Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

Too Many Cuts...come join the #Frothers and have your say

942 replies

AnyFuckerForAMincePie · 07/12/2011 21:23

This is the 3rd thread in a series.

It is for people who are horrified, frustrated and downright sad at the erosion of human rights with respect to how this country is being run, just now and in the recent past

it is apolitical in nature, but of course due to many recent initiatives by the recent govt, there will be rants against our current "leaders"

please join in

I shall post the link to the old threads, our "Too Many Cuts #Frothers" blog that is attracting a lot of widespread attention and a little bit of what we are about in a moment

OP posts:
SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan · 12/12/2011 19:49

not entirely sure that i get what you're trying to say but what it makes me think is that we really, really need a much higher turn out for the next election and to somehow get across to those so disenfranchised as to think their vote is meaningless that it really does count.

SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan · 12/12/2011 19:50

and i hope labour candidates will actually get off their arses and do some door knocking.

TheMouseRanUpTheClock · 12/12/2011 19:52

Santa/Satan, I mean that lasty quoted on another thread earlier today, who is unhappy about where her hubby's tax is spent, should remember that people on benefits also pay tax ie VAT, Car tax etc, and also have a vote, not just her!

TheMouseRanUpTheClock · 12/12/2011 19:53

ahhh, not lasty, lady, dyslexic brain must have mixed up nasty and lady lol!

Peachy · 12/12/2011 19:53

At the moment anyway mouse.

Santa

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 19:59

Work and Pensions committee's enquiry into PIP starts today. here

Maria Miller is the chair obviously - so someone to aim letters at.

In the Welfare Reform Bill debates starting today these are the proposed amendments by the lords: details here

Just skimming:

make UC paid more frequently than monthly if nec.

A review after 1 year.

"(ba) any amount of support for disabled children included under section 10 should be no less than the amount that was provided under the benefits and tax credits system prior to the introduction of the universal credit,? YES!!

?Such amounts are to include an amount of earnings to be disregarded where a claimant has regular and substantial caring responsibilities.? (looks good!)

"Regulations may specify that the pension contributions of single, or either of joint claimants, are to be disregarded when calculating either earned or unearned income.?

?(5) The Secretary of State shall conduct a review into the impact of the calculation of universal credit on?
(a) claimants? ability to access childcare, and
(b) the impact on the work incentives for second earners, to conclude one year after the coming into force of this provision, and shall publish a report on the review to both Houses of Parliament.? (interesting 2nd amendment there)

Also, that it can't be put in place until the new computer + delivery system for payments has been proved works.

?(1A) Regulations will make provision so that the amount included for?
(a) the third child is 75 per cent; and
(b) the fourth child is 50 per cent;
of that included for the first child.
(1B) Regulations made under subsection (1A) shall only apply to claimants whose third child is born at least nine months after this section coming into force.? that looks to me like including first 4 dc now, and reduced amounts only for children conceived after UC system starts...

?(3A) In the case of alleged under-occupancy regulations may provide?
(a) in the case of a disabled person, relocation shall not be required nor shall benefit be reduced, where adaptation has occurred and local services are provided, in order to deal with the disability;
(b) in the case of a person capable of work-related activity, reduction of benefit or relocation shall not be proposed unless suitable employment is available within easy access of alternative accommodation.
(3B) Relocations may only proceed on the basis of agreement with the claimants concerned.?

?(3A) In relation to a dwelling of which the landlord is a local housing authority or a registered provider of social housing, regulations under this section shall not permit the housing cost element of the universal credit to be less than the actual amount of the liability in a case where a household has no more than one spare bedroom.? I'm not sure what this is about

?(4A) Regulations shall provide for?
(a) the frequency with which reviews of the relationship between increases in the rental market and the CPI will be conducted;
(b) the circumstances in which increases in the rental market and CPI will be deemed to have diverged;
(c) the circumstances in which there will be considered to be a critical lack of affordable housing;
(d) the circumstances in which this will lead to a change in the method used to uprate the housing component of universal credit.? This looks good on HB front

