Guest Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Rincewind said: A study that shows how the DWP are sending misleading letters preventing ESA clainants receiving the help they are entitled to. The letter is on public view at Parliament so the report is not 'made up' as some will claim. The ones that discovered it are lawyers representing a client awaiting appeal. His GP told him he could not issue a 'Fit note' which replaces a sick note for those on ESA. This is false. Read the whole report before dismissing it and take a look at who the group consists of and the work that they do. It isunfortunate that the press and media have been preoccupied at the news of a sprog appearing to report on this. https://www.z2k.org/blog/dwp-systematically-spreads-misinformation-to-doctors-about-their-patients-disability-benefits It also begs the question if those on JSA and ESA who temporally have benifits removed do they count as unemployed if not are the fall in unemployment figures misleading? The responses to this post iI will get s the reason I do not paticipate in this thread much. But if I see injustice I say. Having worked in dwp and the wider benefits system for a number of years in the past this sort of ineptitude wouldn't surprise me at all. There seem to be all sorts of holes in the current system which people can fall foul of. If somebody is ill - whether they have limited capacity to work or not - the system should assess them promptly and fully signpost all entitlements. That is the minimum we should expect from a welfare system. That people get everything they are due quickly. Huge backlogs, rigged systems and 6-month appeal waits are unacceptable. Then you add in these letters and poor staff training and it's yet another government department in crisis. Edited 7 May 2018 by Guest
Rogstanley Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 They are the “tough decisions” and “hard choices” the tories are always patting themselves on the back for making. No, not going up against big business tax avoidance, but scamming twenty quid out of a disabled person’s allowance. All signed off by the witch as part of a “hostile environment” towards disadvantaged people, I’m sure. Hostile basically to anyone who doesn’t have the power to strike back. Bullies, spineless cowards, the tories. 2
Izzy Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 6 hours ago, Rogstanley said: They are the “tough decisions” and “hard choices” the tories are always patting themselves on the back for making. No, not going up against big business tax avoidance, but scamming twenty quid out of a disabled person’s allowance. All signed off by the witch as part of a “hostile environment” towards disadvantaged people, I’m sure. Hostile basically to anyone who doesn’t have the power to strike back. Bullies, spineless cowards, the tories. Is that all tories or just specific ones? I thought your abuse was only aimed at policy these days. You get all offended when someone has a pop at Corbyn or Abbott but still think it's O.K. to call TM a witch? Classy... 1
Rogstanley Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: Is that all tories or just specific ones? I thought your abuse was only aimed at policy these days. You get all offended when someone has a pop at Corbyn or Abbott but still think it's O.K. to call TM a witch? Classy... Her policies are what make her a witch, that's the difference. Anyone who is involved in or supports the idea of targeting disadvantaged, minority or otherwise relatively powerless groups for hostile treatment and then congratulates themselves for making tough decisions is a coward and a bully, yes. Edited 7 May 2018 by Rogstanley 1
Guest MattP Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 (edited) More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx Quote Britain faces restrictions on post-Brexit trade and draconian measures to enforce free-market policies because the European Union fears a future Jeremy Corbyn government. Senior European officials have told The Times that concerns over Labour’s economic policies are the main reason for the EU’s insistence on a tough “level playing field mechanism” in a future deal after Britain leaves. The revelation came as the dispute intensified in senior Tory ranks over the customs arrangement between Britain and the EU after Brexit. Jacob Rees-Mogg accused Greg Clark, the pro-EU business and energy secretary, of promoting “Project Fear” by saying that thousands of jobs were at risk if Britain did not minimise friction in trade. Mr Clark advocated the customs partnership preferred by Theresa May but which is fiercely opposed by Mr Rees-Mogg as well as Leavers in her cabinet. EU negotiators are highlighting post-Brexit concerns about lower social and environment standards “because it is better public relations”, but European governments are more worried about the prospect of state subsidies and a return to public ownership in key services should Mr Corbyn become prime minister. If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. Edited 7 May 2018 by MattP
Guest Kopfkino Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 15 minutes ago, MattP said: More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. Pick a likely twitter response: MSM smear The Tories colluded with the EU to leak this Ohhh Jeremy Corbyn
Alf Bentley Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, MattP said: More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. Meh. Unsourced hearsay. Tory-leaning Times says EU concerned at prospect of Corbyn state subsidies. I'm sure the Left-leaning Grauniad will tell you they're more concerned at prospect of Tory undercutting on social standards etc. Slightly more chance of the latter as the Tories are currently in power, but in truth I'm sure the EU will be looking to protect their interests long-term on every front as they've no idea who'll be running the UK in 2, 5 or 10 years time. They'd be silly to worry too much about a red-raw statist Left Govt in the UK. That only happens if Corbyn wins a majority, surely? If he ended up leading a coalition/minority, I cannot imagine the LDs, SNP or others signing up to mass nationalisations. You yourself were speculating that we'd reached Peak Corbyn. I'd say the only chance of a majority Corbyn Govt (barring him pulling some miracle out of his hat) is if the whole Brexit/economy collapses in utter disaster...which probably only happens with No Deal. At the rate we're going, Corbyn will no longer be Labour leader by the time Brexit happens (if it does). Get away with yer, ya witchy moron! Edited 7 May 2018 by Alf Bentley 1
Guest Kopfkino Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 Also it was lovely to see John McDonnell yet again confirm he should be nowhere near power by attending an event to commemorate Marx's birthday at the School of anti-Semitism. Juncker should also hang his head in shame for attending the event in Germany. Lily Allen should also hang her head in shame, openly throwing the word fascist around to describe the government. No wonder discourse in this country is at an all time low when prominent people normalise such words.
