MDC comments on Government’s Spending Review

Most worrying is the new Time Limiting of IB (well ESA after we are all migrated).
This seems to mean that people who have worked and get it due to their contributions will suddenly lose all of their ESA / IB. If they are in a household or have small savings they will probably not get the safetly net of means tested benefits. This seems totally unfair on people who have progressive conditions that after twelve months the Government is simply cutting them adrift. Has anyone got any more input on this. Is it as bad as it sounds ?

The feedback is this is a lot worse. Just terrible. The Guardian makes some of the points :-
Up to 1 million people could lose £91.40 a week in disability benefits, under plans announced in yesterday’s spending review.

“George Osborne announced that the length of time people can claim the contributory element of employment support allowance (ESA) would be limited to one year.

ESA was brought in to replace incapacity benefit, and supports people who are unable to work because of ill-health or disability. The cuts mean that people who moved on to ESA, and who previously worked, will only be able to claim it for one year. At the moment, there is no time limit, and people can claim ESA until they find another job.

Half a million people are already on ESA, and the government began the process of reassessing 1.5m people on incapacity benefit this month. According to estimates from the Department for Work and Pensions, 345,000 of those 1.5m are expected to be deemed “fit to work”, and will be moved on to job seekers allowance (JSA). About 290,000 are likely to be deemed too incapacitated to work, and will not see their benefits time-limited. That would leave 865,000 people on incapacity benefit placed in the “work-related activity group”, who will see their benefits cut after one year.

Those with assets, savings or partners who work will no longer receive benefits. They will not be able to claim JSA even if they are out of work, so would therefore have to rely on partners’ income or savings – if they have any – or sell off their assets. Single people with no assets may be able to qualify for a means-tested safety net.

Anjuli Veall, social policy and campaigns manager at Parkinson’s UK, said the move would unfairly penalise those with long-term, fluctuating conditions.

“A 12-month cap on ESA would run counter to the government’s policy of encouraging disabled people back into work. ESA is not just about finances, but getting extra support to help guide people back into work where appropriate.

“In spite of the government’s assurance that any cuts would protect the most vulnerable in society, we are concerned that the latest policy shift regarding ESA will unnecessarily target people with long-term conditions, such as Parkinson’s.”

Monstrous, just Montrous. That is my reaction after getting more information from the CAB people.
I cannot believe that people like us with progressive, degenerative conditions are simply going to be cut adrift by the measures announced in the spending review. It does not sound too bad when they say that when we are all on E.S.A. the sick will be put into the “Support Group” and not affected by the 12 month time limit. This is just not true, the number of people judged as sick and not “fit for work” will be incredibly reduced. In fact the vast majority of IB recipients will be in the Work Related Activity Group and lose their benefit after the 12 months.
Here is the crux of the matter :-
On E.S.A. you are either in the “Work Related Activity Group” and subject to the 12 month time limit, or you are classed as sick and in the “Support Group” where it does not apply. If the DWP think you fit into one or more of the ‘limited capability for work related activity’ descriptors you will be placed in the support group. so what is this “limited Capability for work related activity”, that determines if you are now classed as sick. Here from the Government website.

“The following groups are treated as having limited capability for work related activity. A person in any of these will be placed in the support group even if they have little or no limitation of function at the time of the assessment:

*
terminally ill; ie suffering from a progressive disease and death can reasonably be expected within 6 months
*
receiving intravenous, intraperitoneal or intrathecal chemotherapy
*
by reason of a specific disease or bodily or mental disablement there would be a substantial risk to the mental or physical health of any person if found not to have limited capability for work related activity
*
a pregnant woman, where there would be a substantial risk to her or the baby’s health if she undertakes work related activity.”
Very, very few of people with our conditions will fit this very strict definition. As the Guardian points out (see above post), most people will not be eligible for the means tested “safety net” either as most will live in households with wage earners or have samll assets. Just cannot believe what I am hearing people will be just “cast adrift” as there condition get worse. I have just watched a cousin go through the terminal decline of Multiple Sclerosis. This has been just terrible for all concerned over many years. Under the these new conditions that person would simply have their IB / ESA cut to nothing and be told “come back when you only have six months to live”. This is not a question of being fair this is montrous just monstrous!

This article may interest you

A fight on their hands

Spending review: George Osborne’s penny-pinching targets disabled people – but we are no pushover

I know I am going to have to be very, extremely, cautious with what I read about these proposed changes, it has caused me extreme stress, and may cause potentially health compromising consequences. I may quip that “I am so broke I can barely pay attention” but in truth I have no clue how I will live once I am affected fully by these ‘reforms’.

@taungfox wrote:

Here from the Government website.

