Jump to content


Recommended Posts

You think that youth unemployment started when the coalition took over in 2010, then? Really?


As regards people having to work longer - do you really think that the retirement age should have stayed the same despite people living much longer now? Who do you think would pay for their pensions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

paulb said

odd the two that are anti this thread are tory supporters


Not really that odd as the argument is basically political as the debaters are obviously from different sides of that spectrum. Anyway it is brought life to a boring diatribe. Being a Labour man I am slightly right of centre. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I would wonder if you were making it up or altering text to suit.

A valid point though you, of course, barefacedly do exactly what you warn of:

We cannot change anything until we accept it. ConDemNation does not liberate, it oppresses.

That is not a Jung quote. You presumably think you are being clever.


Hehe, just been oppressed?


Mine is obvious, too obvious to be taken literally, but, really, as you care about it so much, I will look into it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atos overuling GPs on sick claimants’ requests for visits


ATOS healthcare is rejecting requests for home assessments even if a claimant’s GP supports one.


Asked “why Atos Healthcare can refuse a home visit for work capability assessments, even when a GP supports an application,†the Benefits Minister Nelson McCausland said Atos’ own health expert can disregard a GP’s opinion and demand claimants show up at local test centres.


He said: “Claimants requesting a home assessment are required to provide medical evidence to support their request.


“The information provided is considered by a healthcare professional who will decide whether a home visit is necessary whilst home visits are usually only carried out when a claimant is unable to leave their home for any reason, it is apparent that they are able to attend GP/hospital appointments, then they will normally be expected to attend an assessment centre for their medical assessment appointment.â€






So a Health Care Professional can now over rule a GP :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An update on Facebook from George Rolph the man on hunger strike -






Whose is it?


I want to make this totally clear to everyone who visits this page. The hunger protest I am undertaking because of this governments inhumane treatment of the the disabled, is mine alone. It is not owned or managed by anyone else unless I allow it to be. It is NOT the property of the political left and their activists, or any other political group or sub group, but it IS a political protest. A one man political protest.


Attempts To Steal The Protest.


Many groups have already tried to co-opt my protest for their own ends. DO NOT listen to them. They DO NOT have the best interests of the disabled at their heart. In fact, their interest in the health and well being of the disabled is so shallow, it is a sham. This can be evidenced by their instant dropping of support for the campaign the moment they feel “offended†by something I write. Their interests lie in their idealogical hatred of Capitalism and/or men and the family unit, and they seek to use my protest to further their own agendas while posing as people who “care.â€


I have been approached by, and attempts have been made to, control this protest by numerous left wing activists and spokesmen. Ranging from the Communist, George Galloway to the Marxist activists who now control many Facebook groups. I have also been threatened, abused by telephone and in text, ridiculed, smeared, accused of being mad and accredited with thought processes “disturbed†by my physical “condition.†None of this is true, justified or warranted. I urge you not to listen. I have got angry at nasty little attempts to silence my views but that is because I loath the vicious thought and speech control of Marxist Political Correctness. My thinking is fine. My mood is fine. My opponents are simply disturbed because I am off of their personal and collective political narrative and refuse to cooperate with it.


See here to discover what that narrative is:



Here, if you are interested in the absurdity of Equality:



I have little doubt that their attacks and slanders will continue and may even seek to silence my voice in this forum. It is up to YOU not to let this happen. If it does, you can find me on Pal Talk and my good friend Jess will point you in the right direction if that avenue is ever closed. Look for me and you will find me as long as I am still alive.


If, by writing this, many choose to cease their support. Those that remain can be proud of yourselves. You at least, were not brow beaten into giving up, or talked out of your support by the nasties that want to govern, manage and control your lives, right down to what and how you should be thinking.


What Is My Political Stance?


I lean to the right in my politics but not far enough to be a nationalist. I cannot stomach the BNP for example. Neither am I authoritarian enough to want to see 'Keep off the grass' plaques make a comeback in our public parks, or bow to some statue of a 'great leader.' I utterly reject Communism, Marxism or Marxism posing as soft-Socialism. Marxism being the current dominant political ideology in this country and often masquerading as right wing.


I also loath, reject and abhor feminism, which is simply feminine Marxism by another name and the biggest con trick ever played on both women and men around the world. If I live, I shall be voting UKIP at the elections and I shall explain why that is later on, all being well.


Am I Surprised By The Lack Of Media Interest?