Guest MattP Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: Meh. Unsourced hearsay. Tory-leaning Times says EU concerned at prospect of Corbyn state subsidies. I'm sure the Left-leaning Grauniad will tell you they're more concerned at prospect of Tory undercutting on social standards etc. Quite the opposite.....Literally the next part of the article. “The idea that Conservatives would legislate a race to the bottom is a myth and no one really believes it, even if some Tories have helped create it. The real fear is state subsidies under a Jeremy Corbyn government,” a senior Brussels source involved in Brexit negotiations said. “British policy has remained unchanged for generations but now there is a real chance of a left-wing government reversing it. We have to protect ourselves and the single market.” Edited 7 May 2018 by MattP
Buce Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 3 minutes ago, MattP said: Quite the opposite.....Literally the next part of the article. “The idea that Conservatives would legislate a race to the bottom is a myth and no one really believes it, even if some Tories have helped create it. The real fear is state subsidies under a Jeremy Corbyn government,” a senior Brussels source involved in Brexit negotiations said. “British policy has remained unchanged for generations but now there is a real chance of a left-wing government reversing it. We have to protect ourselves and the single market.” An unnamed 'senior Brussels source'.
Innovindil Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 2 minutes ago, Buce said: An unnamed 'senior Brussels source'. We've had leaks from "Brussels" since the referendum. This is the one that makes you roll your eyes? 1
Rogstanley Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 19 minutes ago, MattP said: More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. Any EU "draconian measure to enforce free market policies", whatever the hell that means, shouldn't pose any problem to the Tories, unless they're planning to enact the same policies as Corbyn surely, which obviously they're not. Might be missing something but I don't see how it's going to cause a problem in negotiations. You'd certainly expect the EU to consider and plan for a range of scenarios, only one of which will actually happen (is this a concept you're any closer to understanding yet?), and one of those scenarios is that the British electrate democratically vote for a Corbyn-led government.
Buce Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 Just now, Innovindil said: We've had leaks from "Brussels" since the referendum. This is the one that makes you roll your eyes? Not so much the leak, but that Matt used it to rebuff what Alf said about 'unsourced hearsay from the Times'. 1
Alf Bentley Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 3 minutes ago, MattP said: Quite the opposite.....Literally the next part of the article. “The idea that Conservatives would legislate a race to the bottom is a myth and no one really believes it, even if some Tories have helped create it. The real fear is state subsidies under a Jeremy Corbyn government,” a senior Brussels source involved in Brexit negotiations said. “British policy has remained unchanged for generations but now there is a real chance of a left-wing government reversing it. We have to protect ourselves and the single market.” ......says unnamed source quoted in Tory-leaning paper. Maybe they do want to avoid a future statist Left UK Govt competing through state subsidies etc. But that would probably be the case whether or not Corbyn was Lab leader. They'll want rules and regulations to cover all options, including that. That will certainly include covering their backs against the prospect of a Tory Govt competing by undercutting standards/regulations, particularly one that has already publicly threatened to turn the UK into a European Singapore. All the more so as, in the short term, the sort of global trade deals that the UK will be able to get quickly (and for which it will be desperate) will require major concessions, probably including on standards/regulations... Must work. Some of us are hard-working, over-taxed small businessmen who have to work on a sunny bank holiday, don't you know. Must work before I move my body and funds to the Bahamas.
Guest Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 (edited) 43 minutes ago, MattP said: More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. But the industries being nationalised are ones where the current private providers are state owned by other EU states. So a bit weird. I couldn't care less, anyway. If you own an industry, it's not a subsidy. Nobody argues about us subsidising healthcare or education. Why would energy or railways be any different? They aren't goods being sold abroad. Edited 7 May 2018 by Guest
Guest MattP Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 14 minutes ago, Buce said: An unnamed 'senior Brussels source'. You've literally posted about twenty of those yourself since the referendum whenever they are criticising our government and expected us to take it as gospel.
