Disabled people face unlimited unpaid work or cuts in benefit

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Osem

Yes of course. The panacea for all our ills. Vote Milliband's Marauders in and they'll see us all right.....

I was thinking more like just getting him out. like evicting him.
the Cons can still stay in, just not him as a leader. a lot of them probably only go along with his ideas to stay in a job anyway.

I'm just going to read the news now to see what else he's decided to do to the poor today.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I was thinking more like just getting him out. like evicting him.
the Cons can still stay in, just not him as a leader. a lot of them probably only go along with his ideas to stay in a job anyway.

I'm just going to read the news now to see what else he's decided to do to the poor today.

Yeah of course.....

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I was thinking more like just getting him out. like evicting him.
the Cons can still stay in, just not him as a leader. a lot of them probably only go along with his ideas to stay in a job anyway.

I'm just going to read the news now to see what else he's decided to do to the poor today.

sadly not so sure on that there is bunch back benchers far far worse with ideoligy. Its like say shooting hitler as himmler would been less nastier.

The whole part reeks of nasty bigoted ideas maybe there is some who not but doubt they would be the ones get to be leader.

I still shocked cameron is the nasty bully towards disabled you would thought this guy would been the most liberal towards them.

[nomadking]

What are people getting all worked up about? You are only going to be expected to do the same sort of things that you would be from simply being in the WRAG. If you are not able to do a training course because of your condition(s), then you won't be expected to do what is essentially a combination of training and a short trial.

A DWP presentation on the proposal reads: "This is a supportive measure and claimants will only be asked to do this where it is suitable in their personal circumstances."

Being incorrectly placed in the WRAG is a completely separate issue. It was Labour who set those rules/systems.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by martyh

Exactly ,in my opinion the word disabled is bandied about too much and has only served to trivialise truely disabled people.
A few years ago companies where forced to adapt for disabled access,sometimes at great expense and leading to some closures .What was the point of all that if organisations representing disabled people reject government proposals to get some disabledpeople back to work

There is certainly an issue with the term "disabled". When parking badges and spaces, access points and toilets all show a logo depicting someone in a wheel-chair. Yet you see most of them rolling up in a big car in a spot with a badge/sign yet they leap out like a gazelle. The number I've seen who truely struggle with sticks, frames or wheelchairs could be counted on one hand.

Maybe we need another term for those with varying conditions or, dare I say, trivial ones, in order to prevent demonising of those who are truly incapacitated through no fault of their own.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

There is certainly an issue with the term "disabled". When parking badges and spaces, access points and toilets all show a logo depicting someone in a wheel-chair. Yet you see most of them rolling up in a big car in a spot with a badge/sign yet they leap out like a gazelle. The number I've seen who truely struggle with sticks, frames or wheelchairs could be counted on one hand.

Maybe we need another term for those with varying conditions or, dare I say, trivial ones, in order to prevent demonising of those who are truly incapacitated through no fault of their own.

Just because some people do not fit the wheelchair bound depiction of the term disabled on the outside doesn't mean they aren't disabled any less than. I would probably appear normal to anyone that doesn't know me, but I also qualify for a blue badge.

Also for example I carry a RADAR key as I need that key more than most people yet it doesn't stop members of the general public having a go at me when I walk out of a disabled RADAR key locked toilet.

I wouldn't judge anyone until I know the full facts. I rarely give out the full facts to even my own family but that's me, only my wife and very close friends know what's really going on and how I live. But I can take any abuse from anyone who make it vocal to me personally as it doesn't bother me.

[Osem]

All we really need to remember is that there are genuinely disabled people (I believe the majority of claimants) and those (a significant minority) who either feign disability or exaggerate their symptoms etc. in order to exploit the system. The sooner the latter are removed from the equation, the sooner the stigma felt by and cynicism routinely directed at many genuinely disabled people will cease.

It's in all our interests (not the least the disabled themselves) for us to do all we reasonably can to root out the malingerers/fraudsters but also raise and safeguard the interests of those fully deserving of and entitled to assistance.

---------- Post added at 12:05 ---------- Previous post was at 12:00 ----------

Originally Posted by peanut

Just because some people do not fit the wheelchair bound depiction of the term disabled on the outside doesn't mean they aren't disabled any less than. I would probably appear normal to anyone that doesn't know me, but I also qualify for a blue badge.