Not in the slightest. I did not expect much coverage from the very beginning as those who heard my sound interview with Ian, the representative of WOWPetition will recall. Listen here:


The reason I did not expect much coverage is because I know the media – electronic and print – is tightly controlled by its editors and is far, far, from being a free press. Thinking they are is like thinking Facebook is about free expression. It is not. Any story that again, bucks the current political narrative and desire, is simply silenced or given paltry lip service. There is a chance the story will get too big to keep silent but again, that is up to you.


I do think that if the media are forced to become interested, that interest may be almost entirely negative (A hatchet job, as it is known) and you should be prepared for that.


You must keep in mind that ATOS were brought here by the last Labour government and implemented by the Tories. That should suggest to you an all party agenda is being carried out in terms of this disgusting Social Darwinism being imposed on our disabled population. As the media is split largely into those two political camps, they would not wish to upset their political affiliates by attacking their policy in this matter.


The simple fact is that the government, regardless of their colour being blue, red or yellow are united in their attack on a section of the British people and the media have, until now, been largely complicit in that attack and show no signs of significant dissent from it.

However, there are faint signs that parts of the media are growing increasingly uneasy with the deaths being caused by these inhumane policies. Do not be fooled by House of Commons hang wringing exercises by certain MP's. Most of them will be simply covering their own backsides and careers in the event of a public backlash developing in the future. “I voted against this measure†being an excellent way to pretend not to have supported it's implementation.


Do I Think This Protest Stands Any Chance Of Changing Things?


Absolutely! If I did not then I would be nuts. It is one thing for the government to ignore someone dying quietly at home or in hospital from problems arising from their domestic policies. They simply have to stop themselves from thinking about the fact that those statistics represent real people. However, it is quite another thing to have someone giving up his life and doing it right in your face where you cannot escape it. To have someone slowly dying and who refuses to give up and just go away, is very much harder to avoid. Particularly when his two demands are perfectly reasonable, actionable and clearly in the public interest. All that is stopping them are a lack of common decency and political pride.


Both of my demands could be implemented in twenty four hours. I know that and so do they. If the public get behind those two demands then the government will find it impossible to ignore them. That is where you come in. Your job is to convince the public, in the face of media opposition if necessary, that the two demands are perfectly reasonable and should be enacted to prevent further unnecessary deaths or suffering.


So folks. If you genuinely care for the sick and disabled more than your petty ideological concerns, its time to show it by doing some more work to stop this evil. If you cannot do that then, goodbye and thanks for dropping in. I shall go on alone if I have too; but get one thing clear: this is my protest, not yours, even though it may be about you. I run it. Not a bunch of fired up lefties looking to bring down the Capitalist system by using your suffering and mine for their own ends. People like that are opportunistic, manipulative scum. I have no problem with NOT working with them at all. Even if that leaves me with just a dozen good fighters.


So, those that remain. Don't let those vultures use you. Fight for yourselves or your relatives and not to further the political ambitions of a bunch of what Marxists themselves call, “useful idiots.†Brainwashed drones in other words.


Oh, by the way. Sometimes you have to bait the hook to catch the fish. See my joke below.


I love you because I love you. Not because I want anything from you and that includes your money, your political allegiances outside of this protest or your votes in an election. I love you because my God loves me. He can do nothing else. God is love.


George Rolph

Day 27 of the Hunger Strike

16 June 2013

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George Osborne’s Welfare Cuts: A Necessary Step


October 9, 2012 by Alex Clackson


There are plenty of opportunities out there to get some form of qualifications and work your way up towards an average salary which is able to support a small family. Not only is having a job beneficial to the economy, but it also creates a positive atmosphere in a particular community and in the nation as a whole.


During his Party Conference speech on the 8th of October George Osborne has proclaimed that the Government will press ahead with plans to cut £10 billion from the welfare budget by 2016-17 on top of the £18 billion cuts already under way. Osborne has secured the agreement of Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, something he said would be necessary in order to avoid additional cuts in other Whitehall departments. The announcement, made in Osborne’s speech to the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham, will set the Tories on collision with their Liberal Democrat coalition partners.


Nick Clegg told his party’s conference last month that he would not allow “wild suggestions†of a £10 billion cut in welfare, while Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander said, “We simply will not allow the books to be balanced in a way that hits the poorest hardest.â€


The rhetoric by George Osborne will undoubtedly create new tensions between the political right and left, between the supporters of cuts and the supporters of spending to kick start the economy. It is perhaps too easy to claim that George Osborne is taking a typical Conservative means to end the deficit – cut the funding to the poorest while the rich are left unscathed. I am going to lay down all my cards on the table and truthfully say that I am personally not a fan of the Conservatives. In fact I am a member of the Green Party therefore in theory I should despise any policies put forward by the Tories. However, George Osborne and his team are onto something with their idea on cutting the welfare budget and in this article I will explain why.


