via Holistic care
The Department for Work and Pensions has been unlawfully stopping people going to tribunal to appeal against decisions to refuse them benefits, three senior judges have ruled.
The upper tribunal found it was wrong for the DWP to refuse claimants the right to appeal if they took more than a month to ask for a review of the benefit decision.
It comes just a week after a supreme court finding that the government was unlawfully charging fees of up to £1,200 for access to employment tribunals.
The DWP system was challenged by the Child Poverty Action Group and two claimants with serious mental health problems who were refused disability benefits and then failed to ask for an internal review within the one-month time limit.
They made late applications for an internal review, called “mandatory reconsideration”, of their benefit decisions, but the DWP initially refused to change the decision or let…
View original post 475 more words
I am angry.
Yet again, I am angry and yet again it is our not-so-noble Prime Minister and her Tory cohorts who have angered me. What a surprise eh? Who would have guessed it.
So, what has Mrs May done his time to rattle my cage?
Well, it’s not hard but, amongst a plethora of other things, the thing that has really riled me this time is the TV interview that she gave, with her husband Philip, on the BBC1 early evening chat show, ‘The One Show’ on Tuesday. I freely admit that I didn’t watch all of it. I couldn’t but the little I did watch made me seethe. I lasted for a total of about five fist-clenching, teeth-grinding minutes before I was forced to change channel. Not because I desperately wanted to watch the programme I switched to, no, I just couldn’t stand to watch any more of the cringe-worthy, sexist clap-trap that was being spouted by our leader and her lap-dog of a husband.
Totally disgusting tripe.
And now, today, the spouse of another Tory grandee is reiterating the self-same nonsense in an article in a Tory-loving daily newspaper. Argh!!!!! Horrible, revolting, mid-20th-century, sexist garbage.
But, what, I hear you ask, was it?
Well, on Tuesday night, Mrs and Mr May, when talking about their day-to-day lives and trying to sound as if they lived lives that are the same as everyone else’s lives, started talking about the household chores that they each undertook. Mr May said that, just like everyone else, he took the bins out. The PM was asked by the interviewer if she did this too and that’s when she made me angry. She told the nation that no, she didn’t because there were ‘Boy jobs and Girl jobs and taking the bins out was a Boy job.’ And now, Sarah Vine is saying the exact same thing. She is saying that the secret to a lasting, loving relationship is for there to be ‘Girl jobs’ and ‘Boy-jobs’.
Boy jobs and Girl jobs? Which decade do these women live in? Why is taking the bin out a so-called Boy job? Because girls can’t do it because it will mess up their pretty frocks or grubby up their delicate hands? Balderdash. I thought that attitude went out in the nineteen sixties and seventies, almost half a century ago. The Sexual Revolution, Sexual Liberation, is something that happened in the past, something that should rightly be consigned to the history books and Wikipedia, not something we should still be fighting for now, in the twenty-first century.
And what about ‘Girl-jobs? What are they exactly? Should women be found solely in the kitchen, doing the housework or looking after the kids whilst the men do the difficult things such as putting up shelves, manufacturing flat-pack furniture and disposing of household waste. Is this what Mrs May and Ms Vine are saying? Well that’s what it looks like to me. The Tories accuse Corbyn and the Labour Party of trying to take this country back to a previous age but they’re trying to do exactly the same thing themselves.
What about women who live alone or, live in an all female household? What are they supposed to do? Live in filth because they are unable to take a bin-bag to the wheely-bin outside, survive without their flat-pack wardrobe and pile all their things on the floor because they have insufficient shelving? Ring for help from an ex-partner, husband or expensive handyman service? Ask the nearest male they can find such as a neighbour or passer-by for help? I don’t think so. Unless Mrs May or Ms Vine have a better idea, many women will just have to get on with it and do it themselves.
And this throw-away comment has made me wonder what the Department of Work and Pensions would have to say on the subject. All over the country there are men and women who have to document their job-search activities if they are to receive their meagre weekly or fortnightly Welfare Benefits payments. When someone applies for Job-Seekers Allowance they have to sign a pledge or contract that stipulates that they will apply for any suitable jobs that come up. They have to document all their efforts which then have to be shown to the people at the Jobcentre every time they sign on. And then, if their efforts to find work are deemed to be insufficient and they don’t have a valid reason for their failure to get a job, they are sanctioned and lose benefits for a shorter or longer period of time until the can show they are trying harder. I wonder what would happen if a job-seeker told their employment adviser at the Job-Centre that the reason they had not found work was that yes, there was work available but that work was for the wrong gender. Would that ever be acceptable? Somehow, I don’t think so. Anyone who tried that trick would swiftly find themselves with no money and queuing outside their nearest foodbank.