Also for example I carry a RADAR key as I need that key more than most people yet it doesn't stop members of the general public having a go at me when I walk out of a disabled RADAR key locked toilet.

I wouldn't judge anyone until I know the full facts. I rarely give out the full facts to even my own family but that's me, only my wife and very close friends know what's really going on and how I live. But I can take any abuse from anyone who make it vocal to me personally as it doesn't bother me.

There needs to be understanding on both sides. We've suffered similar insults when taking our youngest to the disabled toilet but mainly from wheelchair users who seem to feel the only 'real' disabilities are mobility related issues. That just goes to show how members of both groups need to be a bit more open minded at times.

[Taf]

Originally Posted by Osem

All we really need to remember that there are genuinely disabled people (I believe the majority) and those (a significant minority) who either feign disability or exaggerate their symptoms etc. in order to exploit the system. The sooner the latter are removed from the equation, the sooner the stigma felt by and cynicism routinely directed at many genuinely disabled people from time to time will cease.

It's in all our interests (not the least the disabled themselves) for us to do all we reasonably can to root out the malingerers/fraudsters but also raise and safeguard the interests of those fully deserving of and entitled to assistance.

The problem is that HMG (of whatever political persuasion) likes to use sledgehammers to crack nuts, so a lot of collateral damage gets done in the process.

And they don't appear to care.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Taf

The problem is that HMG (of whatever political persuasion) likes to use sledgehammers to crack nuts, so a lot of collateral damage gets done in the process.

And they don't appear to care.

I'd agree that's how it seems at times. Having said that, at times the NHS seems a very uncaring, ill-prepared environment for children like ours. I guess it's inevitable that national systems/organisations will find it hard to treat us all the way we'd like all of the time. Sadly every aspect of our lives is adversely affected by the actions of the minority who choose to lie, cheat, steal and worse to get their way. Disability is no different.

That's one reason why we must make them 'see' the error of their ways and 'educate' them to the realities the genuinely disabled face and be careful not to indulge in knee-jerk reactions every time reform is on the agenda. I think we all agree some reform is required and the more involved and active the genuinely disabled are in this matter, the better the system will represent their needs.

[Taf]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

There is certainly an issue with the term "disabled".

Maybe we need another term for those with varying conditions or, dare I say, trivial ones, in order to prevent demonising of those who are truly incapacitated through no fault of their own.

The PC crowd would love the reappearance of true medical terms such as "spastic", "retarded development" and the like. They'd have hissy fits trying to ban them, then pigeonhole them back into the "disabled" slot which one of them probably coined. Even "handicapped" is a no-no in some circles! "Special" is another term that grates....

[Osem]

Whatever the terms used they will eventually be misused by some. That's a fact of life. The best we can do is to never cease pushing the media to be more judicious and accurate in their use of terminology to differentiate between the geunine and the cheats. At the same time we have to accept that some people are just plain ignorant, spiteful and/or obnoxious. Letting them get us down just gives them satisfaction so I refuse to let them.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

The basic premise of doing something for benefits instead of sitting in the house all day is correct ,and that applies to some disabled people just as much as able bodied people .The biggest problem the government face is incorrect media coverage and the notion that benefits are "free money" with little or no obligation from the recipients.In my opinion some people are panicking because the free ride is coming to an end ,we as a nation are being told that we have to support ourselves a bit more instead of relying on others to do it for them

There are NO decent Jobs out there!!!

---------- Post added at 12:45 ---------- Previous post was at 12:42 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

Might i suggest that Cameron is classed as crazy.

The Tories are going over the top and are making me sick with what they are doing,

However that does not mean i could join the dark side and vote Labour, I will just not vote at all come the next election.

I hold Blair and Labour responsible for every young life lost in Iraq and afghanistan which means i can never trust them in power again and if the Tories do carry out this attack on cancer patients and the mentally ill they will be joining Labour in the NO VOTE list.

I think i will just spoil my ballot paper in disgust at the whole crap of it all.

Do NOT waste your vote, othewise the poltical and business elite (and Labpur and the Tories) will get away with it.

If you are going to vote vote for any party apart from Labour/Tory/Lib Dem next time round!

