A minister in the House of Commons was driven to tears when he stood alone and expressed his heart whelming description of what transpired at the Grenfell Tower and bestowed his sorrow with the people.
On his visit to the Westway, and learning of the disturbing accounts of survivors had been the most humbling and emotional experience of his life. The families that he has engaged with have been through unbelievable torture.
This is a disaster that should never have occurred and he stated they are determined to do all that they can to make certain that something like this never arises again, and he replied to a number of statements which have been made declaring that people are being advised to move far from London.
Or that they will be considered homeless if they do not take an offer. He wanted to be utterly transparent to the House, that if this is ever suggested to a victim then it is totally unacceptable. He has already said that if anybody is knowledgeable of an individual family which is not receiving that proposition they have been promised, then they need to tell him and they will fix it.
These people have lost their home and all that was within that home as well as losing their families in the disaster and it is essential to make sure that these families are looked after and provided with another home, not outside of London, but around London, close to their families because they will require all the help that they can get.
The government can’t put them on the lost and found pile and it’s the government’s duty to make sure they are homed properly. The government can’t dismiss these people but they will not take them into consideration when housing them.
These people are not a stain on our society and the government cannot stamp on them whilst they’re down. However this is not a caring government, it’s parched and inanimate, it bears no compassion at all and they will make a trifling struggle at looking great.
The entire situation is really disheartening because, following all the media coverage regarding Grenfell Tower, it appears that the media has gone rather quiet on the matter and what was today’s news is now tomorrow’s history.
We wouldn’t forget a fallen soldier because we are reminded of it continually but a tower block sets on fire and even though the media coverage was excellent at the time, two weeks later it’s not so relevant anymore and it’s taken a bit of a nosedive.
There should be a little more consideration for the people that lost their homes and their families in the fire, with a little bit more sympathy from the government who are tactless and invariably don’t pay attention to the stuff that is especially significant.
Theresa May has given DUP £1 billion simply so she can stay in government, which was obviously more valuable than the lives lost in the Grenfell Tower incident. That £1 billion could have created new homes for those people and given them a brighter future, even though it will never bring back those that perished in the fire but for those that are still breathing £1 billion would have been more than enough to make their lives a little easier.
In fact, this pretentious DUP settlement will eventually cost Theresa May far more than £1 billion.
This arrangement rocks the columns that prop up not merely the politics of Britain but the politics of Ireland and Northern Ireland too. The price Theresa May has paid for it is hugely disruptive and probably bankrupting and will greatly overshadow the £1 billion price tag for the DUP’s proposal of support deal.
However, as the minister ended his talk about his humbling encounter, was this not simply an excellent bit of acting because if anybody believes that a Conservative housing minister is actually humbled perhaps they should reflect again or is it simply damage control, convincingly delivered by its government lackey?
It’s a tragedy, and even though they were kind words by the minister, the Conservatives are corrupt – money before human lives and heads must roll, this government must make good the commitments they made to the survivors and hopefully the people will not accept anything less.
This man is at the very top and at the very core of careful and deliberate upscaling and dispersal of working class communities happening under Tory and Labour Councils up and down the country.
People and families have been scattered to the four winds. Not only is he delivering this, he has blood on his paws over the Grenfell Tower fire. If these were real tears they were only brought on by a build-up and excess of liability.
In time, the talk he gave will quickly mutate into a scoundrels words. He is a dangerous Tory and a pretty superior rodent at that.
People have lost everything, a community has been ripped asunder, lives interrupted in the saddest way, people have lost family and people have been charred to death. Just how bad are their lives and situations, but you zoom in on a rich Tory who goes home to a no doubt beautiful house and family each day.
He is in command of billions of public funds and resources and can offer possibly even announce an order incorporating all housing in the United Kingdom, yet there he is having chatted to a few victims who tore him to shreds, shedding a tear, but presenting no actual course of action.
He cried when he saw Grenfell on television but he is feeble and does not retain his position and presently he’s on the news lamenting and gets a hint of compassion, why doesn’t he leave his home and let some of the victims from Grenfell stay there, even then he would probably be able to trot off to a second home someplace.
The housing system that is running is all about social cleansing, not simply in Westminster but it’s occurring all over London and it’s been occurring for a very long time now. However, the Grenfell fire has made it much simpler for the government to purge.
Large social cleansing forces tens of thousands of families out of London and data reveals that the numbers claiming free school meals have fallen by about a third in some areas, suggesting regions are becoming stores for the wealthy.
