FlyTheNest

This is what I meant.

Labour MP Dame Anne Begg, who chairs the Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee, said she would support overhauling the delivery of ESA but "did not envisage" any reduction in the value of the benefit.

"That's not reform, that is just saving money. I hope that is not something the government is going to come forward with."

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

HindleA wrote:"Cuts to ESA considered"


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29821696" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So they aren't getting all these people into work, and are just cutting the amount to live on.

I'm shocked and stunned.

BBC probably seen different possible options that were drawn up.I saw one once that" abolished"carers allowance and for a while it was a darn close thing,it will remain a stand alone benefit.UC of course,as correctly constructed,is a way of simplifying by removing (Severe Disability Premium gone,can't get carer and disability elements,no housing element on any earnings for homeowners etc)There is a certain logic to it,equalise conditionality and income-I don't know what the 50p is supposed to be useful for,but I'm sure many people could think of a"use" for it.

HindleA wrote:"Cuts to ESA considered"


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29821696" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ministers are considering drastically cutting the main Employment and Support Allowance sickness benefit, internal documents seen by the BBC suggest.

New claimants, judged to be capable of work with appropriate support, could be given just 50p more per week than people on job seekers allowance.

Of course, the DWP say that the ESA proposals are not government policy. But it shows a callousness that it could even consider such a despicable idea

(Here is the June report, from the BBC, on the leaked documents: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27927842
Amongst other things were claims that "

Employment outcomes actually appear lower than under IB"

and

The benefit is becoming a "long-term destination" for too many people, they say, and more people than expected are becoming eligible for it.

Which, oddly*, was supposedly the reason this Govt. decided that everyone already on IB had to be transferred (with new assessments) to ESA in the first place

And may I add to calls for @Ephe to produce a paper on ESA/WCA and the reforms it needs? I will do what I can to publicise it

Edits to add(1)*Sarcasm... (2) correcting to transferred to to be transferred

@Ladycenturia

1.There is considerable churn.
2.It took them.over five years to even start the process of transferring in our case ,and ours was paper only (ie no WCA)
3..Of course the long term cases were higher than expected.Both parties have propagandised the "they're not really ill" line for decades -they were/are.

@HindleA,

Agreed, on all points.