The Lords show their worth?

[Osem]

The government has lost three votes in the House of Lords over its plans to cut the welfare bill.

Peers voted by 260 to 216 to protect up to 15,000 young disabled people from cuts to employment support allowance.

They voted 234 to 186 for a two-year limit on claims, rather than the proposed one year, and by 222 to 166 to exempt cancer sufferers from a limit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16515414

[Ramrod]

Good

[Maggy J]

Now can every one see the worth of having a second house that oversees poor or bad legislation and passes it back to be reconsidered.

I'd prefer to tighten my belt further if it protects the most vulnerable in our society rather than see them punished because they have no recourse to a vote against a government that so obviously does not have their welfare at heart.

[RizzyKing]

Sadly Maggy this is a small setback for the government and as long as we have certain sections of the media baying for the blood of claimants on the alter of public outrage this clampdown will continue and get worse. I think this whole assault on the welfare state is a sign of a shift in society as in the past being seen to hit the most vulnerable in our society would have created a political backlash. These days though more and more people truly believe a life on benefit is some sort of rosy holiday and that claimants need to be hit.

It's an attitude that alters almost immediately when those who sat on high comfortable before have a change of circumstance and find themselves in the system.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Sadly Maggy this is a small setback for the government and as long as we have certain sections of the media baying for the blood of claimants on the alter of public outrage this clampdown will continue and get worse. I think this whole assault on the welfare state is a sign of a shift in society as in the past being seen to hit the most vulnerable in our society would have created a political backlash. These days though more and more people truly believe a life on benefit is some sort of rosy holiday and that claimants need to be hit.

It's an attitude that alters almost immediately when those who sat on high comfortable before have a change of circumstance and find themselves in the system.

Spot on.

[chris9991]

Unfortunately, probably won't change a thing - Government can have a second vote. Our it wins, it's binding. (It's what happened with the hunting ban bill)

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by chris9991

Unfortunately, probably won't change a thing - Government can have a second vote. Our it wins, it's binding. (It's what happened with the hunting ban bill)

Didn't they end up using the Parliament act to force it through, same difference in the end I suppose though, it got passed.

[chris9991]

Parliament Act essentially means the House of Commons has the ultimate power. However, normally when the Lords votes against the Government will amend the bill before it is voted on again

[peanut]

A good response to this is written on the diary of a benefit scroungers website/blog.

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Sadly Maggy this is a small setback for the government and as long as we have certain sections of the media baying for the blood of claimants on the alter of public outrage this clampdown will continue and get worse. I think this whole assault on the welfare state is a sign of a shift in society as in the past being seen to hit the most vulnerable in our society would have created a political backlash. These days though more and more people truly believe a life on benefit is some sort of rosy holiday and that claimants need to be hit.

It's an attitude that alters almost immediately when those who sat on high comfortable before have a change of circumstance and find themselves in the system.

You know who I blame for this, the right wing media, why can't people starta attacking the rich and big business for more for tax evation and avoidancem who steal far far more from the tax payer than people on Benefit, not to me
menion the fact that rich and big business caused the mess we are in!

[peanut]

Looks like it's business as usual.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16523649

[chris9991]

Originally Posted by peanut

Looks like it's business as usual.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16523649

Gotta bash those who can't fight back or run away

[Maggy J]

Well I know how I'm going to vote next time around..Sorry but when the really innocent vulnerable of our society are targeted far more than the profligate sinners then I think they were lying when they said we are all in this together..

If they ever get it together and really deal with the bonus issue and do get our money back from the banks then maybe I'll rethink but on present behaviour I'm agin them.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Well I know how I'm going to vote next time around..Sorry but when the really innocent vulnerable of our society are targeted far more than the profligate sinners then I think they were lying when they said we are all in this together..

Agreed. did you know that DLA is a very effective benefit with fraud rates of less than 1% (DWP own figures)

the real objective is just to get a certain percentage off it and get some money to pay for a train that the rich people want.

They have 2 cut back books.
one is 'The poor, and the vulnerable'
the other 'The rich'

'The rich' one hasn't been written in much.
'The poor and the vulnerable' is on volume two already.

[nomadking]

Am I missing something here? The proposals would only affect those with large savings. Anybody else with no or lesser savings would move onto income based ESA which is paid at the same rates as contribution based ESA. If you have no real savings, you shouldn't lose out.