Sharpe's Fox Posted 7 May 2018 Posted 7 May 2018 1 hour ago, MattP said: More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. Juncker and the rest of his cronies prefer neo fascist movements bubbling up from Southern Europe than a genuine left wing transformational government in heart of the engine room of EU capital which threatens the Thatcherite consensus. S&D bloc needs to start calling this out. Hopefully the decline of their parties across Europe while the left thrives in Britain will start switch people on.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 8 May 2018 Author Posted 8 May 2018 19 hours ago, MattP said: More evidence (as if it was needed) that Labour's manifesto idea of "exactly the same benefits" when it comes to the EU is complete bollocks. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fear-of-corbyn-prompts-tough-eu-line-on-brexit-lrcmwgvlx If you going to support a Corbyn and McDonnell led government at least be honest with us about what it means for business and our relationship with the EU. These morons (Is that OK Rog?) aren't even in power and they are causing us problems in negotiations. Is it worth pointing out this perception was only made remotely believable by the event of a snap election last year? From that, one could say the Conservatives only have themselves to blame for this difficult negotiating position.
Innovindil Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/07/millennials-have-no-qualms-gm-crops-unlike-older-generation/ A rather dubious study carried out by a lobby group but still interesting to see. Long been interested in gm crops and I'm glad to see it's at the very least being discussed again. Doubt anything will come of it, much like the drugs debate, but who knows.
Guest Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 39 minutes ago, Innovindil said: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/07/millennials-have-no-qualms-gm-crops-unlike-older-generation/ A rather dubious study carried out by a lobby group but still interesting to see. Long been interested in gm crops and I'm glad to see it's at the very least being discussed again. Doubt anything will come of it, much like the drugs debate, but who knows. No thanks.
Innovindil Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 13 minutes ago, toddybad said: No thanks. May I ask why?
Guest Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Innovindil said: May I ask why? History - including recent history - is littered with man putting new ideas and substances into the food chain or environment only to later discover side effects which were not understood are the time. Whilst genetic modification is undoubtedly clever, I'm unconvinced that we are anywhere close to understanding the complex ways in which our food and environment impact upon our health. Cocaine, tobacco, alcohol, asbestos, weed killer, mercury, lead, artificial sweeteners etc etc etc. All of them believed safe at the time, all of them questioned later. I remain disbelieving that we are able to test safety with any degree of certainly given our overall lack of understanding about ever aspect of chemical interactions affecting our body. Obviously our tests become ever more sophisticated but are still broad brush tests. Edited 8 May 2018 by Guest
Guest Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 It's absolutely not the government making a complete and utter mess of Brexit.... Boris Johnson attacks Theresa May's 'crazy' customs plan https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/08/boris-johnson-attacks-theresa-mays-crazy-customs-plan?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Rogstanley Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 (edited) Study on generational inequality proposes gifting 25-year-old’s £10k and raising taxes on pensioners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44029808 The bit towards the end is most interesting, making more wealthy people pay privately for medical care. That makes me uneasy because we know “wealth” in this sort of context is never aimed at the truly wealthy, but like higher rate tax is aimed at people who are just doing slightly better than average. Generational inequality is an issue but we should be looking at the reasons why the country isn’t working as well as it could, why productively is so poor, why wages are so poor and so on, instead of just looking at brash arbitrary redistribution measures that will punish people who have worked hard and saved diligently for their futures. Also, and maybe slightly more controversially, let’s have an open conversation about how much life-extending healthcare we actually want, and whether being kept alive for some years at the very end of our lives is really worth the expense. Edited 8 May 2018 by Rogstanley
Innovindil Posted 8 May 2018 Posted 8 May 2018 10 minutes ago, toddybad said: History - including recent history - is littered with man putting new ideas and substances into the food chain or environment only to later discover side effects which were not understood are the time. Whilst genetic modification is undoubtedly clever, I'm unconvinced that we are anywhere close to understanding the complex ways in which our food and environment impact upon our health. Cocaine, tobacco, alcohol, asbestos, weed killer, mercury, lead, artificial sweeteners etc etc etc. All of them believed safe at the time, all of them questioned later. I remain disbelieving that we are able to test safety with any degree of certainly given our overall lack of understanding about ever aspect of chemical interactions affecting our body. Obviously our tests become ever more sophisticated but are still broad brush tests. Interesting. Not quite sure how we could ever prove it's 100% safe if we never tried it. Would you support trials before introducing into the mainstream food chain, a bit like medical trials before medication is released? Or do we just write off potential advancement because of an unknown?
Recommended Posts