Tens of thousands of impoverished families have moved out of inner London in the preceding five years, generating social cleansing on a large scale, leaving vast parts of the city as the store for the rich, figures imply.
The size of the problem is exposed in data that shows a number of children qualified to free school meals, and a broadly used indicator of deprivation has fallen by nearly a third in some London areas following 2010.
The figures depict a mass displacement of impoverished families from inside London just when the government has launched a boat of changes to the welfare policy. Even though there is no obvious connection between welfare changes and the decrease in free school meal applicants. Sadiq Khan, who obtained the figures, announced that government policies were generating a separated capital.
This evidence confirms that the government’s strategies on welfare and housing have created social cleansing in London on a huge scale. Families have been forced out of large portions of the city and this is not the sort of London we want our children to grow up in.
Boris Johnson announced that Tory welfare reforms would not lead to Kosovo-style social cleansing, promising that we would not see thousands of families ousted from the home where they have been living.
However, the latest numbers reveal that this is what has occurred after the government cut housing benefit, introduced the benefit cap and exposed proposals to sell off social housing.
Runaway rents and a deficiency of social housing are eradicating families from inner London and preventing others from having children in the first place. The housing pressure is not simply upsetting education for children who are forced to move away from their schools, it drives workers farther from their workplaces and that puts stress on companies and public services.
The creation of districts that help particularly the wealthy is damaging neighbourhoods, ruining the marketplace and damaging social versatility.
The numbers note that whilst there has been a 3 percent reduction in those qualified for free school meals across England, four inner London districts have noticed a deterioration of 25 percent or more. Across inner London as a mass, there was a mediocre decline of 16 percent.
Some of those families seem to have relocated to outer districts where even though there was an overall reduction in the numbers qualified to free school meals, some regions observed an abundant appreciation.
In Merton, there was a 19 percent growth, Bexley 15 percent, and Croydon 11 percent and other families have moved out of the capital completely. Innumerable families have been ripped away from their family and friends, with children required to travel an hour and a half just to get to school.
They’re separating London into more rich and poor sections that will generate tremendous destruction to London’s well-being and hasten the burgeoning bias in the city. We’re being socially purged.
The rent goes up, and the benefit cap doesn’t satisfy the rent. That indicates that people are either required to go hungry or move away from their families and the lives they’ve developed.
The flight of disadvantaged families from the capital is, in part, a result of government administration. Government schemes like the bedroom tax and the benefits cap appear to have had a displacement impact and that is what we seem to be witnessing.
These policies have established an open-ended trend that, following the 1990s, has observed inner London growing more prosperous and more costly and if inner London is being emptied out it would have consequential implications and would be something to take action on.
The findings match other matters about the social cleansing of London and found that in 2012 more than 11,000 Londoners were located in housing outside their district, with more than 2,000 being moved outside London completely and leaked government data revealed that 50,000 London families have been located outside their area since 2011.
When questioned regarding the declining amount of children that qualified for free school meals in inner London and claims that this indicated block social cleansing, the Department for Work and Pensions stated, that their welfare changes guaranteed the long-term sustainability of the welfare policy whilst further providing a £80 billion safety net for those who require it.
They also said that families in work make choices on where to live based on what they can afford every day, and they thought it was only right that households on benefits face those same decisions.
Khan, who was shadow minister for London, announced if he was selected as mayor he would create more affordable homes and launch a living London wage, combining rent levels to income.
He stated that he would do all he could do to hinder the government’s proposals to diminish the welfare cap and sell off more affordable family homes and that we need to make sure that the city continues to be affordable to all those who want to live there.
What a poisonous capital city it has become. But never mind the capital, what a wicked country we’ve become, it has become tainted to the core.
Let’s not overlook the part local governments are participating in allowing the process of social cleansing and upscaling. Quite good council estates being destroyed and the land auctioned off to individual housing developers.
The social cleansing of the Woodberry Down Estate in Hackney and the Aylesbury Estate in Southwark two instances in point. Interestingly enough, both were done under the auspices of the new Labour-run councils.
The Oxbridge Three have nothing to say about this matter.
We have become an embarrassment and should be humiliated and it brings a whole distinct spin to the phrase rotten boroughs. Different tactic, the same offensive consequence of manipulating the boundaries.
And we should all accept that there was a limited separation between New Labour and old Tories. This is presently the principal edge of the extreme far right neo-lib Tories and their followers in all parties.
