More Sickness Benefit cuts leaks...

[antone]

I wasn't bashing anyone, just telling how things are, infact it's because of benefits and free health care that the uk is their choosen target, and most are not genuine asylum seekers, Government would sooner pay them benefits than it's own people, that is what has been happening, and I'm not a kipper they IMO are no better than what we have in power now

 

Where do people get this idea that it's easy for immigrants to claim benefits? Over the eight years or so I've been involved in processing or advising about the DWP I've heard this rant so many times, and it is so completely incorrect it staggers me that anyone actually believes it. But yet again, here we are.

[estellyn]

Yes thatchers government with the right to buy council housing stock, and councils not being forced to replace housing stock , but the influx of people from the EU and those from outside it who are here but not officially, working as slaves illegally they all need somewhere to live, this whilst not being solely responsible has never the less played a part in it, we are one of the most densely populated countries in the EU , it's not building more houses and more vehicles on our roads what we need, it's a lower population ,

 

On the rates of pay i'm aware of some companies who started employing eastern Europeans, who they paid less than what they paid British workers, as a result they lowered their rates to everyone, the government have encouraged this , and as said if they stopped WTC and HB for min wage jobs, most employers would lay off some staff, because by paying such poor wages they have been able to afford 2 people for the price of one basically, boom time for them should be over

 

I disagree with your opinion, but I respect your right to hold a differing opinion to mine.

 

2.7% of the UK is built on - that includes roads. There is plenty of scope for more development, and to handle a little migration. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096

 

Preventing migration is a double edged sword - so you stop some people coming here, but what about British people wanting to move elsewhere? I have no problem with people moving to find work, it's up to the government to enforce the laws and ensure people are being recruited fairly and wages are equal in line with what the law requires. In my experience most companies would prefer to hire someone with good English - what does it say if they then end up employing people whose english is not so good? It says something about our prospective workforce? A family member of mine runs a company and once told me he prefers to employ eastern europeans as they work harder, longer and are more reliable at jobs that British workers turn their nose up at. If that's true (I'm not saying it is) then it's pretty appalling.

 

And the laying off of staff argument is a pretty poor one. People being paid more means more disposable income, and this leads to more jobs, not less, plus more taxes paid. Profits to shareholders generally aren't going to shore up our economy - they're going off-shore or get protected by clever accountants.

 

And if an established business can't afford to pay a living wage to it's staff, then it's a poor business model. By all means give businesses tax breaks when they first set up to enable them to get established and afford the initial costs, but after that, they should be paying a living wage.

[estellyn]

I wasn't bashing anyone, just telling how things are, infact it's because of benefits and free health care that the uk is their choosen target, and most are not genuine asylum seekers, Government would sooner pay them benefits than it's own people, that is what has been happening, and I'm not a kipper they IMO are no better than what we have in power now

 

Having dealt with immigrants and asylum seekers as a benefits worker, I can tell you categorically that it is difficult to get benefits as an EU immigrant, it is subject to strict conditions which are getting stricter. 99% of EU migrants I have met, just want to work and earn - sure they'll claim some tax credits or child benefit if it is available to them, but they'd much rather be working than rely on any benefits. And as for asylum seekers, I can't even describe how difficult it is for them to get any sort of benefit or even to be accepted as an asylum seeker, and even if they are waiting for their decision, they are given the very basic amount to live - not sure what it is now, but I think it was about £25 a week. genuine asylum seekers come through terrible trauma and come to this country wanting to start a new life. I worked with a chap who had previously been an asylum seeker, he is a really smart guy, went on to university, his wife works in health care, he was so excited to get his British citizenship, and amused at how much more he knew about British history than most of the people in the office.

 

EU migrants don't get more benefits than us, asylum seekers hardly get anything until their asylum is proven. There is no preference in housing and there is no conspiracy to swindle British people out of........whatever...

[Conniff]

Where do people get this idea that it's easy for immigrants to claim benefits? Over the eight years or so I've been involved in processing or advising about the DWP I've heard this rant so many times, and it is so completely incorrect it staggers me that anyone actually believes it. But yet again, here we are.

 

They get it mainly from newspapers who pick up on the one or two in this country who are demanding their rights as per the benefits system. Like the family on £50,000 and doing nothing or the other one demanding a 10 bedroom house. All political bunk of course and usually headlined around the time of elections or the like. The problem is those couple stick in peoples minds who then tar them all.

[tobyjugg2]

No, the fact that housebuilding isn't keeping up with demand is what is putting increased pressure on rental prices plus the difficulties for the last few years of getting a mortgage causing more people to need to rent than buy, plus less availability of social housing.

 

And there isn't a decent rate of pay because government is subsidising employers with tax credits and housing benefit meaning employers don't need to pay a living wage. Pro business lobbys ensure that the government don't put up minimum wage to ensure that wages don't eat too much into profits.

 

Lack of sufficient funding is putting pressure on public services.

 

The UKIP model of 'all immigrants are to blame for everything', is a clever propaganda filled policy which hooks people who are looking for an easy answer to what is a far more difficult situation than UKIP suggest.

 

It is also an an excellent cover for the fact that UKIP are a right wing uber capitalist pro business, pro wealth party - even more so than the Tories.

 

Absolutely to all those points.

 

Also why bash Thatchers one good action - right to buy.

