though only just. It left behind unemployment figures, growth figures and house repossession rates that were none too shabby given the fact we'd just suffered the worst financial crisis in living memory.

Today, Portugal are desperately re-doing their sums on the back of an envelope before Europe insist they take a bailout. Austerity measures haven't worked. The debt and disaster have only grown and Portugal have had to cut again and again and again.

Coincidence perhaps? Bad luck? Not really. It's the same in Greece. And Ireland. And Spain. You see "the cuts don't work, they just make things worse" as the song goes.

But why? If times are tough we must tighten our belts right? Well, yes and no. If too many people lose their jobs, the state has to pay them unemployment benefits and housing benefit and loses the tax they paid when they were working.

If too many businesses go bust, they won't pay tax any more either and nor will the people they used to employ.

If the public are squeezed so hard with pay freezes and cuts and VAT rises and NI rises and inflation, then they just won't be able to buy much. They cut down on luxuries, buy fewer groceries, take fewer holidays etc etc. All THAT tax won't come rolling in either and businesses and shops suffer even more.

Like a great, big, out-of-control snowball the debt actually get's BIGGER, and things get worse, not better.

Not looking terribly rosy here either is it? If we drop the smoke and mirrors and the "wrong kind of snow" spin, a drop to -0.6% of GDP shocked the hell out of everyone. Old Mervyn King's sounding a bit jumpy too isn't he? Odd comments coming from his quarter, possibly a whiff of frustration?

You don't even need to believe me or not believe me. We have the 1930s as an almost carbon copy of today to learn from. There was a terrible financial crisis then too and governments attempted to solve it with austerity measures (Google austerity measures of the 1930s - you'll get all the evidence you need that austerity is a terrible mistake)

We have Ireland and Spain and Greece and Portugal to prove that massive cuts only lead to more cuts and then more cuts. Far from recovering, their economies are only getting worse. Unemployment is raging, debt is ballooning and growth is shrinking.

On the subject of massive cuts, it's worth pointing out again that George Osborne's £83 billion worth of cuts have never been attempted before. Anywhere. It is more than Maggie ever dared to dream of. Frankly, it's not possible. The destruction it will bring is eye-watering and there is no guarantee at all that it will work. We can attempt to make these cuts and simply find it cost us as much if not more elsewhere. We still lose all the police officers and hospitals and teachers AND the deficit doesn't shrink.

George might argue that the economies of Greece and Portugal and Ireland and Spain are very different economies to ours, yet he conveniently forgot that when he was trying to imply we were on the same brink as them last year. It was the very argument he made when telling us we must cut. There was, apparently "No Alternative"

In the 30s, it was Germany leading the way on austerity and today guess what? Yep, it's Germany leading the way on austerity. As the EU country holding all the growth and recovery cards (not to mention most of the bailout cash), Merkel is insisting on austerity from her less fortunate member states and throwing a few conditions in that suit her own goals - Portugal must privatise, Ireland must give up their low corporation tax rate.

I am astonished daily by the path we're taking and how little dissent governments are facing, right across Europe, as their austerity measures conclusively fall apart. It just remains to be seen how long it will take this time before we realise that austerity measures this vast will fail. Just as they did in the 30s.

Friday Funnies

Enough of the doom and gloom. Enough! These will cheer you up, surely?

"Mr Cameron, can I just ask, How do you sleep at night?

The John Prescott Fight Club

Paxman drops a "c" bomb

MP's NEVER ought to sing....

Why did Labour MPs abstain on Welfare Reform Bill?

As I reported yesterday, MPs voted in favour of the Welfare Reform Bill after a lengthy second reading.