When I immigrated to Britain in 2001 from Russia, I was surprised to learn that thousands of people in this country are able to be unemployed yet still live fairly comfortably. In Russia, if a citizen does not have a job, chances are he may end up on the streets. Even as a young child back then I was proud that a country like Britain looks after their citizens who were unlucky enough to be jobless. But as I grew older I realised an uncomfortable truth, that many of these jobless citizens chose to be unemployed and made the jobseekers benefits their life choice. As I studied the whole purpose of the welfare system, I learned that benefits were meant to be a safety net for the society rather than something people jump on in order to escape employment and watch Jeremy Kyle instead. It angered me that some people choose to live their whole life on welfare benefits and I began supporting the Conservative Party for a number of years.


Yet even now, as a centre-left individual, I believe that there should be cuts to the welfare budget. Having watched a programme recently on a council estate in Blackburn and having heard some young people on the programme claim that they are on benefits “because it’s just easier than getting up early every morning†I thought it was time for the government to take some measures.


George Osborne put forward an idea that families who have children for the sake of receiving child benefits will also feel the full wrath of the welfare cuts. Once again, I have to agree that this is a necessary action to take. In my short lifetime, I have lived in some poor areas and I was saddened to see poor families having children for the sake of having more cash rather than because they genuinely wanted to create a family. Not only am I a believer that it is wrong to bring children into this world if you are not able to financially support them, but I am also a believer that bringing up children without fully understanding the responsibilities it will entail to bring these children up properly will create a nasty vicious circle. This circle goes round as follows: a financially poor mother has a child, the father of the child is long gone, the mother is unable (or does not want to) bring her child up properly, the child grows up with no respect towards society and his country and thus also takes the life of a benefit scrounger and/or a criminal.


Ultimately it is important to change the culture of Britain. Irrespective of my leftward-leaning ideology, I am happy to announce my belief that some citizens of this country must stop relying on Jobseeker’s Allowance and child benefit to get through life. There are plenty of opportunities out there to get some form of qualifications and work your way up towards an average salary which is able to support a small family. Not only is having a job beneficial to the economy, but it also creates a positive atmosphere in a particular community and in the nation as a whole.


Having said all of that, I undoubtedly understand that the current economic situation in Britain is dire and the rate of unemployment is high. Of course citizens who genuinely cannot find a job must receive benefits in order to support themselves while they search for employment. Nevertheless, there are far too many people who see benefits as “free money†rather than a safety net, and against all odds, I am therefore supporting the policies by George Osborne to cut the welfare budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welfare for wealthy must be cut first, says Nick Clegg




Speaking earlier this month, shadow chancellor Ed Balls said wealthy pensioners would not be eligible for the winter fuel allowance under a Labour government.


"At a time when the public services that pensioners and others rely on are under strain, it can no longer be a priority to continue paying the winter fuel allowance to the wealthiest pensioners," he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



If you start quoting Ed Balls, one of the chief culprits for the mess that the UK economy is in, then you have effectively lost the argument.


The idiot is now suggesting that state retirement pensions should also be means-tested. He hasn't a clue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“A View from the Precariatâ€


Taken from: http://www.dorseteye.com/north/articles/a-view-from-the-precariat#sthash.Ibei4XHj.dpuf


A few days ago, I found myself involved in a twitter conversation about desperation. My impression of my fellow conversationalists is that they were mainly salariats (people receiving salaries) for whom, I imagine (because I don’t know), the austerity policies of the UK’s Coalition government have had some impact but have yet to undermine their foundations of existence. Participating as a precariat, my response was markedly different.


In less than three months time, I will be encountering the precariousness of my existence when the DWP requires me to, once again, attend a WCA (Work Capability Assessment) with Atos to see if I am ‘fit for work’ after the 6-month reprieve my GP won for me last March. These so-called fitness tests have already been found unfit for purpose, yet they continue regardless because, as far as I can see, the plutocrats who run my country have decided that only they know best and blatantly refuse to consider any evidence that doesn’t accord with their beliefs. If I remain within this system, there are two ways my future is likely to be mapped.