That should have been great for social housing, the fact that it isn't is because of ALL the political party actions since - not any one.

 

Of course its reasonable for people who have paid in long term into social housing to be able to get some benefit from that should their circumstances improve.

This should also be beneficial to the social housing system as:

* They will have paid in far more than they get in discount

* It is people moved out of social housing needs, reducing the demand

* Even with discount, the purchase price, excluding all other monies made from the houses prior to purchase, would more than pay for a modern new replacement to be built if the money were used for such.

 

Where does this fit in with welfare, or any benefits - it further shows how broken the existing system is just like the more obvious:

* Money from social housing sales used everywhere except in social housing replacement

* Money from road tax not being spent on roads

 

If all the costs, income and benefits were allocated where they should be, we might have the slightest inkling of a clue what the situations really are.

(which is why they aren't - by ALL government parties)

[Nystagmite]

If DWP force me to undergo treatment which ultimately leaves me more disabled than I currently am, does this mean I can sue them? And will they work with my GP and consultants to ensure I actually get suitable treatment?

[Conniff]

They can't force you, you have to sign a consent, but I suppose they could blackmail you.

[tobyjugg2]

They can't force you, you have to sign a consent, but I suppose they could blackmail you.

 

Good point - sign it + 'signed under protest as the requirements may cause me harm.

[telemark]

Has anyone seen this? http://a.msn.com/r/2/AAcDNVw?a=1&m=EN-GB Particularly the bit about changes to ESA and some being moved onto JSA.

[tobyjugg2]

Has anyone seen this? http://a.msn.com/r/2/AAcDNVw?a=1&m=EN-GB Particularly the bit about changes to ESA and some being moved onto JSA.

 

Thank you for that find telemark, the article seems clear and informative, even if the figures and their 'labeling may not be.

 

£168B on welfare with a third of that pension related payments other than state pensions which is shown seperately,

 

£28.5 billion of that bill is from 'personal social services', which includes children in care and long-term care of the sick, elderly and disabled and

 

£13 billion gets spent on housing benefit and disability living allowance - why is disability living allowance not classed with long term care of the sick etc?

 

(I intend no opinion or comment above on which is more or less 'worthy' just somewhat confused)

 

My personal opinion for example is against a specific 'housing benefit' but absolutely for support for the disabled to live at home.

[san_d]

I wasn't bashing anyone, just telling how things are, infact it's because of benefits and free health care that the uk is their choosen target, and most are not genuine asylum seekers, Government would sooner pay them benefits than it's own people, that is what has been happening, and I'm not a kipper they IMO are no better than what we have in power now

They, their, them.

 

Who are you referring to? You're just putting "them", whoever they are, in the same pot. The legal immigrants, the illegal immigrants, refugees, ethnic minorities? Are the Irish and the Scots in there? Why not Scousers and Geordies?

[Nystagmite]

They can't force you, you have to sign a consent, but I suppose they could blackmail you.

 

They'd just sanction you.

[obiter dictum]

We can see why the Tories want us out of the ECHR, HRA etc

 

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Mental_health_ENG.pdf

 

The DWP cannot sanction you for refusal of medical treatment as to entitlement to state benefit. That would infringe Artcle 2 right to life, article 8 right to privacy for home and family life and Article 5 Right to liberty and security

 

That was why repealing the HRA was put on the back burners in the Queens speech. This sorry excuse of a Government has no lawful reason to repeal the Act once you took away all the hysteria and negative propaganda as a reason to repeal...

[Conniff]

They have never wanted to repeal all those things. All they, and loyal brits, want is to be our own boss and be able to get rid of murderers and terrorists. The last one took about 15 years and umpteen millions of pound.

'Sorry, you can't deport him, he still has some valid Tesco vouchers'.

[obiter dictum]

I still cannot believe people still believe this Thresa Mays Cat BS Tripe as to why we cannot deport Terrorists etc.

The answer is because of our own immigration appeals process and the Home Office trying to circumvent the natural process of the law, not the ECHR.

[obiter dictum]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/04/theresa-may-cat-human-rights-act

 

People need to look up "Qualified Rights" and "Margin of Appreciation." Not the Daily Hate Mail or the Express

[Conniff]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326906/Hate-preacher-Abu-Hamza-wins-human-rights-bid-UK-passport.html

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3113340/Billionaire-Dubai-sheikh-s-terror-suspect-brother-law-uses-Human-Rights-Act-win-right-live-UK-despite-arriving-fake-Belgian-passport.html

[obiter dictum]

Daily Hate Mail?? What next the Express or National Enquirer

 

And that was a British Immigrations appeal panel, nothing to do with the ECHR that made that decision

[Conniff]

It's all the papers, so don't try point scoring.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11602222/Allison-Pearson-We-must-get-rid-of-the-dreadful-Human-Rights-Act.html

[obiter dictum]

The Torygraph?? getting better

 

That still does not change the facts that the immigration appeals panel made the correct decision, no matter how people try and spin it

 

Not to mention Abu Hamzais now languishing in an AMERICAN prison cell, not British for the rest of his life

[Conniff]

The Torygraph?? getting better

 

If the Daily Star is more to your taste I will get some quotes from that.

[obiter dictum]

I prefer the ONS , CBI or HM Treasury official press releases myself