?(6) Within one year of these regulations coming into force, an independent research review of their impact shall be laid before Parliament, and such a review to include the effects of such measures on the reduced incomes of social housing tenants and their families, the security of the rent roll of their social landlords, the depletion of tenants? savings, levels of arrears, levels of eviction, any increased homelessness and use of temporary accommodation, the reduced prospects of pensioners for rehousing, and the likely availability of housing stock to meet the new underoccupancy standards, and related matters.? it would be nice if they did that now - but forcing them to do it later with real stats is a second best

"The Secretary of State shall, when imposing work-related requirements with which claimants must comply, ensure that claimants have the necessary type and level of personalised support, and access to localised support, to enable them to obtain employment, or to undertake work or work related activity.? this sounds positive

?but a claimant unable to comply with the requirement to attend for interview may provide evidence to the effect from a health care professional as defined by section 16(6)? as does this

looks like cancer suffers will get their exemption too

Page 11, line 34, leave out ?for a period of 13 weeks? and insert ?while the threat of domestic violence exists? again not sure what this refers too, but sounds like a damn good thing to change

Page 12, line 41, leave out ?three years? and insert ?one year? gah where's the original document!

?( ) If the claimant has a long-term health condition or impairment, the Secretary of State must specifically address?
(a) whether the health condition or impairment had an impact on the failure to comply and, as such, should be seen as good cause,
(b) whether reasonable adjustments had been made to the process.?

?( ) Where a person has, within the previous 5 years of the date of the claim, ceased to be entitled to a contributory employment and support allowance by virtue of section 1A(1) of the Welfare Reform Act 2007 and?
(a) has limited capability for work-related activity, and
(b) since he or she last ceased to be entitled to a contributory employment support allowance, has had limited capability for work for the purposes of Part 1 of the Welfare Reform Act,
they shall be entitled to the contributory allowance.?

Insert the following new Clause?
?Further entitlement after time-limiting
(1) After section 1A of the Welfare Reform Act 2007 (as inserted by section 51 above) there is inserted?
?1B Further entitlement after time-limiting
(1) Where a person?s entitlement to a contributory allowance has ceased as a result of section 1A(1) or (2A) but?
(a) the person has not at any subsequent time ceased to have (or to be treated as having) limited capability for work,
(b) the person satisfies the basic conditions, and
(c) the person has (or is treated as having) limited capability for work-related activity,
the claimant is entitled to an employment and support allowance by virtue of this section.
(2) An employment and support allowance entitlement to which is based on this section is to be regarded as a contributory allowance for the purposes of this Part.?

age 61, line 14, leave out subsection (3) and insert?
?( ) Regulations will prescribe what considerations must be taken into account in deciding whether a fixed term award would be appropriate.?
Page 61, line 15, at end insert?
?( ) Regulations must provide that a fixed term award would not be deemed appropriate where sufficient medical or other expert evidence from a relevant care professional indicates that a claimant has a lifelong condition or disability of a degenerative nature that means that the claimant is likely to continue to meet the requirements of section 76(1) or section 78(1) (or both), as appropriate, indefinitely.?

CB to be excluded

( ) Regulations under this section must provide for an exemption from the application of the benefit cap for individuals or couples owed a duty to be provided with interim or temporary accommodation under section 188, 190, 193 or 200 of the Housing Act 1996.?

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:04

Could I just say that I love the House of Lords? Especially the Baronesses. God bless a room full of people that actually care about the possibility of the disabled and poor becoming homeless.

lubeybaublely · 12/12/2011 20:08

I'm hearing on twitter that council tax benefit isn't included in UC, and it's too late to get it added, and that even the unemployed will have to pay at least 25% of it. People keep mentioning it being a new poll tax

Anyone know any more?

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:14

There are several references to CTB in the original doc, but nothing conclusive I can see just by skimming.

lubeybaublely · 12/12/2011 20:14

Oh cross posted with those amendments. Those Lords are alright [thumbs up]

When will it be known if all that has been included?