You only have to look at the death casualties of welfare reforms, NHS cuts, et cetera, our amazing austerity to understand that the poor are getting killed and elbowed out the way for the rich, particularly in hyperinflated London.
But the truth is that disabled people require help more than the rest. Help that’s being ideologically rejected by a system that handles highly complex specific people as nothing more than statistics, quota’s and headline fodder and that is the dilemma. Meanwhile, sick and disabled people get treated worse than dogs, until abuse is normalised.
Only the DWP are continuing to obscure at each conceivable turn the publicity of data that would settle things one way or the other. This enables them to maintain the published data that doesn’t support this or that conclusion, but without willingly presenting data of their own.
However, the DWP was ultimately compelled to show that there were raised death rates amongst those elected to carry the brunt of the bank bail-out, and other justifications for the stamping down of the disadvantaged and defenceless.
One figure alone recorded 4,000 dead who was pronounced healthy to work and that was simply the tip of the iceberg.
If the people that had their benefits cut because they were deemed to not have a disability or illness and then they die, clearly that would show that assessor who considered them not sick or disabled wrong in the first place.
There have been a number of claimants who have been before an assessor who has examined them, one man was told that he should get to his doctor quickly because there was something dangerously wrong with his heart.
The claimant was considered to be eligible for employment and died some weeks later!
The death percentage of those refused ESA was 48 times greater than for the average working population in the two weeks post assessment. Refuse ESA and death happens inside two weeks.
Sadly this is most positively conceivable in the event of some poor people.
These people had permanent health conditions but were considered eligible to work by an assessment which isn’t fit for purpose. A portion of them died inside two weeks of that judgment. In some instances, they killed themselves, in more their sickness killed them, with death pretty likely to have been accelerated by the pressure of a long drawn out assessment process and then being refused money at the end of it.
The report didn’t need to prove causation, that would have been to illustrate a really malevolent intention on the part of the DWP. What we have is proof of a hackneyed callousness that rules the sick fit to work, a truly fatally flawed social policy.
The work-related activity group is comprised solely of people who are presumed to recover from their sicknesses and be well enough to return to work inside a year. In that group, there should be no mortality at all, barring accidents, so why have approximately 10,000 people lost their lives after being assigned there?
The Department for Work and Pensions acknowledged failure in its effort to suppress a number of people who have died whilst claiming incapacity benefits following November 2011 and has declared that the number who died from January that year and February 2014 is a surprising 91,740.
This represents an increase in a percentage of 99 deaths per day or 692 per week, amid the start of December 2011 and the end of February 2014 compared with 32 deaths per day/222 per week between January and November 2011.
The DWP has laboriously stated that any causal effect within benefits and death cannot be calculated from these statistics.
The DWP has further alleged that these isolated figures present insufficient scope for examination and nothing can be obtained from this publication that would enable the reader to reach any conclusion as to the outcomes or impacts of the Work Capability Assessment.
Mortality in the support group and the assessment stage are more problematical since they involve people who do have severe disabilities, many of who may be expected to die whilst claiming. But are these deaths being stimulated artificially by the DWP’s handling of them?
A statistical announcement issued (August 27) in answer to a Freedom of Information inquiry dating back to May 28, 2014, asserts that the cumulative number of deaths involving claimants of Incapacity Benefit, Employment and Support Allowance and Severe Disablement Allowance between the start of December 2011 and the end of February 2014 is 81,140, including 50,580 ESA claimants and 30,560 IB/SDA claimants. All figures are rounded up to the nearest 10.
Join this to the 10,600 deaths that were previously known between January and November 2011 and you have 91,740.
Information for ESA claimants shows:
7,540 deaths whilst claims were being evaluated, bringing the perceived sum to 9,740.
7,200 deaths in the work-related activity group, bringing the identified whole to 8,500.
32,530 deaths in the support group, bringing the perceived sum to 39,630.
Also, 3,320 deaths in which the claimant was not in receipt of any benefit payment and is consequently listed as unknown.
The total number of claimants who flowed off ESA, IB or SDA whose date of death was at the corresponding time and of those the number with a WCA decision of fit for work, mid-December 2011 to February 2014 was 2,650 2,380 ESA, 270 IB/SDA.
Furthermore, the entire number of people who ran off ESA, IB or SDA whose date of death was at the corresponding time with a completed appeal following a WCA decision of fit for work, Great Britain: December 2011 to February 2014 was 1,360 1,340 ESA, 20 IB/SDA.
