Friday 6th March 2015

Post by **refitman** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 7:46 am

Morning all.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 8:26 am

Morning all.

A repost of thatchersorphan's post late last night:

thatchersorphan wrote:
DWP have announced that they are to privatise part of the administration of Universal Credit. Missed this when it came out http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/department_for" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... nt-booking Their intention is that the process for booking the appointment for a claimant’s initial work search interview will be handed to the private company Capita.

And I care about this because it's on top of the news that FERA (the govt food and science agency) has been partially sold off / taken over by Capita.

Capita are going to own and control much of the UK soon. Government by Crapita.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 8:34 am

Morning all.

Council by-election in Selhurst yesterday. Selhurst forms part of the Croydon North constituency which is a pretty safe seat for Labour; however in the 2012 by-election, caused by the death of sitting MP Malcolm Wicks, UKIP candidate the unique (thankfully) Winston McKenzie came third so the Kippers had aspirations in this area, hence their call for this by-election.

http://insidecroydon.com/2015/01/30/uki ... yer-20000/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And the result?

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects · 9h9 hours ago
Selhurst (Croydon) result:
LAB - 71.5% (+19.4)
CON - 11.6% (-2.0)
GRN - 7.0% (-1.5)
UKIP - 6.9% (-5.6)
LDEM - 3.1% (-2.9)

So a very good night for Labour, in a contest that probably should not have been called; but a spectacularly bad one for the Lost Deposits who got just 65 votes, reckoned to be the lowest number of votes they have got in any Croydon ward since their formation.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 8:36 am

Cllr Warren Morgan ‏@warrenmorgan 9h9 hours ago
Labour vote up in all 3 London by-elections tonight - by 20% in Croydon. Green vote down in all three - by 4% in Brent, 5% in St Pancras.

So that supports the recent London polls which showed Labour doing well.

and here's last night's YouGov

Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB · 2h 2 hours ago
Latest YouGov Sun poll sees LAB take 4% lead - the biggest this year
CON 31 (-3)
LAB 35 (+1)
LD 6 (-2)
UKP 15 (+1)
GN 8 (+2)

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:22 am

Re: Yougov

Chicken effect?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:35 am

http://www.theguardian.com/social-care- ... ntegration" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

manchester-health-social-care-integration

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:39 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Re: Yougov

Chicken effect?

Too early for that.

More a return to sensible polling after two Tory outliers and a slight Labour outlier.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:42 am

What on earth is going on in Scotland? What's all this tactical voting guff?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... t-48469694
Scotland in Union, which launches on Friday, is aiming to provide opinion polling and research to help people to vote tactically against the SNP in key constituencies.

Have people learnt nothing from the anti-Tory Libdem tactical voting debacle? I'm really worried that people are being pushed into tactical voting by polls that may not even be accurate. Everything's pointing to a hung parliament at the moment and in a hung parliament vote share counts. Labour needs every single supporter in every single seat, however safe, to get out and vote for them to gain a mandate in case of another Coalition. Stuff like this worries me. Who's behind it? How's it being funded? I suspect shenanigans.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:45 am

The Coalition's worst minister (in what is a strong field)?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 89354.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chris Grayling, the current Lord Chancellor, is said by some to be the worst lord chancellor in living memory. Others would argue that verdict is too kind. Lord Pannick, one of the country’s leading barristers, who belongs to no political party, summed up Grayling’s achievement on Wednesday evening in the polite and understated language they use in the House of Lords,

“Mr Grayling’s period of office has been notable only for his attempts to restrict judicial review and human rights, his failure to protect the judiciary against criticism from his colleagues; and the reduction of legal aid to a bare minimum,” he said.

As for the fees Grayling proposes to charge litigants in civil courts, he added: “His finale before the general election is to undermine basic access to justice. If you wrap yourself in the Magna Carta, as Mr Grayling sought to do last week, you are inevitably and rightly going to invite scorn and ridicule if you then throw cold water over an important part of our legal heritage.”