---------- Post added at 12:46 ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

Exactly ,in my opinion the word disabled is bandied about too much and has only served to trivialise truely disabled people.
A few years ago companies where forced to adapt for disabled access,sometimes at great expense and leading to some closures .What was the point of all that if organisations representing disabled people reject government proposals to get some disabledpeople back to work

What put them into rubbish jobs at a time of high unempolyment, then NO!!

---------- Post added at 12:48 ---------- Previous post was at 12:46 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I didnt say disabled people cant be lazy. However you are suggesting everyone in receipt of benefit needs to be economically active, I disagree with this. I also think its unreasonable to expect this to work when unemployment is so high amongst the able bodied, this whole policy is a farce when there isnt even enough jobs to go round. The government should be creating jobs not doing silly schemes such as this.

Extreme circumstances or not if there is sanctions then 'something' is compulsory.

Currently people do get sanctions on ESA if they dont follow up on work related activity. Not as extreme as you may think or want to believe.

Now on the subject of seriously ill people been made to do work activity. Thats up for debate but anyone with experience in the welfare sector will tell you there is a defenite issue at the moment with seriously ill people been put in the WRAG anyone except the DWP that is.

The disabled did not ask to be put in this stuation,, they want to work and get decent jobs, but they cannot!

So why should they be forced to do rubbish jobs?

---------- Post added at 12:49 ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

Yes? I'd probably agree if by 'disabled' he's referring to people who falsely claim disability benefits or exaggerate their conditions as opposed to those who are genuinely disabled. I know several people who've been signed off work on disability benefits for years who could dosome work. They have never been required to do so however and I don't suppose my experience is unique either. That doesn't mean that the majority of claimants who are genuinely disabled aren't fully deserving of benefits and are going to be forced to work when they patently can't.

It's a bit like the asylum argument. There are too many bogus claimants who abuse the system and in so doing a) take much needed resources out of the system and b) add to the considerable stigma genuine asylum seekers face. I don't see anything wrong with cracking down on bogus claimants of any description or requiring something in rerturn in the case of those who're able to do so.

How it's done is the key and until there's some real detail about how this issue is going to be tackled and these decisions made, I don't think we need to run away with the idea that cripples are going to be dragged sceaming to their local B&Q or have their benefits stopped.

What needs to happen is that issues of genuine concern to disabled people are brought coherently and effectively to the attention of the policy makers and one of the best ways to do this is via our MPs - personally and via the various charitable and other organisations. In my experience MPs rather like a quiet life and it's surprising just how much a few dozen letters and some well timed surgery visits or whatever can focus their attentions. Anyone with concerns about this issue would be far better off going down that route than worrying about something that isn't going to happen.

Nearly all asylum arguments were true!

---------- Post added at 12:51 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

The only option then is not to try and get Dave to change his mind. but to get Dave out.

Write to your MP to resign, and call for a by-election for all 650 MP's, they vote for none of the 3 main parties (except for the BNP, you can vote for UKIP if you must!). That will teach them a lession!

---------- Post added at 12:53 ---------- Previous post was at 12:51 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

I disagree. Not doing what I've suggested only contributes to making the outcome a self-fulfilling prophecy. 'They' can't do whatever 'they' want as they don't have a big enough majority and there are plenty of vulnerable MP's who want to keep their seats and can be influenced. It doesn't take many to vote against (or vote for changes/concessions) in order for the proposals to be modified to make them fairer and more workable.

Although I may disagree with some of their proposals I really don't think this government has an agenda against the sick and elderly but they are having to face up to some very stark and inescapable realities. Make no mistake, the next government will be in exactly the same situation - the days of 'uncontrolled' spending are gone forever.

---------- Post added at 09:46 ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 ----------



Yes of course. The panacea for all our ills. Vote Milliband's Marauders in and they'll see us all right.....

The Government and the poeple who back them have a agenda against anyone who is not rich!

The days of 'uncontrolled' spending have not gone forever as long as the rich keep spending on new yachts/cars/homes/football club etc!

---------- Post added at 12:53 ---------- Previous post was at 12:53 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

I was thinking more like just getting him out. like evicting him.
the Cons can still stay in, just not him as a leader. a lot of them probably only go along with his ideas to stay in a job anyway.

I'm just going to read the news now to see what else he's decided to do to the poor today.

The Tories and Lib Dems need to all go!!!

