Laugh all you like. It was Labour who brought in medicals for claimants and gave the contract to ATOS. This government agreed with Labour and have carried on their work.
Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government. How do you think this government managed to get the changes through parliament so easily?
This government carried on their welfare changes work, but also closed all the easy visa routes Labour invented for those immigrants that aren't skilled at anything much.
Being critical of the government does not equate to support for Labour. I have very little time for the incompetents on the Labour front bench. They gave Atos the original ESA contract but it was the current government that extended their contract to 2015 back in 2010. Medicals for claimants existed a long time before the introduction of Atos. It was this government that gave 2 of the main 3 PIP contracts to Atos in spite of the huge criticism of their performance re ESA and the dishonesty in their tender document (as highlighted by the Public Accounts Committee).
It was this government that rushed through the IB-ESA migration (which was criticised by Professor Harrington) without sufficient testing. It is this government that has fallen out with Atos and has added 500,000 to the ESA assessment queue. It is this government that did not test the new PIP assessment process correctly leaving many people waiting for 6 months, and others even longer, without any support as neither Atos nor Capita have done their job to an acceptable standard.
It is this government that has played a major role in the chaos in the appeals system. Before the 2010 election a current government minister said that the success rate for appeals should be no more than 10%, but the success rates for DLA and ESA appeals have risen to 44% and 48% in the latest MOJ figures.
As for how the policies were pushed through....surprise surprise it is because the Tories and Lib Dems had a majority of the votes! Labour's opposition has been pathetic (but the legislation would have got through anyway because of the Tory/Lib Dem majority).
As for your comment "Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government" can you please show me some evidence of where they proposed the IB-ESA migration, or abolishing DLA for working age claimants, or the DLA-PIP migration, or time-limiting ESA, or introducing mandatory reconsideration (with no payments made whilst this is being looked at); or abolishing legal aid for first tier welfare appeals, or the closure of the independent living fund.
I still see no reason why some Tories are ranting about this investigation (which may or may not be happening). If we are complying with the duties that we signed up to then there is no issue. If we are not then surely they should want us to fulfil our obligations.
As for our position in the world re supporting the disabled we have certainly been very much towards the top (as we should be in such a comparatively rich country) but it should still not be forgotten that disabled people are still at a substantial disadvantage to able bodied people in most areas of life. Figures from various groups such as the Centre for Welfare Reform and the IFS have shown the disproportionate effect of cuts on disabled people. There is now a danger, as highlighted by the likes of Tanni Grey-Thompson, that the progress that has been made over the last 20 years is going into reverse.
Yes, cuts had to be made but I don't agree with the scale of them, although (as I said before) that does not necessarily mean that we have breached our obligation under the UNCRPD. It seems that some want to pre-judge the findings of this alleged inquiry but I would rather wait and see what any such findings are.
It is an unnecessary investigation. What are the UN doing in Irag??????
That all depends on where Irag is. ;-)
I still don't see the connection though. It would be better if you explain how the investigation of the DWP will affect the humanitarian efforts in Iraq, then we will have something to debate.
It is an unnecessary investigation. What are the UN doing in Irag??????
The UN cannot do a investigation into “grave or systemic violations” of the rights of disabled people in irag, for the simple reason that iraq government never signed up to protect the rights of the disabled were, the UK government did sign up to this.
The UN cannot do a investigation into “grave or systemic violations” of the rights of disabled people in irag, for the simple reason that iraq government never signed up to protect the rights of the disabled were, the UK government did sign up to this.
Iraq has signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In fact there are only a handful of countries that haven't signed it and a handful that have signed it but not ratified it. It seems rather odd that the UN has chosen to investigate the UK, it would be interesting to see what other countries they are investigating.
Iraq has signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In fact there are only a handful of countries that haven't signed it and a handful that have signed it but not ratified it. It seems rather odd that the UN has chosen to investigate the UK.
As has been pointed out, there are far more pressing issues in Iraq than carrying out an investigation regarding its commitments, according to the convention.
As has been pointed out, there are far more pressing issues in Iraq than carrying out an investigation regarding its commitments, according to the convention.
So now it is not because Iraq hasn't signed up to protecting the rights of the disabled but because of the situation there. The UN appears to be doing very little about anything other than cherry picking what to look into.
So now it is not because Iraq hasn't signed up to protecting the rights of the disabled but because of the situation there. The UN appears to be doing very little about anything other than cherry picking what to look into.
But have the iraq disabled people complianed to the UN that thier rights are being abused, because that is what will have happened for the UN to be looking into things in the uk
But have the iraq disabled people complianed to the UN that thier rights are being abused, because that is what will have happened for the UN to be looking into things in the uk
So first of all you claimed Iraq hasn't signed it and when that was shown to be untrue it is now they haven't complained. LOL.
Oh good, I'm not surprised, being a stupid question, no one afaik has replied to it.
The criticism was that the UN was spending time on considering this investigation, when there was a need for humanitarian relief in Iraq. I asked how the investigation would impact on these efforts.