The latest figures infer the average amount of mortality per day mid-January 2011 and February 2014 was about 79.5 – 556 per week.
This compares with a percentage mid-January and November 2011 of about 32 per day – 222 per week.
This Writer has not yet checked the DWP’s accompanying statistical release, presenting the candied Age-Standardised Mortality Rates mid-2003 and 2014. The data in this one asserts that fatality decreased from 1,111 deaths per 100,000 across all three benefits to 1,032.
However, claims for Incapacity Benefit, ESA didn’t exist at the time were at an all-time high in 2003, of almost three million throughout the year. The numbers claiming this sort of benefit have both declined and increased since then.
So what are we to presume?
Firstly, the numbers released need to be more examined, in-depth research that can be accomplished by This Writer inside an hour or so of its announcement. Second, that the DWP should withdraw its appeal against publishing them, for obvious reasons. Third, that the Age-Standardised Mortality Rates give a misleading understanding of the amount of mortality.
Finally, that pressing questions must now be questioned about the way incapacity benefits are being delivered by the Department for Work and Pensions and we should feel physically sick, the number of people dying is expediting under our government, so what do we do to prevent this?
The Tories intend to abandon the Human Rights Law so I doubt they care about what the overall citizens consider, they only want views from the wealthy who have a large dwelling and loads of cash, because they can afford to support themselves with high-priced advocates from the Tories if they say anything adverse.
There are a 100,000 disadvantaged people, reduced to existing on the state, and the state simply cuts that inadequate lifeline and they die!
The foul piece of work accountable for this had a great education, then espoused wealth, so he’s not even a self-made man. He led his Political Party until they realised what he was, and got rid of him.
He has now been perceived to be a trickster and a piece of dirty excrement and he has been regurgitated out of our system.
We did once have a pretty good country but it’s now sick and lame and it brings a tear to my eye that our government have a policy that kills and the one thing that Tories are good at is manipulating data and numbers, but this is contemptible even for them.
Any other company or person would have judicial measures taken if they were responsible for this sort of crime, sadly, this government are above the law, and I hope the minority of people who voted them in are happy, I believe forced euthanasia will be next.
Sadly, that would be too dignified, the government would want us to suffer right till the very death and generate as much pain and distress as possible.
No one should be beyond the Law, Government included. Pursuing this train of thinking, and I could just be inventing out of my backside on this, but since we are in a style, subjects of a selected Government, we are all citizens to the Crown.
Now I am convinced that the Queen would not want to get entangled in any way publicly with this, but the Crown, in this Kingdom, has an old-fashioned commitment towards the Crown’s subjects. I am sure you understand my gist, but I’m uncertain as to how this could work because the Monarchy is now completely Constitutional.
Nevertheless, any public interference by the Monarch would constitute legal mayhem. It appears the Royals only mediate behind the scenes, and in their own interests – even though I stand willing to be admonished.
There appears to be a modern-day Nazi Party manipulating the Press and our TV programme executives promoting their sickening misuse of the impoverished regime. The Tories are continuing where the Coalition left off.
How many times have you noticed programmes aired on channel 4 and 5 regarding so-called benefit rogues or spongers? You have Undercover Benefits Cheat, The Great Big Benefits Wedding, 12-years-old and on Benefits, Britain’s Benefit Tenants, Benefits Street, Benefits Britain et cetera.
They are all intended to make the benefits claimants seem like spongers-of-the-state to anyone viewing those programmes. They want to make them appear blameworthy for being in a position where they require assistance.
The press too, and of course, they are continually pumping up on anything out of the norm to help sell their newspaper. But when they report on a claimant that has had something they shouldn’t have they intensify it and make even the tiniest fiddle into such an enormous deal that the readers are ready to go and stone the person to death.
Melodrama, it is all invented to help turn the nation’s community upon the disadvantaged and defenceless in the community who need to rely on donations. But really, there is much more depravity going on than that inside the ramparts of Parliament by the highly regarded people who are driving those attacks upon Britain’s vulnerable.
Many of our ministerial leaders and MP’s are using redirected funds accumulated by not paying out benefits to claimants who innocently find themselves put on sanctions, and those denied ESA or JSA, to line their own carnivorous pockets.
