What will it take for the Government to enact welfare reform?

[Schlossadler]

What has to break, before the Government is finally willing to enact welfare reform?

Is it your ideology then that the taxpayer funds the lifestyle of anyone who decides to make any decision that they cannot pay for? You are taking away personal responsibility and the concept of standing on your own two feet. This is why the welfare class is growing so rapidly. It's is so destructive for the individual and the country. It needs to be curbed as soon as possible (ie 2029 with any luck).

Welcome back.

As a tax-payer who receives no benefits I have no skin in the game, but I can see that slashing benefits isn't the way forward. The Tories made hugely expensive reforms, including trying to cut disability benefits and look where we are. Read the post by @Jimmyneutronsforehead -that is the way forward.

Yes I knew you wouldn’t want to elaborate on the position from which you “debate” this

You don't need a diagnosis, but a lot of families rely on the diagnostic pathway to provide the feedback reports that can be used as evidence to support the claim.

There are lots of ways evidence can be gathered about a disability though, like through schools and other bodies that care for that child.

Quality of evidence matters immensely.

That's why although you don't need a diagnosis, being on an investigative pathway can really help.

Unfortunately you aren't living in the real UK. The "super rich" fund a huge proportion of taxes but unfortunately are leaving the country so the burden of paying for the benefits class will fall heavily on middle earners.

Agreed re proper disability assessment which would remove the suspicion that people with ADHD or depression are claiming benefits. (An awful lot of people with severe depression manage to force themselves out to work each day). I don't think anyone is arguing the genuinely disabled shouldn't be given state assistance as far as I can see.

Another problem that is growing is in certain communities the women do not work . This was ok in the past when there was a breadwinner and apart from family allowance no benefits. Now there are girls who will never have a job, proceed straight to marriage and bearing many children and requiring housing etc. It’s unmanageable. Instead of their future dds “moving up” as was the way for previous immigrants, they are sticking to traditional women’s roles - taxpayer-funded.

In Tower Hamlets for example there is huge unemployment and people relying on the state. Why? It’s London. There is no shortage of jobs. It’s absolutely a lifestyle choice and one that is indulged.

We don't have enough money to fund both benefits and defence adequately. My vote is defence is the priority so benefits need to be cut and as soon as possible. We can't wait for the economy to possibly perk up or not. We can't borrow due to the moron premium. And we are too taxed as it is. If AB cant cut benefits and wants to raise income tax which is his only real option he needs to call an election.

If AB cant cut benefits and wants to raise income tax which is his only real option he needs to call an election

If governments called an election every time they broke a manifesto pledge we'd have a never ending GE cycle.

Let's see what the budget says.

Which benefits would you cut? Badenoch said housing benefit, but that would be insane unless you want to throw people's lives into complete chaos. I doubt landlords would be chuffed either.

If they sorted out the nhs especially the waiting lists sickness benefits would fall. My cousin is waiting for a hospital test , cannot return to work until it is sorted. , her date is quoted as well into next year. .

I don't think anybody on this thread - or anyone from any political party - is arguing that the welfare bill doesn't need to come down, or that a life on benefits is a good thing.

The arguments are about what will actually work to get more people off benefits and into meaningful work. My argument is that you can not do it through ideologically driven, crude cuts. Cuts done wrong just push people further into poverty - and therefore push up the costs for the tax payer and to the economy in the long run. There's plenty of evidence and research to support that view - plenty of which is linked throughout this thread.

Genuine welfare reform needs to be pragmatic, and rooted in evidence, incorporating things like vocational training, more apprenticeships, improved local mental health care before people reach a crisis, preventative health care so that short term illnesses don't become chronic etc. etc. There are plenty of ways explored here: How to reduce pressure on welfare spend in a popular and lasting way | Joseph Rowntree Foundation

If there was a silver bullet to get the welfare bill down by cuts alone, it would have happened by now.

Prudent not to give out personal info.

I think you’ll agree.