Labour have stated that they support the principle of a Universal Credit, of always making work pay and of simplifying the benefit system. There are, however, serious flaws in the bill that need to be addressed and Labour tabled a comprehensive amendment :

That this House, whilst affirming its belief in the principle of simplifying the benefits system and good work incentives, declines to give a Second Reading to the Welfare Reform Bill 

-because the proposal of the Universal Credit as it stands creates uncertainty for thousands of people in the United Kingdom; 

-because the Bill fails to clarify what level of childcare support will be available for parents following the abolition of the tax credit system; 

-because the Bill penalises savers who will be barred from the Universal Credit; 

-because the Bill disadvantages people suffering from cancer or mental illness due to the withdrawal of contributory Employment Support Allowance; 

-because the Bill contains no safeguards to mothers in receipt of childcare support; 

-because it proposes to withdraw the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance from people in residential care and fails to provide sufficient safeguards for future and necessary reform; 

-because it provides no safeguards for those losing Housing Benefit or appropriate checks on the Secretary of State’s powers;

-because it fails to clarify how Council Tax Benefit will be incorporated in the Universal Credit system; 

-because it fails to determine how recipients of free school meals and beneficiaries of Social Fund loans will be treated; 

-and because the proposals act as a disincentive for the self-employed who wish to start up a business; 

-and is strongly of the opinion that the publication of such a Bill should have been preceded by both fuller consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny of a draft Bill" 

They are good amendments. They are well thought through and show that Labour have done what an 
opposition party should do - scrutinise legislation and ensure that IF it passes, it does so as smoothly and with as little pain as possible.  


The amendment failed by 244 votes to 317. However, the bill passed by 308 votes to 20 as Labour MPs were whipped to abstain on the bill but vote for the amendment. Just 20 MPs voted against  and defied the whip, 10 of whom were Labour. Find out who by clicking here) 


At first, there was fury over this last night. Grassroots Labour members, Labour bloggers and sick and disabled campaigners were astonished that Ed Miliband should ask his MPs NOT to oppose a bill with so many flaws. A bill which in its present form would go against every principle of the Labour Party.


However, overnight and this morning, Labour MPs have told me that this was an attempt to persuade Lib Dems to back the amendment. Let's face it, Labour do not have a majority. Any bill they vote against alone will always fail. Labour have 258 MPs. The Conservatives have 307. The Lib Dems have 57 and there are 28 "Others." If enough Lib Dems and "Others" vote for the amendment or abstain, we might lose the battle, but we win the war. Labour MPs assure me that if the amendment hasn't been accepted at the 3rd reading they WILL vote against the bill.  


The only way this bill can be reformed is to ensure that enough Lib Dems vote for the amendment. 


We now have the committee stage of the bill and this is the period in which lobby groups MUST make their voices heard. We MUST win the hearts and minds of those MPs - on both sides of the house - who have serious concerns over the points raised in Labour's amendment. Make no mistake - if we can't the Bill will pass as it is. Campaigners must now work tirelessly to ensure that any concerns they may have NOT listed on the amendment are lobbied for and included.


This morning, it seems to me that Labour have been as supportive and constructive as we could hope any opposition party to be. The time for talking is NOW. Any government that ignores these reasonable suggestions would not deserve the support of its coalition partners. 

2nd Reading of Welfare Reform Bill - Summary

Today was the 2nd reading of the Welfare Reform Bill and, on the whole, it seemed a very constructive, mannerly affair with both sides of the house making reasoned arguments. There seemed to be a genuine desire on both sides of the house to make sure the reforms were fair and any problems resolved.

The main points that came up time and again were those things IDS couldn't confirm, the parts of reform for which details haven't been decided despite them being in the original bill. These include :

-Child Tax Credit will be abolished but IDS cannot confirm what will take it's place One study seems to imply that whilst currently up to 97% of childcare is paid for, this might drop to 70% acting as a disincentive to work. 


-We also don't know what will happen about free school meals, passporting of benefits, disability premiums,  housing for those on DLA or whether DLA will continue after retirement age. Council tax benefit and elements of support for carers are also unclear. Labour argued throughout the debate that there were far too many details yet to be presented to the house.

-Labour continually pointed out that without work to go to, these reforms would fail and cause hardship and inequality. Jobs MUST be the starting point for welfare reform.

-The savings cap came up over and over again. Members argued that capping savings at £16,000 for those on Universal Credit did not "foster ambition"

- Members on both sides raised concerns over the Work Capability Assessments and reassurance was given that these would be addressed.

