Funds Allocated For Time Limiting ESA Before WRB Is Passed


This from the Disability Alliance http://www.disabilityalliance.org/esalimit.htm?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter shows the utter arrogance of parliament  and our alleged representatives in 2011. Just as NHS reform plans are already going ahead before the vote, so welfare reforms are being pushed through before the democratic process has completed

Welfare Reform Bill (Employment and Support Allowance - Time Limiting - Contingency Fund Advance)

7 September 2011
The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Chris Grayling): As part of his Spending Review announcement, the Chancellor set out his proposal to introduce a time limit of 1 year for those claiming contributory Employment and Support Allowance who are in the Work Related Activity Group. The change will, subject to the passage of the enabling legislation, apply from April 2012. For those in the Work Related Activity Group who have already received a year or more contributory Employment and Support Allowance as at April 2012, entitlement will cease immediately.
In order to avoid delay in implementing this policy the Department for Work and Pensions has obtained approval for an advance from the Contingencies Fund of £2,705,000 to allow for the development of IT, ensure those potentially impacted by the time limit in April 2012 are notified of the change and to deliver the operational support that will be required before Royal Assent of the enabling legislation.
Parliamentary approval for resources of £2,705,000 for this new service will be sought in a Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Work and Pensions. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £2,705,000 will be met by repayable cash advances from the Contingencies Fund. 
 DA says: this decision will end all out of work benefits for over 400,000 disabled people – including people with cancer. The Government is denying the House of Lords a chance to scrutinise and vote on this proposal in the Welfare Reform Bill before prematurely telling disabled people their support could end in six months.

More information

Spider In The Bath

This morning there was a spider in my bath. A spider so big it was possessed of visible ankles, which to add insult to injury were clearly more stable than mine. Being the brave warrior typecomplete wimp that I am, I squealed pathetically on sight and consulted social media for the most effective spider removing advice I could find. Having first insisted that any advice about the spider being more scared of me would be dismissed on the grounds that it can definitely run faster than me.


Once I'd read all the helpful advisory tweets I concluded the best option for me and the housebreaking arachnid was to wash it down the plug hole. Thoroughly so it couldn't pull an insey winsey trick and climb back up. Shower head in hand I pointed it at spidey and took a deep, slightly wobbly breath.

It bloody JUMPED at me!! Jumped. Repeatedly. In a sort of reverse bungy jumping, spidery kind of way. Once I'd screamed hysterically and fallen over my own feet trying to get out of the bathroom before the spider could kill me, I realised the spider was part of a wider web of intrigue. I suspect the government are now employing jumping spiders to test the veracity of claimed level of disability. If you can reel backwards when the spider jumps you're fit for work. Let's face it, spiders are cheaper than the current DWP contractors and with the current accuracy rates for decisions 'battle the arachnid for benefits' is a viable alternative.

The Evidence Is Growing That The Cuts Are Savagely Targeting Disabled People

Joe Public blog about the Papworth Trust survey results by yours truly

BBC Radio Merseyside

DLA and PIP discussion about the findings of the Papworth Trust's survey featuring yours truly, listen again here. Relevant section starts approx 19min 30 seconds.

Creating A PR Disaster - The AMF Way

Step 1: Pick a snazzy, slightly secretive name which bears no relation to your company's role...let's say AMF*.

Step 2: Become a large, powerful and wealthy multi national corporation engaged to carry out government contracts. Warning note to any sick and disabled people on benefits considering this as a viable route into work; you will need a bike, ability to ride said bike and a magical, contract creating, money shedding tree. Rumours of similar duck house providing, moat cleaning and grocery shopping trees abound, but sadly the equipment, social care and benefits fairy has proved too elusive to pin down at point of writing without fear of libelling said fairy.

Step 3: Do not concern yourself with the trivial details contained in any of the actual contracts the government agreed with you. There is no need to answer phones on time, organise appointments or comply with accessibility legislation. Never forget such rules don't apply to you. To be fair...they don't apply to the people who make them either so you're only following their sterling example. 

Step 4: Be sure to tend your magical, contract creating money tree with great care. Treat your staff and 'customers' with equal disdain. Rely on media hysteria to ensure staff and customers never compare notes about their treatment. Ensure the removal of any potential awkward public questions by making sure the questioner ends up in a position of power and forgets their former role as champion of the vulnerableworld.

Step 5: Create magical, contract creating money tree arboretum as solution to that disturbing scent of human suffering which occasionally penetrates past the moat and duck house.

Step 6: Act rapidly and decisively to negate any criticism from customers or staff. Enage expensive lawyers to protect your continued right to enjoy and protect the reputation of said magical, contract creating money tree arboretum. Breathe deep sigh of relief as you are reassured by staff's continued disdain for customers drawing attention  away from arboretum.

Step 7: Remind staff of the threat their social media use poses to arboretum. Offer up a potential holiday in said arboretum to ensure compliance.

Step 8: Negate customer criticism of arboretum by hitting them over the head with spare magical, contract creating money trees. Enjoy satisfying splatter noise as trees impact and decide to extend 'splatting' policy to all customers whether critical or not.

Step 9: Threaten anyone supporting or allowing customers to speak with splatting policy.

Step 10: Pat self and lawyers on the back

Step 11: Become aware of irritating whimpers arising from beneath successful splats.

Step 12: Become aware of rational voices alerting you to irritating whimpers. Suffer the deep psychological trauma this poses to continued enjoyment of arboretum.

Step 13: Forget to check content of any alleged whimpers. That first one was definitely absolutely bullying so decide the rest will definitely absolutely be bullying tactics too. 

Step 14: Insist irritating whimpers are just that. Whimpers. After all, only whimpers would ever choose to become customers of AMF and whimper opinion widely considered invalid. Decide to ignore futher.

Step 15: Rational voices invade the peace of arboretum. These voices are a bit too loud actually, not usually classed as whimpers and not similar enough to a character from Sesame Street to be bought off as successfully as previous rational voice rebutting policy.

Step 16: Whimper and wail. "It's not fair". After all, it seems to have worked for the whimpers out there and the lawyers are too busy enjoying arboretum access to come up with anything better.

Step 17: Locate lawyer sulking just outside arboretum and promote them to chief executive officer of splatting.

Step 18: Attempt to remove backbone from lawyer and divert permanently to whimper class as punishment for temerity in suggesting some whimpers might be valid and therefore not defamatory.

Step 19: Concede grudgingly now spineless lawyer might have had a point actually. Reassure self by relegation of newly disabled lawyer to whimper classes. No-one listens to them anyway.

Step 20: Whine about relentless bullying from whimperers and continue to insist their whimpers are not legally valid opinions.

Step 20: Decide it's probably time to check content of whimpers. Especially those pesky, particularly vulnerable ones.

Step 21: Realise pesky, particularly vulnerable whimperers might have been telling the truth all along.

Step 22: Pee pants a teensy bit. Whimperer, schmimperer's totally irrelevant but idea of life outside arboretum not quite so conducive to continence.

Step 23: Engage lawyers able to tell the difference between Streisand and the Streisand effect.

Step 24: Scream at and permanently remove arboretum access from whichever department insisted whimper content checking was an unneccessary act.

Step 25: Wonder if possible to employ those particularly vulnerable annoyingly rational whimperers to replace previous allegedly qualified legal advisors.


*Points but no prizes to anyone who knows why AMF and can say so in the comments thread without libelling anyone. As it's my blog and me who'll get sued I decide what constitutes libel!
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)