“The following groups are treated as having limited capability for work related activity. A person in any of these will be placed in the support group even if they have little or no limitation of function at the time of the assessment:

* terminally ill; ie suffering from a progressive disease and death can reasonably be expected within 6 months
* receiving intravenous, intraperitoneal or intrathecal chemotherapy
* by reason of a specific disease or bodily or mental disablement there would be a substantial risk to the mental or physical health of any person if found not to have limited capability for work related activity
* a pregnant woman, where there would be a substantial risk to her or the baby’s health if she undertakes work related activity.”

I am confused [doesn’t take much these days] Taungfox where did you find that passage? Itried but got utterly lost.

Are the four types posted the only criteria for being deemed too ill for work and therefore, effectively left in peace with infrequent reviews?

Those getting Incapacity Benefit are being migrated to ESA [Contributions base} and regardless of classification will be taken off the conts based and pushed onto the income based ESA after 12 months?

….. by reason of a specific disease or bodily or mental disablement there would be a substantial risk to the mental or physical health of any person if found not to have limited capability for work related activity …..

I am ignoring the ambiguity of “if found not to have limited capability for work”, not to have limited capability, therefore they have capability to work, or not capable or any work related activity limited or otherwise. Who defines the criteria for that elasticated work “substantial”?

The following groups are treated as having limited capability for work related activity. A person in any of these will be placed in the support group even if they have little or no limitation of function at the time of the assessment:

Reading this and the four types listed makes it sound that everybody, even those with terminal 6 months death sentences are classed as having “limited capability for work related activity”.

The confusion has thoroughly befuddled me.

I have a plan. I will attend my asessment with a few leaflets from dignitas or exit and tell them .. make me work and I am booking into one of these because all this is more than a substantial risk to my mental health!!

Forgot to add, I did a little blogging http://amgroves.blog.co.uk/

@amgmod wrote:

Forgot to add, I did a little blogging http://amgroves.blog.co.uk/

Just noticed the blogging……
More good points, well made.
Did not think about things like occupational pensions and their effect. It seems we just cannot win. Most people of our age will have some small assetts or have a wage earner in the household so that they will not get the means tested safety net. We are just left to fend for ourselves (now till 66). This has all been carefully calculated to deprive disabled people of money, backed up by a scare campaign on benefit scroungers. At any other time this would have aroused a tumult of anger, but with all the other bad news of the CSR they have got it through unnoticed. It is very complex too, a lot of people just do not understand what is happening or believe the bland pronouncements “if you are sick we will look after you”. But how sick is the question. They have moved the goalposts, and our sickness and futures will be decided by ATOS a private company whose vested interest is to find us “Fit For Work”. We have worked for thirty years and paid contributuions to get the Invapacity Benfit. Suddenly that is swept away in a cruel trick and they know the vast majority of us will not get the means tested benefits. I see thousands of disabled people not being able to remain in their homes because of it. The ending of the I.L.F. being the probable death knell.
I love your humour on Dignitas and Exit. The current joke here is that we should get Mr Osbourne some nice Dignitas vouchers for his birthday.

@taungfox wrote:

Just noticed the blogging……

I love your humour on Dignitas and Exit. The current joke here is that we should get Mr Osbourne some nice Dignitas vouchers for his birthday.

Thanks for reading and commenting back. Nice to know that my logic and common sense [don’t worry I will flog myself for using such skills later] seem to mirror others.

Right now, I think for the sake of my health I must just put it all aside and wait until firm, precise, parliament agreed, definites have been published andthen concentrate on interpreting that and working it all out then.

I may consider writing an educated letter to my MP [once I figure out who that is] detailing how these proposals are doing to make one of their voting constituants homeless and helpless. That’s a thought … … …

Thanks for the compliments about the humour, it is about all I have that is not affected by my MD “Doh!” that means I’ll be classed as “fit for limited work related activity” as a comedienne!!! Foot in mouth, again

Looking long long term though, is it also the case that they will try do away with the groups/organisations representing the sick/elderly/carers. They are literally doing away with the ‘identity’ of disabled. Unless critically ill, almost everyone is going to be seen as able to work. Whether they get a job is another matter. Its all about cuts, cuts and more cuts.

Local authority budgets will tighten so much over the next few years. Already many local support groups are closing as funding is being withdrawn. Same with carer centres. They provide a valuable support service to many people and yet this is being reduced too.
Most LA grants are under threat but if govt long term vision is a Universal credit, there will be no need for grants as no specific groups will be able to be identified.

We do need welfare reform, noone can deny that, but not some of the steps they are taking. It is going to take all of us, a united front across all groups to get the message across that Osbourne has proposed measures that will take us back to victorian times.

This just a personal opinion but they can afford to say they will leave DLA alone. With the introduction of ESA it means over time so few people will qualify for DLA and eventually they will say…..” its cost effective to migrate the last few on DLA to the Universal credit.” They did similar with Income Support. We have to look at their aim and work back over to work out the steps needed to get there. Its not just about what they ‘announce’ but what they plan to do by stealth.

Sorry for the rant