It was however, noticeable from the start that by far the biggest issue was sickness and disability benefit reform. It came up over and over again from members on both sides of the house, many waving sheaths of letters from frightened constituents. A HUGE congratulations to campaigners who have worked tirelessly to make sure that MPs were well informed on the issues sick and disabled people face. It showed in every part of the debate that the message had got through.

Questions were asked on DLA and it seems that the government have backed down on scrapping mobility payments for adults in care homes. Liam Byrne pushed IDS for confirmation which wasn't quite given, but it was certainly a stronger concession than was given last week.

For a while it looked as though Labour might back down on time limiting ESA and certainly, many Labour MPs raised this issue as one of the greatest causes for concern. Byrne didn't quite back down, but it seemed to me that this may still be up for debate - a positive sign.

Many MPs also mentioned that DLA was in little need of reform. It was an occurring theme that announcing a 20% cut in the benefit before any assessment had taken place could only be viewed as a cost cutting measure and would understandably cause concern. I wondered if there might be a push to remove DLA from the WRB altogether as too many details were still too unclear? Watch this space.

Concerns were raised over ATOS and the assessment process. IDS was pushed on whether he would reconsider inflicting regular assessments on those who's disabilities were lifelong or degenerative. this was one area he stood very firm on. He saw nothing wrong with assessing ANY benefit regularly.

The Conservative side of the argument was nearly always that benefits were far too complicated and that work must pay. I disagree with neither of those statements and felt that there would be little resistance to changing specific details as long as those two points were rigorously upheld. They mentioned a desire to see real jobs that pay - another desire I can't disagree with

Finally, I'd like to point out that attendance in the house was shameful. A handful of MPs scattered the benches during this, the most important change to our welfare system for 60 years. Along with the NHS proposals, I urge EVERY MP to take his or her responsibility more seriously in our name. They ALL need to be informed on these proposals and surely every constituent has the right to think that his or her MP will give this enormous overhaul their full attention?

Sadly, right at the end when the cameras came in, Chris Grayling, the final speaker, turned the debate into a party political row. It WASN'T like that all the way through. This issue should be above politics. To their credit, most who spoke managed this admirably.

The (Lab) amendment failed by 244 Ayes, 317 Noes. Where were the other 89 MPs? Again, I don't care about excuses. This is too important to miss.

Update : John McDonnell MP (Lab) is tweeting that Ed Miliband told Labour MPs (PLP) to ABSTAIN on the bill, and to only support the amendment. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions on that one. I'm way too deflated. 

Advice for Sickies Watching Welfare Reform Bill

Morning spoonie warriors.

Nice day for the second reading of the Welfare Reform Bill.

You can watch it on the Parliament Channel shortly after PMQs.

Obviously, we can't watch all those politicians discussing OUR futures without some fairly hardcore support, so here's my special spoonie guide to political debates.

1) Time to get your meds together. Anything analgesic (to stop pain), anti-psychotic (to stop fury) , anti-emetic (to stop vomiting) and anti-anxiety (to stop sheer incredulous horror) a will help

2) Nice, hot, sweet tea will give a little comfort. This is especially good taken with Toblerone.

3) Have the following tracks on your ipod, ready to drown out particularly obnoxious and ignorant fools :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skh6Bp_M_-o I'm Still Standing (no pun intended)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtIKTW85e5Q I Will Survive - Singalong version!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJVewWbeBiY High Hopes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnjkb4q6FKU Tomorrow

4) Remember that the party you DON'T support will say things that make you want to shoot the TV, but it's their job. Cheer extra loud when your guys say something you like.

5) Finally, remember that nothing will happen today. This is just to make sure that there are plenty of jobs for politicians at this difficult time. We MUST keep them active or morale will drop. They will obfuscate, lecture and patronise, but they can't help it - it's all they know.

If all else fails tune out and laugh at their sill haircuts or impossibly unfortunate faces or horrific ties. It works for me.