Iain Duncan Smith resigns from Cabinet

[I1L2T3]

Warming up nicely:

 

"Cameron: I blame Osborne"

 

Front page of The Times tomorrow apparently.

[Mister M]

Warming up nicely:

 

"Cameron: I blame Osborne"

 

Front page of The Times tomorrow apparently.

 

Could be worse. It could've said "Cameron: I blame Thatcher"

[ricgem2002]

Could be worse. It could've said "Cameron: I blame Thatcher"

could be even worse with ash pointing to a picture of brown and on front page of star :hihi:

[ECCOnoob]

From the gov.uk site:

 

Nowhere does the DWP stipulate what precisely the payment should be used for, they leave it to the recipient to decide the best way to use it to meet the additional costs arising from their condition. Every post you make on this shows that you know nothing about PIP yet you continue lecturing people about it and saying it should be cut. Which is the essence of the Tory attitude to disability and benefits in general.

 

I have two family members who receive PIP and I am a legal guardian and trustee for one of them.

 

I have been dealing with disabled family members since school age. I have been dealing with the DWP, local authority, social services and other service users since my teenage years.

 

I know how things used to be and I take time to read between the lines with things proposed and things already in place.

 

Don't tell me what you THINK I know and don't know.

 

Just because my view does not follow the line of the rent a gob disability rights brigade does not make me any less valid. I am not so thick that I consider the collective "disabled" to be some protected bubble who should be 100% guaranteed to be immune from any sort of assessment, consultation, change or reduction to their means. Its exactly the same sort of knee jerk exaggerated reaction that people have whenever even a tiny proposal is whispered regarding trimming a part of the NHS.

 

Leaving it up to the service user to decide how to meet their "additional costs" IS NOT the same as spend on what they like and use it as a top up to their income. That is what is happening with SOME of the recipients. Its supposed to be used for an additional cost caused by their disability. Its not pocket money.

 

Those who don't have any additional costs. Those who dont need any additional support. Those whose living, condition or personal circumstances have improved should quite rightly be re-assessed and where necessary have their monies reduced or removed altogether.

 

Its not a blanket reduction. Its not a complete withdrawal. Nowhere in the plans does it say that cases will not be considered on a unilateral basis. They of course will be.

 

IF a person is deemed to need their money, they will keep it. Those that don't wont.

 

What part of this are you not understanding?

Edited March 21, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[*_ash_*]

come on then ash explain how labour lost you your wages ?

 

You're probably either too young to remember, or too old now to learn ric

[ricgem2002]

You're probably either too young to remember, or too old now to learn ric

I bet anything that you and others have benefited from labours policies over the years but just cant bring yourself to admit it

[ECCOnoob]

Let me give an example just to see if I can stop banging my head against a wall.

 

One of my relatives with a mental health condition used to go to a work placement each day. He could not self travel unsupervised so his PIP budget had an element for taxi accounts, support worker and/or LD Service buses to take him to and from work. Last year he suffered some physical degenerative change and could no longer go to work every day. He now only does 2 days a week.

 

His PIP review reduced his monthly monies by around £150. That obviously created quite a drop in his bank balance.

 

Fair??

Edited March 21, 2016 by ECCOnoob
typing correction.

[Mister M]

An interesting summary of IDS policies at DWP:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/20/ids-victorian-morality-reforming-zeal-gross-incompetence

[*_ash_*]

I bet anything that you and others have benefited from labours policies over the years but just cant bring yourself to admit it

I bet anything that you and others have benefited from labours policies over the years but just cant bring yourself to admit it

 

Could you write anything more vague if you tried?

 

 

(even without your drink or drugs or whatever you absorb into your system?)

 

-

 

Let me give an example just to see if I can stop banging my head against a wall.

 

One of my relatives with a mental health condition used to go to a work placement each day. He could not self travel unsupervised so his PIP budget had an element for taxi accounts, support worker and/or LD Service buses to take him to and from work. Last year he suffered some physical degenerative change and could no longer go to work every day. He now only does 2 days a week.

 

His PIP review reduced his monthly monies by around £150. That obviously created quite a drop in his bank balance.

 

Fair??

 

In this case the Mirror or Guardian headline would just boost these people more.

[Quik]

Let me give an example just to see if I can stop banging my head against a wall.

 

One of my relatives with a mental health condition used to go to a work placement each day. He could not self travel unsupervised so his PIP budget had an element for taxi accounts, support worker and/or LD Service buses to take him to and from work. Last year he suffered some physical degenerative change and could no longer go to work every day. He now only does 2 days a week.

 

His PIP review reduced his monthly monies by around £150. That obviously created quite a drop in his bank balance.

 

Fair??

 

Seems more than fair as you explained it. His funded costs have plummetted so his funding has been reduced.

 

I fail to see anything unreasonable about that.