Jump to content


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2220 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse....

 

An investigation by BBC News has uncovered several of the benefits under consideration for change:

 

Industrial Injuries Compensation Scheme - could be replaced by companies providing industrial injury insurance policy for employees. Any that did not would become members of a default national industrial injuries scheme, similar to the programme for asbestos sufferers. DWP predicted saving - £1bn

 

Carer's Allowance - this could be restricted to those eligible for Universal Credit. Leaked documents suggest about 40% of claimants would lose out.DWP predicted saving - £1bn

 

The contributory element of Employment and Support Allowance and Job Seekers Allowance - currently claimants who have paid enough National Insurance contributions can get the benefits with little means testing; DWP analysis suggests 30% of claimants, over 300,000 families, would lose about £80 per week. DWP predicted saving - £1.3bn in 2018/19

 

Disability benefits - Disability Living Allowance, Personal Independence Payments and Attendance Allowance (for over 65s who have personal care needs) would no longer be paid tax free. Possible saving - £1.5bn per annum(based on IFS Green Budget calculation )

 

Council Tax Support - to be incorporated into Universal Credit. Possible saving - not known

 

Child Benefit - Limiting the benefit to the first two children. Possible saving IFS estimates £1bn saving per annum in the long run but little initially

 

Regional Benefit Caps - The £23,000 limit would vary in different parts of the country, with for instance Londoners receiving the top amount due to the higher cost of living. Possible saving - not known and dependent on where levels were set

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32084722?ocid=socialflow_twitter

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The media tends to portray benefit claimants as scroungers, to stigmatise the claimants.

 

The benefits system is meant to be there as a safety net and not a hammock. Such people treating it as a hammock deserve to be penalised if they have no intention of finding work. But for genuine claimants who are suffering with whatever illness and for people actively seeking work, such people should not be penalised.

 

Another thread on CAG shows that benefits rise is capped, 1% (from what I remember reading) - this is highly unfair when fuel, electricity, gas, food prices continually rise, as does the price of taxes and water rates, - those claiming benefits are already struggling and the matter is just going to get worse.

 

Reading your post makes it even more abysmal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't express in civilised language how angry I am about these alledged changes. The changes to carers is in my opinion unforgivable and beyond humane reasoning. I am only 1 of an army of people who sacrifice their own earning potential to look after a loved one. Carers is not aa grand sum but we rely heavily on it. It was not enough to victimise the disabled person, now they want to victimise the army of carers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

newhere, I couldn't agree more! Without such people as yourself looking after others (whether family member or friend), there would be an influx of people who need care to survive and no place in which to put them.

 

To cut carers allowance is nonsensical, even if looked at from a financial point of view of the government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If IBS implement these draconian measures that won't make a great deal of difference to the mess left by the banking crisis , there will be riots, on a mass scale, or you will have desperate people with nothing to lose going into a shop and blatantly taking food,or items of value, they won't be bothered about getting caught as prison will be better than being free to starve and wallow in poverty for many, only once they government realise that it's costing a dam sight more keeping all these ex benefit claimants in prison than it was costing in benefits, only then will the idiots do an about turn,

 

One bit in that news report was that they said that esa claimants could see their benefits cut by £80 per week ??? how much does the media think those who are on esa get paid per week ?

as i thought the top line (support group) was around £120 per week? so that would leave err mmm £40 per week, that's going to go far,not

And as for the line about the jobless not seeking work getting less money, doesn't that already happen with the current sanction regime and the not so well known about hardship payments ? in fact it happens to those who are actively seeking work as well , because the real reason is to manipulate the number of those unemployed thus helping government spread more bs about how more people are in work ,as a result of them, but the truth is very different, as some are not counted because they have been sanctioned or are attending one of those mandatory job club type ideas they aren't counted as unemployed either, then you have those in work, that are on zero hrs contracts, part time or in temporary work, most paying the min wage wages that are often subsidised by wtc and other in work benefits, how many have got proper full time jobs that at the least pay a liveable wage? not many would be the grim answer

Link to post
Share on other sites

these things get leaked to test public reaction, like the often budget leaks.

 

So the ones that stand out to me are taxing DLA/PIP (I assume this means no longer disregarded as income?)

Carers allowance

Contribution ESA, although it isn't clear what is planned for this other than its been flagged for cuts, but looks like they either plan to time limit ESA SG on contribution or add some means testing checks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about somebody like me, single person having worked most of their life, now having to reduce hours at work due to illness (illness means I have to have several visits to hospital each month for tests/treatment) and having to apply for PIP in order to get Working Tax Credit.