We have discovered them with their hands in the public till decreasing their own tax duty whilst rising hard-working Briton’s tax, defrauding thousands of pounds in expenses demands from the tax man, and putting up their own salaries above inflation, et cetera.
But this is okay, nothing bad is said about them on TV or in the Press, they are exempt from any penalty. Why are there no shows on TV about Minister Cheats, MP Swindlers, Parliament Spongers, et cetera?
There is no equality. Merely extremely evil people who would like to see the poor launched into the workhouse like back in the dark ages of antiquity, and we know what happened to most of them, don’t we!
Human Rights are being stamped on for the poor, disabled and vulnerable here in Britain in this, the 21st century by our own Government, but it is alright as they have further manipulated the rules of the country so they can stay in government for at least another two years.
Corporate manslaughter might be a valuable position to begin. The DWP put out figures in 2012 showing the amount of mortality among ESA claimants mid-January and November 2011, a tally of 32 per day.
Now it has published numbers confirming the amount of mortality among ESA claimants mid-December 2011 and February 2014, an average of 62 per day, approximately double the former average.
Ministers at the DWP would have been conscious that the amount of mortality was growing but they did nothing about it.
That may be deemed to be out-and-out neglect by the people controlling policy at the DWP, leading to the deaths of other people.
It’s frightful, inevitably there must be some way the government can be held responsible over this? Although, we could go with impeachment.
Impeachment is when a peer or citizen is accused of high offences and misconducts, exceeding the scope of the law or which no other authority in the land will prosecute. It is a procedure that is aimed in particular upon Ministers of the Crown.
The first reported impeachment was in 1376 and the last in 1806.
It is the most tragic thing for all of these unfortunate people and there should be an extended drive in all of this terrible nightmare which just goes on and on and gets worse and worse.
The follow-up should be a demand for those people who believe these sanctions on poor people are acceptable and they should stand trial for the excess mortality caused, which appears to be about 55,000 up until February 2014 but is rising at about a hundred a day.
While David Cameron was alongside it all supporting and encouraging it, this level of death from the government’s abuse is lewd, and heads of government need to roll.
This should be headline news. It just goes to prove that governments are still picking days to hide bad headlines. I mean, look who owns Sky and of course they won’t mention it, the Tories have the media bought or is it Murdock that has the Tories bought?
Myself, I speculate it’s more an alliance of preference, both worship money and control and when they operate collectively that is what they get.
The government is unfit for purpose and should be dismissed and taken to court to acknowledge their cruel disregard for the lives of those who have died and those who have lost relatives or friends because of these actions. The government have supported this all the way.
Nazi genocide in which Hitler killed many Jews, the sick and the disabled, and this is no different because the government are suppressing a race of people, but this time it’s the poor that are suffering and being killed.
The government tell us rubbish and hogwash, they cut benefits by these sanctions and they write letters to claimants in an endeavor to stress them out and then you go round in a never ending loop of telephone calls, posting letters to them and evidence that you’re in need of benefit or disability, but you simply end up going round and round in an never ending circle, and for those that get engulfed into the insanity, it invariably causes the demise of many.
There are people out there suffering from cancer, that are having to wait an entire 6 months to get their money, money that they’re entitled to. In the meantime, they are suffering because they can’t afford heating, fresh food and laundry.
Isn’t it astonishing though that ATOS are still doing the assessment for the DWP even though everybody was told they had lost the contract?
Disabled Britons are being put through terrifying examinations and tribunals simply to obtain essential benefits who may have been brutally denied funds after assessors have been accused as policing claimants out the window in entirely unethical assessments devised by the Government.
After the Conservative Government shifted from Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) in 2013 thousands of people have been re-assessed and denied much-needed benefits. However, these examinations, outlined by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and carried out by private firms are now being brought into question over the walking component.
Assessors for French data firm ATOS and British company Capita needs to ascertain whether the claimant can walk 20 meters unaided, amongst additional everyday tasks, according to DWP rules.
But, experts have stated they think assessors are policing disabled people from the window of assessment centres and cynically ticking off the mobility criteria without the person even knowing, or having the opportunity to be challenged on it.
If such methods are being carried out, the assessors are neglecting to present the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) with the proper information to evaluate a case. Nevertheless, both have demonstrated they are carrying out examinations and following practices set by the DWP.
Under the reliability criteria, assessors must verify whether or not the 20 metres can be initiated every day and under changing circumstances. Alternately, at assessment centres, informal observations are being carried out which campaigners state cannot possibly match what is set out in law.