If there was a silver bullet to get the welfare bill down by cuts alone, it would have happened by now

Exactly @Theseagullwhisperer The Tories had 14 years to sort it out, but ended up making things worse.

A privileged position is my guess. And a pro-Reform one.

The only thing that will lead to the welfare reforms we need for any government would be when we need a bail out from the IMF. Not "if", but "when" as it's inevitable that is where we're heading. The IMF will impose conditions on the bail out, one of which will be to reduce government spending. As benefits and welfare are the biggest component of public spending, it's obviously going to take a big hit. We can't cut funding for defence, education, which have already suffered huge cuts over the decades. The government of the day will gleefully comply as they can honestly say to their back benchers and electorate "not our fault guv' the IMF made us do it!".

Driving up child poverty is not the answer. Not least because of the knock-on costs for public services like the NHS and the huge cost that has to the tax payer.

You can't really compare it to choosing to have a pet or not: setting aside the fact that children have human rights and are not responsible for their parents decison's, these children are future citizens and will one day be vital economic contributors themselves, so, the state has -not just a moral duty - but also a long-term economic interest in their well-being.

I think the answer has to be much less short-termist, knee jerk caps and cuts and much more long term strategic reform.

Just fuck off?

Well aren't you a charmer.

A less wasteful, more efficient and effective system is better for those that need it and the disabled.

People have been predicting an IMF bailout since Labour gained power. We were supposed to have one after the last budget. 🤷‍♀️

The NHS will never be "sorted". It's institutionally incompetent and inefficient. Until you spend any length of time dealing with long term/multiple health conditions, you don't realise just how bad it is in terms of illogical procedures, incompetent admin/management, staff who literally don't know their arse from their elbow, no respect for patients, no proper infection control awareness, etc.

People who are on the fringes, i.e. the odd visit to A&E or the GP, know that it's not ideal, but they think it's just one-off problems, or occasional, etc., But when you literally have to talk to doctors, nurses and support staff every week, have multiple hospital admissions, multiple tests and treatments, over a number of years, you realise that the incompetence and inefficiency goes right through its veins.

Not getting a GP appointment for a couple of weeks or a 6 hour wait in A&E or a 2 hour wait in outpatients is just scratching the surface. If that was the NHS only problems, it's not really a problem as that's superficial.

The real problems are that there's no communication between departments/staff. Different departments don't know what others are doing, they don't know when procedures change in a different department. Everyone knows that hospitals and GPs don't talk to each other because they're different trusts. What they don't know is that different departments in the same hospital/same trust don't have effective communication either. Even when they're literally next to each other physically or just across the corridor, they don't/can't communicate, leaving the patient to run around like a headless chicken chasing different departments for things that one department has told them will happen but the other department says won't. Patients are left in limbo. Not helped by the fact that so many staff/depts simply don't answer their phones anymore, deliberately, leaving them ringing constantly, meaning patients simply can't find the right person to deal with their issues, and of course, they refuse to give out email addresses either, so patients often have to turn up in person at the ward/department to get things sorted/answers/appointments, etc.

Until you've seen it in "action", (or lack of action) it's hard to appreciate just how bad it's become.

I think the answer has to be much less short-termist, fewer knee-jerk caps and cuts, fewer broad-brush increases, and much more long-term, strategic and sustainable reform.

I don’t think the government will ch age as they using welfare to buy their votes.

just seen news of a proposal leaked that people who fly twice a year would be deemed frequent fliers and so be subject to additional taxes…. WTF???

I’d agree with all of that! And I hope when it comes to it the government and the opposition parties can genuinely consensus build in the same way.

Ideology aside, I think all political parties want to see the welfare bill come down in the long term, and I hope they can work cross party to pragmatically achieve that.

IKR.

And I wonder if Labour modelled how much they will raise from the proposed holiday homes tax.

They don’t always model of course….

Whether you work or not?

ok your reluctance to answer is an answer in itself

That is not a government proposal, so you can relax. In fact, the government has said a frequent flier levy would have too many problems.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-56582094