Day of Protest Against Benefit Cuts

[KalokiMallow]

benefitclaimantsfightback.wordpress.com/

"News is coming in of protests and actions around the UK as part of the National Day of Protest Against Benefit Cuts called for the 24th January."

Are any of you likely to be attending this?
I'm thinking of dosing myself up on super strong painkillers and hobbling on over to the London one. Would be nice to meet up with some MNers?

FB event here

Would love to but am southwest so london too far with an 18 month old. How are you? Have there been any improvements in the housing situation?

Is there any day of protest for those of us who feel the benefit cuts do not go nearly far enough?

Sorry, I can't go on protests willy-nilly, that's right - because unfortunately, I have to work.

GooseFatRoasties - sorry, didn't see your thread.

If you're disabled or caring for disabled, I'll be trying to attend and represent others, see my thread www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/1131689-Protest-against-disability-benefit-cuts-on-Mon-attend-from-your-sofa

Kaloki, I mean (god, confused already - doesn't bode well, does it? )

Haha, was just about to link to your thread Cage

longfingernails I'm glad you feel so superior with your health, just keep your fingers crossed that you stay that lucky will you? Because god forbid your luck might change and you'll have to rely on welfare that you've wished away.

On the contrary. I support generous welfare going to those who genuinely can't help themselves.

The problem is the proliferation of scroungers. You would be far better protesting against them - the public is sick and tired of getting ripped off. If taxpayers could be confident their hard-earned money is going to those in genuine need, then the welfare system would enjoy far greater public support.

You should also wholeheartedly endorse the Iain Duncan Smith agenda. Make work pay, cut all benefits for those who refuse work, and get those who are lazy and workshy back on the road to productivity.

"On the contrary. I support generous welfare going to those who genuinely can't help themselves."

And that's why we are going on this protest. Because cuts are being made to those services needed by those who cannot help themselves

Just because I support the concept of welfare going to the vulnerable doesn't mean I agree with the details of how it is structured.

As it happens, I think the mobility component of DLA wouldn't be the first thing I would cut - but I do think it is very expensive for what it accomplishes. There have to be cheaper alternatives.

Not to mention it seems silly to have different rules for eligibility based on where you live. Eligibility should depend on your disability, not your residence.

So while I won't be applauding this cut, I won't be protesting it either.

Good luck with the protest. Cannot see it doing any good though, they didn't listen to the students/school kids and they won't listen to anyone else either. That's not a reason not to protest though.

Good luck with the protest ...I will be there in spirit

lfn - do you know what the mobility component actually does accomplish?

Removing it entirely is without doubt cheaper.

Underlying all this, of course, is the deficit.

The left have lost the argument on the necessity of tackling the deficit.

Unless they come up with a palatable alternative (an alternative that will not cause businesses to flee Britain, such as tax hikes) then they can protest as much as they like.

The British public know that Labour overspent, that Labour borrowed like crazy before the crash because they thought they had abolished boom and bust.

There is an alternative - the Labour alternative - namely, to cut even deeper, in a totally unplanned way, when the IMF comes knocking because we are no longer trusted to repay our debts.

Where shall we get the money from to keep paying the benfits though - there is nothing left?

Are you going to wear a t short or walk with a placard saying which benefits you are campaigning in favour of or which ones you think it is alright to cut.

hows about instead of cutting from disabled people, the elderly and children we take from 'those of broader shoulders' to help sort out the deficit? that was the buzz phrase/plan wasn't it-pre election?
i must have misunderstood that phrase as i don't see disabled people or the elderly or children as those with the broadest shoulders. i do see see top earners/tax payers and banks with "broad shoulders" though. but, oh no, silly me, none of this seems to be touching them afterall.

good on those of you marching.

Quite right Lego - The broader shoulders ephithet was used to describe those who would be losing child benefit (and therefore 'excusing' it). Funnily enough there seems to be no such description to 'excuse ' the cuts in DLA and other benefits. They are just pushing them through - no excuse included.

I put this link up on another thread also for anyone who doubts the protest is needed.

onemonthbeforeheartbreak.blogspot.com/

Lego - those people with broader shoulders and the financial services industry pay a phenominal amount into the budget of this country already - I would rather them target the feckless tossers who don't have a work ethic and who think that this country owes them a living.

Then I would march.

But MPs will never target themselves

longfingernails, I truly hope you never have to live with a disability, or care for someone who has a disability. I can't fathom why mobility allowance is expensive for what it achieves, in the end, if a disabled person cannot get around, then someone is going to have to do it for them. This means taking away the independence of people to do what they can do for themselves, including work where they are able. Without mobility, people will end up isolated, stuck at home on their own, and if there isn't anyone else to do things for them (cuts to care and social services), then the ultimate end will be that people will die, they will starve from being unable to go shopping, they will commit suicide from loneliness and frustration. They will have their money taken from them when they can't attend benefit assessment appointments and they will become ill because they can't get to the doctors.

People who are managing their lives with the help of their DLA will not be able to do it without that cash. So on the contrary, mobility allowance is value for money, because it would cost the state a hell of a lot more to pay for carers to do things which disabled people could do for themselves.

They can take away my mobility allowance if they so wish, as long as they replace it with a top of the range reclining powerchair, make all public transport accessible, provide me with an powerchair that fits in my house, make my house accesible - including the kitchen, and provides me with enough money to hire a support worker when I need one.

And replace the items when they become worn out.

So instead of £49 a week they have to spend the same as the purchase of two small cars and a carer. And revamp every bus, train carriage, bus station, train station and a lot of rural bus routes.

And then they have to provide the same for every person with mobility difficulties, regardless of whether they are in a residential unit or their own home.

Residential homes cannot offer a replacement service - they simply cant afford it, so the only solution is to empower those in care homes by providing them with the means to mobilise, which means providing the means or paying for the means.
Paying for the means is the cheapest option.

Hear Hear Hossylass.

madamecastafiore, then i guess cammeron was telling all his voters lies then.

oh dear, it is as i thought... not really a huge suprise from a tory party who will always, no matter what, be nasty.