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:18

Okay the part about DV we missed the first time - it says that someone suffering from DV won't be forced to comply with any sanctions for 13 weeks Shock proposed amendment is that they won't have to comply while they are still under threat (which we all know can go on well after you leave - so sounds reasonable to me)

The 1yr, instead of 3 is suggesting that the longest withdrawl of UC allowed would be a total of 1 yr. (I think)

CardyMow · 12/12/2011 20:18

It's to do with the responsibility for Council Tax being passed to local authorities. It means it will become a postcode lottery as to HOW much of your Council Tax gets covered by the rebate. And in high CT areas like mine (have to pay parish council tax too), it is more than likely that I will NOT get all my council tax covered when this comes in. Yet the Council won't move me to a 'cheaper' area because there's no 4-bed houses. I'm in a 2-bed right now, but they won't let me have a 3-bed, because I have 4 dc.

I have been trying not to get too frothy about this one yet, as there is NOTHING concrete about how council tax relief will be delivered when it is devolved to local authorities.

The amendments look good though. Thank GOD.

SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan · 12/12/2011 20:19

there seems to be some coverage for not being able to ignore people's health restrictions and their doctor's notes too. surely that has to get through?

CardyMow · 12/12/2011 20:20

So they still think that you won't starve in a YEAR of no income then?! Oh, yes, it might seem like that is being very generous after the original proposal of 3 years - but it won't be any more generous to someone who has died of starvation, will it?!

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:21

this is the bill

these are the proposed amendments if anyone wants to compare and contrast. In a few places different lords and proposing different amendments.

I'm not really sure how long the lords process usually lasts? hopefully we will know soon - but am feeling hopeful for the first time about this Grin

won't suggest premature celebration - but Wine anyone?

SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan · 12/12/2011 20:22

i hope to god it all bounces back and forth between the houses and courts of human rights for long enough that the whole thing gets dropped or ds reaches an age of independence so i can top myself peacefully.

wonder what the papers would make of disabled rioters smashing their way into pharmacies making off with antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-seizure meds and pain killers before fleeing to third world countries to live out their disabled lives in peace.

SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan · 12/12/2011 20:22

no wine in the house te but i'll settle for a night's unbroken sleep.

RudolphthePinkNosedReindeer · 12/12/2011 20:23

That does look promising Te.

I joined Twitter a few weeks back and followed Lord Sugar for fun. He is against the WRA and retweets things he thinks worthwhile. Now I have mislaid password etc so I can't do it, plus my tweet understanding is rudimentary, just wondered if it might be a thought for those more au fait.

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:23

No I was a bit Hmm about that - even a total of one year would be split into 3mths, 6 mths, 3 mths... long time to sleep on a friend's sofa (if they'll have you) Hmm Hmm

BUT hopefully enough other stuff will have been changed that it would be very rare for it to come to that. I bloody hope so anyway.

TimeForChristmasSpirit · 12/12/2011 20:25

According to services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/welfarereform/stages.html It is back with the Lords on the 14th December.

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:26

so 2 days for them to agree which amendments to put through and send back to commons?

TimeForChristmasSpirit · 12/12/2011 20:31

This explains the passage of a bill www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/commons/coms-lords-third-reading/ It has to go to a 3rd reading after the report stage.

TeWiharaMeriKirihimete · 12/12/2011 20:34

hmm, more like a week then, to go back to commons and then they will have to debate the changes.

Delays are always good though imo. More time to make noise and it means we can keep talking to MPs about this so they support the amendments we like (and add more) at the consideration of amendments stage.

Glitterknickaz · 12/12/2011 21:53

Do you want me to continue with the blog given that the Lords have voted for the cuts?

gallicgirl · 12/12/2011 21:54

Just seen tweet about CTAX so came over here to see what went on.

Someone suggested that even the unemployed might have to pay 25% of their CTAX. I sincerely hope this isn't true because when councils have continued to try and collect outstanding community charge, it was mostly all those 25%s from the unemployed that were uncollectable.

However, I read the consultation paper on CTAX changes and although I remember seeing the responsibility for CTB being handed over to LAs, I don't recall seeing anything which suggested LAs would then have the authority to cap the amount of CTB for those who are eligible. It just wouldn't be able to be collected.