Panaroma - the rising cost of health

[Decisionsdecisions1]

I’m guessing it’s trying to be balanced but there are some interviewees that they appear to be deliberately showing in an unsympathetic light.

This feels like a bit like it was written by Kemi. Could have been so much more informative.

It could happen if we haven’t tipped too much to state dependency. Of course Labour are the wrong party for that, but that’s not surprising.

I still think there’s enough to vote against, look at the two child benefit polling. It was against the change by a majority.

If for whatever reason that changes and we keep voting for higher benefits then the system will correct it in another way.

Sorry but politically I just can't see it happening- 23% of the working age population receive some form of Government working age benefits (UC, PIP etc).

Plus 35% of the working age population don't pay income tax.

So it is irrelevant as no political party, left, right or centre - will ever get elected with a manifesto promise to cut welfare spending.

I believe unfortunately that only leaves a collapse of welfare spending or Government finances in general as the default option.

So as I mentioned logically (but not morally) if you think that you are eligible for health benefits (whether legitimate or not) then you should grab them now before they are gone.

You may be right, don’t worry about being sorry I hear you. I’m not sure overall but that doesn’t mean you’re incorrect.

You might get to a point where the choice is between a political party that cuts benefits by 25% and one that cuts benefits by 50%.

That is not how it works, and all this sort of thing does it pit disabled people against each other.
Someone getting PIP for severe depression is not taking money away from someone with MND.

There already is a benefit targeted at disabled people. It is called PIP.
If you are not disabled, you can not claim it.

Because PIP is not a payment given to get people better. It is a payment given to enable disabled people to be independent. The clue is in the name.

It is also absurd to think that the reasons people are on PIP can be fixed to start with. Can you suggest what treatments there are to enable someone to grow limbs back? Or cure autism? Loads of MNers with autistic children will be waiting to hear your answer to that one.

Actually I think that you will get to a point where you have a political party like the Green Party saying that we can pay for everything by simply borrowing loads and massively increasing taxes and screw what the money markets think because who is in charge a democratically elected government or some hated banker types.

Government finances then blow up and the likes of the IMF or ECB step in and make the drastic cuts in Government spending and not care about the views of the electorate. This is exactly what happened with the Greek bailout.

To be fair to the Greens, Reform are not far behind them with non credible unfunded budget deficit busting electoral promises. Which is why I think both are unelectable.

Out of interest do you think that the disability benefit schemes such as PIP and their continued growth are economically sustainable? Because they aren't .

I am no economist and have no idea what the answer is. But I do know that blaming people that are on PIP is not the answer.

Thanks for the honest answer, you believe that the state should continue funding PIP and disability payments but it is not your concern where the money comes from.

This is basically why socialism doesn't work in practice, it's great and honourable idea but just doesn't work in the real world.

I did not say any of that. I said I do not have an answer, so please do not put words in my mouth.

Economists actually say PIP is the problem.

💯 although we may reach a point where choice doesn't come into it. It ceases. If there isn't the money it doesn't matter what the politics are.

Fair enough and it wasn't my intention to falsely put words in your mouth.

But at the risk of repeating @Victoriantimespost, if there isn't the money available for PIP then it doesn't happen or at least gets drastically reduced, whether we like it or not.

Personally, I’d rather the government went back to DLA, when the DWP believed medical reports, rather than testing if people can do idiotic tasks.

I am not bothered about people getting takeaways. IMO, tax evasion is on a far grander scale. People froth at the mouth about a takeaway, costing £10, but not someone evading £20,000 in tax!

Blimey. I'd dread to think what the benefits bill would spiral to if DLA was introduced ! People used to get awarded it for literally anything , hence why so many lost it when the system changed to PIP.

Money lost to tax evasion each year is £5.5 billion. Cost of disability and incapacity benefits is £65 billion, up from £36 billion three years ago.

Those numbers are terrifying - and clearly not sustainable. It's the people on here that need benefits for themselves or their children that should be most concerned about benefit fraud, because when the system collapses its going to be really bad.

i agree and given that I can't see a political option then collapse is the default outcome.

The question then is how quickly will Government finances collapse and that depends on which party is in power. In order of which party will collapse Government finances the quickest I would say:

1. Greens by a long way
2. Reform
3. Labour
4. Conservatives

I have deliberately left out the LibDems as I have no idea what their financial policies are or even if they have any.

I'm actually in Australia and I do think our government has used the UK at times as a bit of a canary in the coal mine (i.e I recall our PM talking about your healthcare spend etc). Not saying it's perfect here but there is a lot more acceptance of self funding (i.e .medical and retirement) with guardrails for those in need. And pretty much all benefits are means tested with sliding scales (so you don't have those sharp income cut offs that discourage growth). Like the UK our disability spend has grown massively in the last few years so they are making some pretty major changes to cut spend around the growth areas (autism, ADHD). Not saying those cuts are popular with everyone but all these kind of policies tend to have bipartisan support in Australia - and traditionally the more extreme changes are introduced by the left wing party because it's easier for them to do it. Our green (watermelon) party is way too busy with infighting to be any sort of political threat and have been losing ground in the last elections.

Iim very much in agreement. In fact that particular episode I belive was one that had so many complaints to OFCOM about the bias, inaccuracy and misinformation that last time I checked it had been removed from iPlayer.

I did watch this one. And I did make a complaint about it. As it 100% was misleading. For example the whole section on mental illness/ADHD/Austim being able to claim mobility cars was factually misrepresented and factually inaccurate. It very very heavily falsely implied those number of people were getting mobility cars PURELY based on mental illness or ND conditions. Which completely and utterly ignored the actual facts that if you are claiming SOLEY for mental illness/ND the chances of you being eligible for enhanced mobility which would enable you to be eligible for the motability scheme is practically nill without severe restrictions and physical illness. Purely because to even qualify for enough points under that particular descriptor for enhanced mobility you have to qualify for the most part of it which is 100% only applicable to physical illness not mental or ND. 🙄 Which was very much misleading as they stated people were qualifying as they'd had mental illness/ND as their main condition which simply isn't true. If they did meet that criteria it was due to other issues...which convinetly they brushed over.

The highest score you can get for "just" mental illness under mobility section 1 part e is "Cannot undertake any journey because it would cause overwhelming psychological distress to the claimant. 10 points".

You need 12 points to get enhanced mobility and able edible for the mobility scheme.

So unless you also are eligible under either
F)Cannot follow the route of a familiar journey without another person, an assistance dog or an orientation aid. 12 points (which for reference is barely ever applied to MH cases)

Or

The second part under:
metres. 10 points.
E)Can stand and then move more than 1 metre but no more than 20 metres, either aided or unaided. 12 points.
F)Cannot, either aided or unaided, –
stand; or
move more than 1 metre. 12 points

(Both of which do not apply to mental illness or ND on it's own)

They will NOT qualify. Meaning the majority awarded are actually awarded based on physical issues which again was convinetly missed out to support their narrative 🙄🤦‍♂️

I thought reform wanted to cut welfare?

They do but they want to increase spending/ tax cuts in other areas which would be massively unfunded and equally cause a fiscal collapse if implemented in full.

It's just that the Greens policies are even more unfunded and so will get you to fiscal collapse that much quicker if implemented in full.

Yes I’d go with that