First – depending upon how my mental and physical health holds up – I will attend a WCA and fail it because that is how the system has been designed. In the past, I could appeal and spend several months with reduced income until my case was heard by a tribunal (I’ve attended two of these already and won) but the system will have changed by the time I arrive at this place again. Now, when I fail my WCA, my case has to go back to the DWP for reassessment before I can appeal. I have yet to see details about how this works but, as far as I can tell, there is no longer any provision for me to keep my ESA until my appeal is heard – so to maintain my already precarious ‘life-style’, I would have to claim Job Seekers Allowance, which implies I am ‘fit for work’. So I have a choice – no benefits until my appeal is won (assuming that it is), probably for months; or JSA.


If I apply for JSA, I am then subject to a different kind of system. What is certain is that, as a prospective employee, I have little or nothing to recommend me to an employer: ex-offender (therefore ‘criminal’), aged 58 (“too oldâ€), long-term unemployed (therefore less likely to get employment) at a time when jobs simply don’t exist and to cap it all, a woman living in the most deprived region of England.


What is absolutely certain is that when I am subject to this kind of ‘treatment’, I become suicidal. I’m not alone in such feelings and I wouldn’t be the first to act on them either as any simple search will show.


This is no plea for sympathy – these are the facts about the future I face in less than 3 months time and one I am going to have to deal with. Nor am I unwilling to work. What I am is unwilling to comply with a system that marks me as ‘vermin’ and whom no ‘decent’ person can regard as socially acceptable. I’m unwilling to work for employers who refuse to value their employees because it would kill me as surely as the DWP would. As a member of the precariat class, the human right to life no longer seems to apply to me and if the changes to legal aid go through, our loss of ‘Right to Life’ will be enshrined in law.


It doesn’t matter that, in the three years since the end of my sentence, I have worked my ass off as a desister. I get on well with my neighbours; have an excellent relationship with both my landlady and her agent (to the extent that when my housing benefit was reduced, they accepted the new rate because I have value, not just as a good tenant but as “the best tenant they have on their booksâ€); have worked hard with local Mental Health agencies to grow away from my suicidal ideations, and I continue to look for ways to contribute to my society via the social media. The system I am now caught up in dismisses all of this in favour of work-shy, skiving scrounger propaganda, which alleges precariats are personally responsible for all the country’s financial woes, and who needs to be taught a lesson. Never mind that, prior to my physical and mental health breakdown, I had worked for over thirty years, including 12 years of self-employment.


These are the facts that inform the ‘desperation‘ felt by us precariats but which seem largely misunderstood by anyone who hasn’t actually shared the experience. We make up ONE THIRD of the UK’s population yet are effectively excluded from participating in our society in favour of a minority opinion of some very selfish people.


Desperate times lead desperate people to do desperate things. Oh, I intend to explore what possibilities there might be, work and social-contribution-wise, that might enable me to hold my precarious existence together come September but, during this period of my reprieve, I also need to look at my ‘bottom-line‘. This is what it looks like from where I am standing now. Perhaps I’ll be one of the “lucky ones†who find a benefactor, and perhaps I won’t. What I do realise is that I’m unwilling to be subject to this death by a thousand cuts. Let death come quick and clean – in the meantime, I can start making arrangements for re-homing my beautiful cats; I can begin to make arrangements to recycle my present home to help those not so far down the despair scale as me; and I can continue to raise my precariat voice.


Desperation is not something we can ‘put aside’ because that’s how ‘they’ want us to feel (one of the comments made in the conversation which inspired this blog) – for precariats, desperation has become a way of life, courtesy of the rich, and it is literally killing us in our thousands now. None of this was ‘unknown’ – all the issues raised in this piece were known ahead of time. Our Eton-educated government decided it knew better. Despite overwhelming evidence that the ‘austerity algorithm‘ itself is flawed; despite all the evidence of the lethal hardships being placed on the poorest in our society; despite all the acknowledgements of ‘errors’ or ‘mistakes’; we see little or no change in attitudes towards the precariat. In fact, hatred levels are rising.


This is what I live with on a daily basis – like millions of others in my society – whilst those who have more cling to the wreckage and counsel against desperation. Tell that to the mother who cannot feed, clothe or house her children. Tell that to the sick and disabled, shunted through a rigged system designed to make them work or die. Tell that to the young people whose home life is something they daren’t return to who are now homeless and abandoned by a government with a vested interest in high unemployment.