Important information which is frequently obscure, the claimant must be questioned if they can always walk the distance required. If they can’t walk it in all situations, satisfying all the criteria, it must be acknowledged they can never achieve the task.
Notable disability campaigner Baroness Thomas of Winchester faced her own struggle with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and won.
Fighting for the rights of disabled people, the peer in the House of Lords stated the four essential reliability criteria she had included, along with Lib Dem MP Steve Webb, are being overlooked at assessment centres operated by Atos and Capita.
What Baroness Thomas got entered into legislation was that the four reliability criteria had to be more than mere guidance.
The four were, in the case of the Moving Around distance, that the claimant had to be able to walk the distance, even 20 metres, safely,
and to a satisfactory standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period.
The Government made those rules compulsory. Yet, the DWP maintains their examinations led by contractors ask specific questions which can verify someone’s abilities every other day.
A spokeswoman announced that they do not look at a snapshot of someone’s life, despite the fact that the assessments barely last forty minutes which is mind-blowing and would not give them a decent chronicle of somebody’s health requirements.
You can’t form a view of somebody’s ailing health, which leaves me utterly mute and in scepticism on how well these evaluations are being dispensed with. This is not a game, these claimants have a debilitating ailment, which several experience excessive tiredness, weakness and pain, which leave many in isolation.
Giving them money does not relieve their discomfort, but it does make their lives a little better. Most live in agony and that tiny fraction of funds that they do get is a blessing, after all, they don’t aspire to be impaired or disabled.
And they require all their energy to get through each day but then they come across these silly guidelines that are established by boundaries and are a genuine pain in the posterior and cost many their lives. Most of these people have integrity and it’s a disgrace that they are being managed this way, like complete and utter animals, in fact, most animals get handled better.
The Government have stated that if a person can walk that distance on some days but not other days, then they must be considered not to be able to do the distance according to the guidelines.
In a PIP assessment, a person is only required to be able to walk 20 metres unaided, just two bus lengths. This was formerly fixed at 50 but shifted abruptly in what was deemed to be a silly money-saving tactic.
This was clearly going to save the DWP a bunch of money and mean that a number of higher rate DLA claimants would lose the higher rate PIP and therefore not be eligible for the Motability car.
Those that were entitled will not be any longer as the government sink their fangs into the jugular and it’s an outright insult as they treat all claimants with rebuke, almost like a blow to the mouth with a fist.
When the Government announced the PIP regulations, they abruptly altered the initial 50-metre guideline.
The point is that the walking evaluation must be an outside test, and needs to take into account of weather situations, the state of the pavement, crowds, dropped kerbs, even if we’re simply talking about walking 20 metres.
Firms like ATOS and Capita have deposited more than £500 million in taxpayer money through the DWP contracts.
However, after taking the DWP contract for PIP assessment in 2013 aged, weak and disabled people have been forced into evasive re-assessments which leave them afraid and sometimes poverty-stricken.
Wheelchair using UKIP councillor and disability spokeswoman Star Anderton, 45, was also forced to go back for assessment. She maintains it is common that, people are viewed as perfectly capable of satisfying the guidelines if they can walk the requisite distance only once.
So many people say that’s what occurs. They go for assessment and it is essentially considered if they can do that distance once, they can do it all the time.
That’s the contradiction of the Government guidance and they might be able to do it every now and again. The reliability criteria is specified in forms by ATOS and Capita and the reliability criteria were promptly included after the boundary shifts from 50m to 20m.
Even though it’s in all the forms they don’t take any notice at the assessment centre and the rules aren’t being adhered to. It is as if all they want is to put everybody on standard rate and seek to get the figures down.
ATOS has frequently rejected such allegations but campaigners have blamed them of satisfying workers who bring down the number of claimants on the DWP. Supposedly, they carry out examination as proposed by the DWP and do not stray from the set test which they carry out and transfer back to the DWP for a settlement.
Capita echoed this comment.
However, people who had been for a DWP evaluation with ATOS and Capita stated they were not questioned whether they could walk the requisite distance reliably, and to a satisfactory standard, repeatedly and in a generous time period.
In fact, when their assessment data was recovered from the DWP it stated they were informally observed. It’s reported as many as 800 people per week are being dismantled of their benefits, or the higher rate, leaving them too sick to work and too nervous to challenge the judgment in court.
One woman who found out about the reliability criteria and wrote about it in her appeal following her losing all her disability benefits.