 

I thought this government wanted NO 'passported' benefits, well they have created completely the opposite with Universal Credit AND have caused a whole new army of faceless blameless officials in the 'assessment centres' and 'work placement schemes for benefit claimants'.

 

I currently HAVE work but HAVE to reduce my hours in order to receive the treatment I need to make a full recovery to enable me to work until I retire at 67, under the old rules I could have retired in 3 years time, not 9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scandalous!

 

A carer in their own right SAVES THE TAXPAYERS MONEY!!!!

 

I still think someone should commission an artist and build a big memorial in the center of London, preferably close to a major tourist spot. Have it comprised of a photo of all the victims who have died due to welfare reform. AND have it demonstrate the SHAME this government has and the SHAME the People have for allowing it to happen

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only person to enter parliament with honest intentions was guy Fawkes!! We all know what his plans were, maybe he was a profet and could see what would happen to the common man and woman.

Parliament is full of elitest posh private school boys (and girls) who are completely out of touch with "normal households"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think someone should commission an artist and build a big memorial in the center of London, preferably close to a major tourist spot. Have it comprised of a photo of all the victims who have died due to welfare reform. AND have it demonstrate the SHAME this government has and the SHAME the People have for allowing it to happen

 

Nice idea, although I think the present government does not have so much shame since they are proud of such things as foodbanks. Main opposition government also appears not to have any shame!

 

The more I read CAG, the more my eyes open to the atrocities in the UK. I was kind of blind before. Here, I read real stories and problems from real people, not just a media report that is probably biased.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone should be making political out of this. If you read the 2010 Labour manifesto, they also planned exactly the same things, including only 1% payrise for public employees, and have said just last week that they will not reverse any of the cuts made by the present government.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think anyone should be making political out of this. If you read the 2010 Labour manifesto, they also planned exactly the same things, including only 1% payrise for public employees, and have said just last week that they will not reverse any of the cuts made by the present government.

 

I have just read the Labour Party's 2010 manifesto, and I must be blind as I can't see any of these proposals in it.

 

http://www2.labour.org.uk/uploads/TheLabourPartyManifesto-2010.pdf

If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Limiting child benefit to the first two children is the only idea that I support, and I am a Conservative voter.

 

Why exactly are we paying people to have children in the first place ?

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry I missed the benefits cap bit at the bottom. I would want benefits capped at say £20k in London and the southeast, and say £16k elsewhere.

 

 

I don't see why people in London should get a penny more than those in the rest of the country.

 

Why exactly are we paying people to have children in the first place ?

 

 

It started after the second world war and was to help mothers who had lost their husband fighting. That ended 60 years ago so no real need for it any longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So you would like benefits left at £26,000, more than a working person takes home ??

 

But a working person can also take home (depending on their situation) benefits on top.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having considered further, just have a cap of say £16k, then if people cannot afford to live in London, they can move. If more people moved away from London, this would ease the pressure on schools and hospitals etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Having considered further, just have a cap of say £16k, then if people cannot afford to live in London, they can move. If more people moved away from London, this would ease the pressure on schools and hospitals etc.

 

Slippery Slope there

Eugenics and ghettos spring to mind

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It started after the second world war and was to help mothers who had lost their husband fighting. That ended 60 years ago so no real need for it any longer.

 

In the interests of historical accuracy I have to challenge that. CB originated (as Family Allowance) in the landmark Beveridge White Paper of 1942, and neither that nor the speeches supporting it in Hansard cite war widows as a reason. There were a range of reasons, mainly around alleviating poverty and 'nutruring' the next generation, and later in the 1950s to bring about greater equality of opportunity by encouraging families to let children stay in school rather than take them out to earn income at the earliest opportunity.

 

The text of the Family Allowances section of the Beveridge Report is widely available online if you are interested

 

http://www.sochealth.co.uk/resources/public-health-and-wellbeing/beveridge-report/beveridge-childrens-allowances/

 

I don't suppose any party would invent it from scratch today as a universal benefit if it didn't already exist, but abolishing things people already receive isn't something politicians want to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The text of the Family Allowances section of the Beveridge Report is widely available online if you are interested

 

 

No, I'm not interested, I was generalising and that is just splitting hairs and adds up to the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...