Not exactly a stupid question now, was it.
Seeing as you have now read the question and understand its context, I don't suppose you'd like to have a crack at answering it.
The criticism was that the UN was spending time on considering this investigation, when there was a need for humanitarian relief in Iraq. I asked how the investigation would impact on these efforts.
Not exactly a stupid question now, was it.
Seeing as you have now read the question and understand its context, I don't suppose you'd like to have a crack at answering it.
It is a stupid question as I've no idea what the extent of the workforce is at the UN. However it would appear if they have the time to undertake this investigation there is no shortfall and I expect someone will arrive on an all expenses trip here relatively soon perhaps even via Iraq.
And you still haven't told what impact the investigation in the UK will have on humanitarian efforts in Iraq.
The usual argument by many of the defenders of this government whenever these investigations by the UN or reports from them (IE the condemnation of the spare room punishment) are critical of the Tories, is to point out that,
"things are far worse in... insert name of country.... so why aren't the UN doing something about that"?
When one thinks about this, it's an attitude that first of all seems to believe that the UN is only able to look into one thing at a time,
But more importantly, those who insist on telling us that the disabled in this country or people being persecuted for having a 'spare room' should just shut up because things are worse in, 'insert country',
No one should complain about their treatment by our government until things are as bad as in, somewhere else,
the fact is there will always be some country somewhere where someone or some group are having a harder time than the people asking for, or needing, help somewhere else,
this 'logic' seems to be implying that no one should be helped by the UN, no government should be criticised until everywhere is as bad as everywhere else,
the UN has massive resources and is more than capable of conducting multiple operations,
I doubt anyone is saying that the treatment of our poor and disabled by the Tories is as terrible as the things that the people of Iraq and other countries are enduring, but to use what is happening elsewhere in the world as an excuse to nothing here is just not good enough, and is a deflection tactic.
"My brother, David Clapson, a diabetic ex-soldier, died starving and destitute because he was penalised by the Job Centre for missing a meeting.
David had his £71.70 weekly allowance stopped meaning that he couldn’t afford food or electricity. He was penniless, starving and alone. His electricity card was out of credit meaning the fridge where he should have kept his diabetes insulin chilled was not working. Three weeks after his benefits were stopped he died from diabetic *ketoacidosis – caused by not taking his insulin.
David wasn’t a “scrounger”. He had worked for 29 years; 5 years in the Army....."
"My brother, David Clapson, a diabetic ex-soldier, died starving and destitute because he was penalised by the Job Centre for missing a meeting.
David had his £71.70 weekly allowance stopped meaning that he couldn’t afford food or electricity. He was penniless, starving and alone. His electricity card was out of credit meaning the fridge where he should have kept his diabetes insulin chilled was not working. Three weeks after his benefits were stopped he died from diabetic *ketoacidosis – caused by not taking his insulin.
David wasn’t a “scrounger”. He had worked for 29 years; 5 years in the Army....."
Shocking, but not surprising sadly, and there are many who would still call him a scrounger, I am certain of that,
Comments
I also think there is a pattern of behaviour from this government, a pattern of abusive behaviour towards the vulnerable.
How is this investigation going to detract the United Nations from their efforts in Iraq?
It is an unnecessary investigation. What are the UN doing in Irag??????
Being critical of the government does not equate to support for Labour. I have very little time for the incompetents on the Labour front bench. They gave Atos the original ESA contract but it was the current government that extended their contract to 2015 back in 2010. Medicals for claimants existed a long time before the introduction of Atos. It was this government that gave 2 of the main 3 PIP contracts to Atos in spite of the huge criticism of their performance re ESA and the dishonesty in their tender document (as highlighted by the Public Accounts Committee).
It was this government that rushed through the IB-ESA migration (which was criticised by Professor Harrington) without sufficient testing. It is this government that has fallen out with Atos and has added 500,000 to the ESA assessment queue. It is this government that did not test the new PIP assessment process correctly leaving many people waiting for 6 months, and others even longer, without any support as neither Atos nor Capita have done their job to an acceptable standard.
It is this government that has played a major role in the chaos in the appeals system. Before the 2010 election a current government minister said that the success rate for appeals should be no more than 10%, but the success rates for DLA and ESA appeals have risen to 44% and 48% in the latest MOJ figures.
As for how the policies were pushed through....surprise surprise it is because the Tories and Lib Dems had a majority of the votes! Labour's opposition has been pathetic (but the legislation would have got through anyway because of the Tory/Lib Dem majority).
As for your comment "Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government" can you please show me some evidence of where they proposed the IB-ESA migration, or abolishing DLA for working age claimants, or the DLA-PIP migration, or time-limiting ESA, or introducing mandatory reconsideration (with no payments made whilst this is being looked at); or abolishing legal aid for first tier welfare appeals, or the closure of the independent living fund.
I still see no reason why some Tories are ranting about this investigation (which may or may not be happening). If we are complying with the duties that we signed up to then there is no issue. If we are not then surely they should want us to fulfil our obligations.