[Gary L]

If we were in America, someone would probably have assassinated him by now.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Gary L

If we were in America, someone would probably have assassinated him by now.

I fear that may be wishful thinking.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

I did bring it to the attention of my mp and that was the response I got. I did not, however, say if I agreed with him or not.

That response is a bit telling of what we dealing with now.

End of the day these changes do nothing to help someone disabled to work, a disabled person could of their own back still ring up tesco and say they are willing to work for nothing in return for getting a job interview.

So many times compulsory activity is disguised as helping people improve their lives.

---------- Post added at 15:31 ---------- Previous post was at 15:27 ----------

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

There is certainly an issue with the term "disabled". When parking badges and spaces, access points and toilets all show a logo depicting someone in a wheel-chair. Yet you see most of them rolling up in a big car in a spot with a badge/sign yet they leap out like a gazelle. The number I've seen who truely struggle with sticks, frames or wheelchairs could be counted on one hand.

Maybe we need another term for those with varying conditions or, dare I say, trivial ones, in order to prevent demonising of those who are truly incapacitated through no fault of their own.

disabled doesnt mean you have to be wheelchair bound.
neither does seriously ill.

Have you sat there watching disabled car parking or something? I am genuinly interested how you have seen tons of people in disabled car parks just when they happen to be getting in and out of their vehicles as well as able to diagnose them froma remote distance. Of course its also possible the person using the vehicle isnt the actual badge owner.

---------- Post added at 15:41 ---------- Previous post was at 15:31 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

I'd agree that's how it seems at times. Having said that, at times the NHS seems a very uncaring, ill-prepared environment for children like ours. I guess it's inevitable that national systems/organisations will find it hard to treat us all the way we'd like all of the time. Sadly every aspect of our lives is adversely affected by the actions of the minority who choose to lie, cheat, steal and worse to get their way. Disability is no different.

That's one reason why we must make them 'see' the error of their ways and 'educate' them to the realities the genuinely disabled face and be careful not to indulge in knee-jerk reactions every time reform is on the agenda. I think we all agree some reform is required and the more involved and active the genuinely disabled are in this matter, the better the system will represent their needs.

This is where most of the disagreement is.

(a) how many claimants are fraudelent? some people think its a big chunk, others think its a very small minority. The official figures support the latter and we have propoganda looking for extreme cases to support the former.
(b) is the old or new medical assessment fairer? both can probably be duped. Fraud will never be eradicated. Its my personal view the older assessment was fairer to the claimants, and whats fairer to the claimants in my opinion comes first.
(c) What is an acceptable level of fraud? Some people will probably not be happy until there is no visible fraud, its logical that preventing fraud conflicts with helping everyone that needs help, its inevitable that anti fraud measures will stop genuinly needy people get the help they need. Are these really anti fraud measures or cuts disguised as anti fraud? To me the current levels of fraud are acceptable, the cost is very affordable. They have been blown up by propoganda in recent years to soften up the public to welfare reform. Anyone who has studied the changes will know there is little anti fraud in there but rather lots of moving the goalposts. So certian medical conditions legitimate ones one minute were incapable of work and the next capable.

With all this in mind tho the issue remains that everyone in the WRAG still has scored the required points on the assessment to not be deemed as fully capable of work and these people are the ones at risk of been forced to do unlimited unpaid work, or rather work for their benefits at below min wage. The WRAG isnt where you go when you dont get enough points on the assessment, in that scenario you get turned down completely. So the people in the WRAG group are not fit and healthy people, they will still have been deemed as having some sort of medical problem affecting their ability to work.

Of course what are the government doing spending so much time on this, XX amount of thousand people unfairly claiming benefit is a nothing problem compared to the fact we have 10s of billions of tax unpaid, a shrinking workforce, shrinking exports, high inflation, a credit crunch, a housing shortage, lack of things been made in this country (the real biggest issue facing this country). As well as corrupt MPs serving business. Look at david camerons social circle eg.

Now for my last point and this will offend some people.

If I get ill enough again to need to reclaim benefits to survive. My priority will not be to find work, it will be to survive. Sorry martyh and others if this offends you, but its not everyones priority in life to always be working, sometimes other things come first. Certianly if I ever get told I only have so long to live, my CV will be the last of my concerns.