When will Mrs May and Ms Vine join Mr Corbyn, Mr Farron, Ms Sturgeon, Ms Wood et al in the real world and not remain firmly stuck in the past. Boy-jobs and Girl-jobs have been and gone and, in my opinion, good riddance to them. Household tasks are just that, tasks. Tasks that can be done by anyone in the household, regardless of gender, not girl-jobs and boy-jobs, just boring, mundane, everyone tasks.
The Government has failed to deliver the £4bn of savings it was expecting to make after cutting disability benefit, according to new analysis.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the Government was hoping to cut spending by 20 per cent by moving from the Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to Personal Independence Payments (PIP).
Forecasts initially predicted £13.6bn would be spent on disability benefits in 2018-2019 but now this figure is thought to be £18bn.
Senior Labour MP’s accused the Tories of “creating further waste and expense” resulting in the need for cuts elsewhere.
Shadow work and pensions secretary Debbie Abrahams said: “This analysis clearly shows that the Government’s social security cuts are failing disabled people. It is becoming increasingly clearer that these flawed Tory assessments only create further waste and expense.”
Frank Field, chairman of the Work and Pensions select committee, added: “Clearly the Government was as over-optimistic with PIP as…
View original post 271 more words
Scope, the charity for disabled people, tweeted an interesting number when the general election was announced. There are, it said, 13 million disabled people in Britain. Some 89 per cent have said they will vote.
The reason that number is worth paying attention to is that if the 89 per cent are true to their word, and if they use their franchise to hold the Government to account for its brutal treatment of disabled people, it might just spell trouble for Theresa May’s dreams of a three-figure majority.
Now, let me make one thing clear at the outset. I’m not about to say who you should vote for. Journalists too often do that. I would simply invite you to consider the Government’s record when it comes to disability.
If I were to take on the role of prosecuting ministers over that, I would struggle to find somewhere to start. So long would…
View original post 857 more words
I think I’m supposed to be grateful.
I think all of us disabled, and older people are supposed to say ‘Thank you’ to the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, for his much flaunted, much hyped boost of £2bn for Social Care in yesterday’s Spring Budget.
Thank you Mr Hammond, you are so beneficent and generous.
Sure, £2bn is an awful lot of money, and, with any luck it, at least some of should help ease the Care Crisis we currently have in this country, but it can only help if it actually filters down to the people it’s supposed to be helping. My major concern is that it will be shared out amongst all the Social Services Departments, nationwide, and will just vanish into their usual, annual Social Care black hole. We, the older and disabled people who are the ones who are supposed to reap the benefit will probably get to see little, if any, of it at all.
As someone who is in receipt of Social Care, there I three places I can think of straight off where that £2bn could make a real difference if it was spent properly.
First of all, I would like to see the money being put towards ending the farce of the fifteen minute care-call. How can anyone in their right mind think that fifteen minutes is long enough to provide any form of meaningful care for a disabled or older person? It’s barely long enough to make a sandwich or boil a kettle for a cup of tea, let alone help a frail person access the toilet, get them dressed or undressed, make sure they’re comfortable and safe, cook a light meal and help them eat it, if they need help, make a bed and do a little light housework.
Some of Mr Hammond’s £2bn definitely needs to go towards this.
Secondly, the paltry amount Home Care workers get paid needs to be addressed.
When I was in receipt of Agency Care, via my Local Authority, the workers were receiving little more than the minimum wage, indeed, in some instances it seemed as if they were even getting less than that. I now get my care through a scheme called ‘Direct Payments’ whereby my Local Authority pays the amount they would have spent on Agency Care directly to me and I get to employ and pay for my own carers. In theory, this is a great plan and, for many, it works well but it is impossible to offer a decent wage for the work that needs to be done and therefore, get the most suitable carers. The amount I get, for example, allows me to offer an hourly rate of just £9.40, before tax and NI, hardly a fortune, especially when you consider the level of personal care I am expecting those workers to undertake. I would dearly like to be able to offer more but, as someone with no private income whatsoever to fall back on apart from my Welfare Benefits, I am stuck with just the funding my Social Services Department allows me every month for my long-suffering and excellent carers. Hardly enough at all.
Some of Mr Hammond’s £2bn needs to go towards this.
Then thirdly, there’s something which doesn’t affect me personally as yet. The amount that is available for both short, and long-term, residential Care Home accommodation. How can we expect older and disabled people to receive good quality, dedicated care when they need intesive care or can no longer live in their own home, if the amount Residential Homes are given for each resident’s care package is so small? We can’t
Some of Mr Hammond’s £2bn needs to go towards this.
What I really want to see most after yesterday’s display of Governmental generosity would be a completely new Care Strategy for our country. There needs to be meaningful consultation with the Care providers, the medical profession and carers themselves, both Home Care and Care Home agencies and workers and the Care Recipients, namely all the older and disabled people who need help to live in comfort and with dignity. We need to be assured that any extra or new funding is being spent wisely and well and is contributing towards the wellbeing of those who need it most.
Some of Mr Hammond’s £2bn definitely needs to go towards this.