“the coalition government is sticking to its Plan A because spending cuts are not about deficits but about rolling back the welfare state. So no amount of evidence is going to change its position on cuts.â€


Ha-jung Chang – Cambridge economist


The thing about being a precariat is that every single welfare cut hits us in some way or another. We are required to abide by (unlawfully) harsh rules at every turn by a system that is actively seeking to find a reason to harm us, whilst our plutocratic ‘betters’ seem to have no standards or laws applied to them at all. People talk about the hypocrisy of government as though it is a debatable matter but when we can clearly measure it by the death-count, then it really is time to stop talking and start doing something about it instead! The evidence is quite plain. The consequences already roosting in our social statistics where each and every number is a human being in pain, suffering or dead.


Perhaps collective desperation will start being felt when other social groups start really feeling the impact of what the Coalition Government is doing to the people of the UK. By that time, however, the precariat will be the historical statistic that showed how UK Tories and their Corporate masters demonstrated how to do a ‘Final Solution’ properly.


As a member of the precariat, when all the chickens finally find no roost because there are wolves in the hen-house, I hope the ringleaders of this social obscenity experience the full weight of international law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simplifying the welfare system and making sure work pays




Many people on benefits believe that the financial risks of moving into work are too great. For some, the gains from work, particularly if they work part-time, are small, and any gain can easily be cancelled out by costs such as transport.


The government believes that the current system is too complex and there are insufficient incentives to encourage people on benefits to start paid work or increase their hours.


We are aiming to make the benefit system fairer and more affordable to help reduce poverty, worklessness and welfare dependency and to reduce levels of fraud and error.




We are reforming the welfare system to help more people to move into and progress in work, while supporting the most vulnerable.


Introducing Universal Credit


We are introducing Universal Credit in 2013 for people who are looking for work or on a low income. Universal Credit brings together a range of working-age benefits into a single payment. It will:

•encourage people on benefits to start paid work or increase their hours by making sure work pays

•smooth the transitions into and out of work

•simplify the system, making it easier for people to understand, and easier and cheaper to administer

•reduce the number of people who are in work but still living in poverty

•reduce fraud and error


Introducing Personal Independence Payment


Disability Living Allowance (DLA) is a tax-free benefit for children and adults who need help with personal care or their mobility needs. It was introduced in 1992 and had not been fundamentally reviewed or reformed since. There is confusion about the purpose of the benefit, it is complex to claim and there is no systematic way of checking that awards remain correct.


We have introduced a new benefit called Personal Independence Payment (PIP) from 8 April 2013 that will eventually replace DLA for people aged 16 to 64. PIP helps towards some of the extra costs because of a long term ill-health condition or disability. It’s based on how a person’s condition affects them, not the condition they have. It’s designed to be a more sustainable benefit and make sure support continues to reach those who face the greatest challenges to taking part in everyday life.


Introducing a cap on the amount of benefits working age people can receive


From 2013 we will introduce a cap on the total amount of benefits that working age people can receive so that households on working age benefits can no longer receive more in benefits than the average wage for working families.


Reassessing incapacity benefits recipients for Employment and Support Allowance


Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) replaced a range of incapacity benefits in 2008 for customers making a new claim because of illness or incapacity.


From October 2010, those people who are still receiving the older style incapacity benefits are being reassessed and moved to ESA or other benefits more appropriate to their circumstances. This exercise will continue until 2014.


Improving the Work Capability Assessment


Anyone claiming ESA will have a Work Capability Assessment to assess their capability for work. To ensure that the Work Capability Assessment is as fair and accurate as possible, we are continuing to review and improve it.


Making sure housing support is fair and affordable


We are creating a fairer approach to the way we pay housing costs to help bring stability to the housing market and improve incentives for people to find work or increase their hours.


From April 2013 we have introduced new rules for the size of accommodation that Housing Benefit, and then Universal Credit, will cover for working age tenants renting in the social sector. This makes the rules consistent with those that apply to tenants renting in the private rented sector.



In the coalition agreement we announced our intention to simplify the benefit system to encourage people to move into work and make sure that those able to work must show a willingness to work as a condition of receiving benefits.


In ‘Universal Credit: welfare that works’, published on 11 November 2010, we set out plans to introduce Universal Credit in 2013 to simplify the benefits system, make work pay and reduce worklessness and poverty.


Reducing the number of days lost to sickness absence


On 17 February 2011 the government set up a review of the sickness absence system to help reduce the 140 million days lost to sickness absence every year. The review was jointly chaired by David Frost, former Director General of the British Chambers of Commerce, and Dame Carol Black, then National Director for Health and Work.