As for our position in the world re supporting the disabled we have certainly been very much towards the top (as we should be in such a comparatively rich country) but it should still not be forgotten that disabled people are still at a substantial disadvantage to able bodied people in most areas of life. Figures from various groups such as the Centre for Welfare Reform and the IFS have shown the disproportionate effect of cuts on disabled people. There is now a danger, as highlighted by the likes of Tanni Grey-Thompson, that the progress that has been made over the last 20 years is going into reverse.
Yes, cuts had to be made but I don't agree with the scale of them, although (as I said before) that does not necessarily mean that we have breached our obligation under the UNCRPD. It seems that some want to pre-judge the findings of this alleged inquiry but I would rather wait and see what any such findings are.
That all depends on where Irag is. ;-)
I still don't see the connection though. It would be better if you explain how the investigation of the DWP will affect the humanitarian efforts in Iraq, then we will have something to debate.
It seems not a lot
The UN cannot do a investigation into “grave or systemic violations” of the rights of disabled people in irag, for the simple reason that iraq government never signed up to protect the rights of the disabled were, the UK government did sign up to this.
Iraq has signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In fact there are only a handful of countries that haven't signed it and a handful that have signed it but not ratified it. It seems rather odd that the UN has chosen to investigate the UK, it would be interesting to see what other countries they are investigating.
As has been pointed out, there are far more pressing issues in Iraq than carrying out an investigation regarding its commitments, according to the convention.
So now it is not because Iraq hasn't signed up to protecting the rights of the disabled but because of the situation there. The UN appears to be doing very little about anything other than cherry picking what to look into.
But have the iraq disabled people complianed to the UN that thier rights are being abused, because that is what will have happened for the UN to be looking into things in the uk
So first of all you claimed Iraq hasn't signed it and when that was shown to be untrue it is now they haven't complained. LOL.
I am saying that the iraq people have not complained to the UN as i dont know if they have or not, but it seems a fair guess that disabled people in the uk have, as there have been alot of reports into things like this in the uk. More information here.http://disabilitynewsservice.com/2014/08/activists-welcome-un-inquiry-decision/. And here http://www.thefedonline.org.uk/disability-in-the-news/cuts-have-hit-disabled-people-harder-says-equality-watchdog-report
And you still haven't told what impact the investigation in the UK will have on humanitarian efforts in Iraq.
I wasn't aware anyone had asked me as I never said it would.
The question was open to everyone.
Oh good, I'm not surprised, being a stupid question, no one afaik has replied to it.
The criticism was that the UN was spending time on considering this investigation, when there was a need for humanitarian relief in Iraq. I asked how the investigation would impact on these efforts.
Not exactly a stupid question now, was it.
Seeing as you have now read the question and understand its context, I don't suppose you'd like to have a crack at answering it.
It is a stupid question as I've no idea what the extent of the workforce is at the UN. However it would appear if they have the time to undertake this investigation there is no shortfall and I expect someone will arrive on an all expenses trip here relatively soon perhaps even via Iraq.
The usual argument by many of the defenders of this government whenever these investigations by the UN or reports from them (IE the condemnation of the spare room punishment) are critical of the Tories, is to point out that,
"things are far worse in... insert name of country.... so why aren't the UN doing something about that"?
When one thinks about this, it's an attitude that first of all seems to believe that the UN is only able to look into one thing at a time,
But more importantly, those who insist on telling us that the disabled in this country or people being persecuted for having a 'spare room' should just shut up because things are worse in, 'insert country',
No one should complain about their treatment by our government until things are as bad as in, somewhere else,
the fact is there will always be some country somewhere where someone or some group are having a harder time than the people asking for, or needing, help somewhere else,
this 'logic' seems to be implying that no one should be helped by the UN, no government should be criticised until everywhere is as bad as everywhere else,
the UN has massive resources and is more than capable of conducting multiple operations,
I doubt anyone is saying that the treatment of our poor and disabled by the Tories is as terrible as the things that the people of Iraq and other countries are enduring, but to use what is happening elsewhere in the world as an excuse to nothing here is just not good enough, and is a deflection tactic.
188,000+ signatures so far
Petition by
Gill Thompson
"My brother, David Clapson, a diabetic ex-soldier, died starving and destitute because he was penalised by the Job Centre for missing a meeting.
David had his £71.70 weekly allowance stopped meaning that he couldn’t afford food or electricity. He was penniless, starving and alone. His electricity card was out of credit meaning the fridge where he should have kept his diabetes insulin chilled was not working. Three weeks after his benefits were stopped he died from diabetic *ketoacidosis – caused by not taking his insulin.
David wasn’t a “scrounger”. He had worked for 29 years; 5 years in the Army....."
Shocking, but not surprising sadly, and there are many who would still call him a scrounger, I am certain of that,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2418204/Raquel-Rolnik-A-dabbler-witchcraft-offered-animal-sacrifice-Marx.html
The Conservatives should find a scapegoat, and get rid. (Hint, the scapegoats first name is Iain.)