Despite having kidney failure and being hospitalised three times per week for treatment, the retired grandmother who worked for more than three decades had benefits withdrawn following her PIP assessment.
After pointing out, under the reliability criteria, she could not carry out the necessary distance safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period, her benefits were reinstated.
There have never been points for mobility before and now there is.
It’s nothing but a trick. People were never asked the questions they’re asked now, aside from how far you could walk and the person would tell them that on a normal day I can walk this far and on a bad day I can’t walk that far.
The DWP doesn’t care who you are or what your difficulties are, you are a number and they want a smaller number. ATOS has distributed data about the rules online and campaigners state examiners do not adhere to the guidelines.
It says, the reliability criteria must be considered for every activity and will be viewed as an essential part of the information-gathering method whether at a face-to-face interview or throughout a paper-based evaluation.
An ATOS Healthcare spokesperson stated that as one of the suppliers to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), they engage each evaluation in stringent accordance with the Department for Work and Pensions PIP assessment guide.
And the reliability criteria is fundamental and that means and all their Health Professionals are thoroughly taught in their performance and application. This covers evaluation for mobility for which an evaluation of an individual’s capacity to walk takes adequate account of the guidelines without limitation.
Apparently, they guarantee the criteria of their reports and that they’re kept in line with all guidelines established by the DWP and the process is further reinforced by an objective review process which reports to the DWP.
The DWP, not Capita, makes the determinations on whether to grant a benefit or not and the level and time of those awards.
Assessments are taken into consideration by the DWP adjacent to all other proof offered by a claimant and assessors are qualified to recognise when and where everyday observations may be used in line with DWP guidance.
A Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) spokesperson justified the use of informal observations, alleging they were relevant to the assessment process. Evidently, they are practised adjacent to the healthcare professional’s own evaluation, the claimant questionnaire and any other proof.
The spokeswoman stated that they demand the highest standards from the contractors who conduct the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) evaluations and work closely with them to guarantee PIP is operating in the best way imaginable.
Decisions for PIP are made after viewing all the data given by the claimant, including any supporting proof from their GP or medical professional, and anyone who opposes the ruling can appeal.
For those people that are refused PIP but are nevertheless obviously sick, they are then put onto Universal Credit. An employer will pick someone who, amongst many other things, will turn up regularly, not go sick or let them down.
Somebody who does not need the work place to be altered so that they can work and above all, be reliable. Therefore, they will not waste their time on the person who has cancer, multiple sclerosis, or epilepsy amongst all the other illnesses that could cause one to be late for work, or not be able to get into work at all.
These people might not have qualified for PIP, but that does not mean they’re not ill and it’s far more awkward for them to get a job that people without disabilities don’t have. Nevertheless, if they do have a disability, how long will their boss continue to hire them when they’re not able to turn up for work?
Mental Health problems will no longer be a component of PIP, this was unobtrusively put through throughout the by election and will see countless people losing payments.
There are of course people out there that will maintain that all those who want to cheat PIP will declare that they can’t walk 20 meters.
And it may be that some people will choose to deceive the benefits policy, but choosing to put disabled people through incorrect or skewed assessments is not fair to those people who require the benefit.
Maybe if MPs didn’t give themselves a pay increase all the time and stopped giving out so much overseas relief and gave it to their own people and they quit funding immigrants benefits and grants to furnish their homes, then perhaps some of those disabled claimants would not lose their dignity.
This government is attempting to destroy the benefits system for disabled people, having previously closed the workshops that those people obtained self-esteem, even though they were paid a paltry wage, these workshops were killed off on the terrains of cost.
The MPs must look at their personal self on a number of tax-free benefits they get. They chose to cut the benefits by £30 of those on disabilities, but receive a wage increase for themselves whilst claiming expenses for small things like paper clips.
When there are hundreds of thousands of immigrants with outstretched hands expecting to be supplied with easy money it is the most defenseless in our society that repeatedly takes the punch to guarantee that the non-contributors continue to get their free donations, and the governments of the past and present should dangle their heads in embarrassment as should the voters who keep voting in these dirtbags.
They gather money by cruelly penny-pinching from those least able to stand up for themselves, where they will, no doubt prize themselves a nice profitable gratuity and pay increase.
Recommendation for PIP or previously Living Disability Allowance should never have been outsourced outside of the NHS, it should have been the local GP of the person who was making a request for that benefit to carry out the evaluations and present the report to the DWP.