The review considered how the current sickness absence system could be changed to help people stay in work, reduce costs and contribute to economic growth and whether these costs are appropriately shared between the state, individuals and employers.


We published David Frost’s and Dame Carol Black’s independent review on 21 November 2011.


The review presents an important analysis of the:

•sickness absence system in the UK

•impact of sickness absence on employers, the state and individuals

•factors which cause and prolong sickness absence and which, in too many cases, mean that employees move out of work entirely and on to benefits

•roles that healthcare professionals, employers and government services play


The government published its response to the review’s recommendations on 17 January 2013. The response outlines a strategy to support the health and wellbeing of the working age population and examines:

•setting up a health and work assessment and advisory service

•improving sickness absence management

•supporting healthcare professionals

•reforming the benefits system


Who we’ve consulted


We consulted on proposals to simplify the benefits system to improve work incentives in ’21st century welfare’ between 30 July and 1 October 2010.


We consulted on proposals to replace Disability Living Allowance (DLA) with a new benefit – Personal Independence Payment between 6 December 2010 and 18 February 2011.


We sought views on initial proposals for the draft assessment criteria for Personal Independence Payment between 9 May and 31 August 2011.


Following feedback on the initial proposals, we revised the draft assessment criteria for Personal Independence Payment and consulted on the second draft of the assessment criteria for Personal Independence Payment between 16 January and 30 April 2012.


We consulted on proposals on some of the rules for claiming Personal Independence Payment, Disability Living Allowance, Carer’s Allowance and Attendance Allowance between 26 March and 30 June 2012.


From 15 June 2012 to 27 July 2012 the Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC) consulted on the following draft Universal Credit and related regulations:

•Universal Credit Regulations 2012

•Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment and Working-age Benefits (Claims and Payments) Regulations 2012

•Housing Benefit (Benefit Cap) Regulations 2012


On 10 December 2012 we published the SSAC’s report on the consultation together with the government’s response.




We have published a number of impact assessments and equality impact assessments covering the measures to simplify the welfare system included in the Welfare Reform Act 2012.


The department continues to carry out analysis of the likely impacts of its policies on groups such as disabled people.

Bills and legislation


The changes to the welfare system are contained in the Welfare Reform Act 2012 . The main elements of the act are:

•the introduction of Universal Credit to provide a single payment that will improve incentives to work

•a stronger approach to reducing fraud and error with tougher penalties for the most serious offences

•a new ‘claimant commitment’ showing clearly what is expected of claimants while giving protection to those with the greatest needs

•reforms to Disability Living Allowance, through the introduction of Personal Independence Payment to meet the needs of disabled people today

•creating a fairer approach to Housing Benefit to bring stability to the market and improve incentives to work

•preventing abuse of the Social Fund system by giving greater power to local authorities

•reforming ESA to make the benefit fairer and to ensure that help goes to those with the greatest need

•changes to support a new system of child support which puts the interest of the child first


We have published and will continue to publish regulations relating to the Welfare Reform Act 2012.


We have also published policy briefing notes giving more information about the main elements of the act for:

•Personal Independence Payment

•Universal Credit transitional protection


We have published more information about changes to Employment and Support Allowance in 2012 under the Welfare Reform Act and some commonly asked question and answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those who have more cling to the wreckage and counsel against desperation. Tell that to the mother who cannot feed, clothe or house her children. Tell that to the sick and disabled, shunted through a rigged system designed to make them work or die. Tell that to the young people whose home life is something they daren’t return to who are now homeless and abandoned by a government with a vested interest in high unemployment.



This. :lik:


How sickening that whole sectors of the community, the poor, are vilified as fraudsters and scroungers. Those charges are more accurate if aimed at the bankers, the politicians and the City directors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that daveh is not in touch with the reality of how the welfare reforms are hurting honest disabled and /or sick folk in Shetland. The Lib/Con politicians have put so much spin on everything they do. They leak 'stats' about benefit fraud etc which has been proved to be untrue. The media has to take responsibility for spouting the politicians drivel.......


The 'ignorant' believe 41% of welfare budget goes on the unemployed.

FACT -the actual figure is 3%


The 'ignorant' believe that 27% of the welfare budget is claimed fraudulently.

FACT – the actual figure from Department of Work & Pension is 0.7%


The 'ignorant' believe 48% of those claiming Job Seekers allowance have been on the benefit for more than a year.

FACT – 27.8%


The 'ignorant' believe that an unemployed couple with two children get £147 weekly.

FACT the actual amount is £111.45

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...