It creates too much stress for the claimant and their doctor is more insightful of their disability and requirements, particularly if they have a succession of ailments, then they can give an imagery of their health.
After all, the patient’s doctor knows them better than anybody else and they would presumably have been their patient for an extended time and they would be capable of presenting the DWP with all of their conditions and how it changes from day to day, how far they can walk and what they can and can’t do for themselves.
Assessors should not be evaluating medical matters with benefits of recipients where they do not have the medical training or the ability to deliver a good bed side manner that a GP would and why should a sub-contractor who is not medically able be permitted to direct probing interrogations for information which is protected under patient confidentiality with the NHS?
There are some shysters out there who fraudulently claim benefits but then there are also people genuinely in need that are not being handled with the dignity and respect by a nation that puts Great in front of its name.
Nobody less than a medical doctor practising in disability appraisal should be permitted to evaluate or make any judgments correlating to what a disabled person can or cannot do. There are some people who seem fine one day and then completely crippled up and powerless to do anything the next day, that is, sadly, the nature of some disabilities.
The reliability criteria state that if you can’t do something repeatedly then it is to be interpreted as if you can’t do it at all. Those are the DWP’s own rules set in deliberation with well educated and qualified medics who know the science behind the symptoms.
Some people are judged by fantasy stereotypes, propelling an extrapolation of their own ability. It stands to reason that you can’t implement your expertise to evaluate other peoples ability if they are sick and you are not.
For some people, it would take three or more days to recuperate from a brief trip to the store, but they will still try to do that trip because if they don’t they would be stuck indoors all the time. However, with healthy people, it wouldn’t take that much time to recover from such a light activity and they could do it three times a day in lunch breaks whilst maintaining a job.
Yet Tony Blair’s government attempted to spin comparable populist attitudes that all disabled people are closet criminals. They abused this manner of bias and cumbersome reasoning to sidetrack awareness from their own misdeeds like the dodgy dossier and expenses disgrace.
It was a persuasive weapon and redirected a lot of anger, disability hostility crime rose a lot. The Tories maintained the wrong this allowed without reinstating an air of fair play because it assisted their plan of austerity to refuse people benefits. That is what PIP is all about.
The disabled have been utilised like a political kitty plaything to divert the eye of the media and the people, and as a whipping boy to disgrace everyone into accepting their own portion of the spending cuts.
While cuts may be inevitable for all quarters following the consequences of irresponsibility manifested in the banking disaster, this sort of deceitful gyration and wrongful execution of defenseless human beings by government has lead immediately to the grass root rebellions we are dispensing with now in the United Kingdom with Brexit and a transition of control to the Labour movement.
Judges have been granted an 11 percent wage rise. The MP’s have now been granted an inflation busting pay rise and the House of Lords get £300 a day simply for signing in. It’s a society for bottom burpers to interpret the news in leather bound seats while consuming food and of course drinking, smoking, and nodding off all the while they are paid £300 a day five days a week for this.
£1500 a week for doing nada and they’re clamping down on the sick and disabled.
The government wants to save money and entered into an arrangement with a private company which wants to make money, a union made in heaven but sadly the loser is the claimant.
Evidently, the assessors have always appraised people out of windows and they further plant people in the nearest car parks to the assessment centre. Other methods that are used are toilets that they put out of order signs on and lifts that are not permitted to be used by wheelchair users, stating it is because of health and safety issues.
Apparently, the receptionist scrutinises people in the waiting room, as do others who purport to be people waiting to be assessed. Then there is the use of uncomfortable seats to see how long people can remain in the chairs, usually without arms to assist people getting out of them is a typical deceitful trick.
There are are a number of people out there that are not falsifying it but the papers disregard this reality. Some of the might not look sick, but then you have others that might have terminal cancer, which after several yards becomes obvious if people stopped to observe, but they don’t, they simply assume and walk off all self-righteous.
Disability cars, well most cost, except the basic ones, and there is a price limit of 30K on them, therefore loads of people pay £500-3,000 deposit if they, for example, have a big family or require wheelchair access, plus the expense of the conversion et cetera.
Then they lose their higher rate of payment for the three years, plus if they come out of the scheme after say two years, plus insurance companies then view you as a new driver, as 96 percent of insurance companies don’t take on people from the mobility scheme and the ones that do are the more costly companies, so it’s not as black and white as people imagine.