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:53 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Re: Yougov

Chicken effect?

Polling was carried out on 4th and 5th so there might be some reflection of Cameron's grandstanding but it'd be hard to say how much.

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/d ... 050315.pdf

Edit to add link to full YouGov/Sun poll.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 9:54 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/social-care- ... ntegration

manchester-health-social-care-integration

Good article. I like the fact it picks up on the point I have made in comments btl - if devolving responsibility for the NHS to local councils is such a good idea, why did Bevan reject this option when setting the NHS up in the first place.

It doesn't address the complete lack of transparency and proper constitutional procedure in what is apparently a done deal, though. Debating the merits (or not) of the idea seems a little redundant given it's fait acompli and that's the bit that has made me so angry - there's been no debate at all.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:03 am

'Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows local authorities’ spending per person has been reduced by 23.4% in real terms over this parliament.

But the IFS found local authority spending in Westminster was worst affected, with a 46.3% cut, while North East Lincolnshire fared best with a cut of just 6.2%.

“On the whole, it is more deprived areas, those with lower local revenue-raising capacity, and those that have seen the fastest population growth that have seen the largest cuts to spending per person,” David Innes, a research economist at the IFS, said. '
https://www.politicshome.com/economy-an ... ut-quarter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thankfully politicshome.com have got a mobile friendly site again.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:30 am

I've seen some pretty bizarre decision taken by people in the DfE over the past 4 years but this might be one of the worst.

About 4 years ago a small primary school on the IoW was threatened with closure by the council due to an excess of places. There was a local petition and it seems that the only way to keep it open was to go for academy status. Given it's size (4 classes - R/1, 2/3, 4/5, 5/6) it was presumably told that it had to join a chain.

Which one?

AET. Never mind that they didn't actually have any other primary schools on the island - it was given to them.

And guess what?

It went into special measures today having been given an Inadequate rating.

From the report:

The new headteacher was permanently appointed to her post in January, following one term as interim headteacher. Three of the four class teachers joined the academy this academic year, one in January.

Since January, support from an executive principal, who is the headteacher of Beechwood Junior School in Southampton, has been made available to the academy, arranged by the Trust.

That school, inevitably, is not one run by AET. But given their track record lately, that's probably no bad thing.

http://onthewight.com/2015/03/06/primar ... easures-2/

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:48 am

Morning.
I see that Caroline Lucas is calling for a progressive alliance with the SNP and plaid in the next parliament because of the green surge.
Hmm.to me this suggests the greens,with possibly one seat,trying to help themselves to a larger slice of the power pie.
Not being a tribalist,but I just don't like them.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:50 am

Reading the concerning posts here, it appears our services - educational, justice, social security provision - have been taken over by Ferengi.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:51 am

Good-morning.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:52 am

Rebecca wrote:Morning.
I see that Caroline Lucas is calling for a progressive alliance with the SNP and plaid in the next parliament because of the green surge.
Hmm.to me this suggests the greens,with possibly one seat,trying to help themselves to a larger slice of the power pie.
Not being a tribalist,but I just don't like them.

I'm not familiar with the policies of these three, can anyone summarise their commonality?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:53 am

Hmm...I see the shit-stirring Andrew Gilligan strikes again. From a month ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... fears.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another Birmingham school has been placed in special measures by Ofsted – with its head and governors likely to be removed – as fears grow of a resurgence of the “Trojan Horse” plot.

In a report to be published this month, Small Heath, a previously “outstanding” non-faith state secondary, will be downgraded to “inadequate”, the lowest possible score.

Inspectors who visited 10 days ago found a “narrowing of the curriculum” and staff in turmoil after the previous –secular – head left.

Shanaz Khan, the new head teacher, who started in September, was heavily backed by several of the key plotters in Trojan Horse, which drove out non-Muslim head teachers and imposed hard-line Islamic practices at a number of state schools in Birmingham.

So what did the report (published today) say?

The breadth of the curriculum is a strength of the school. It prepares students well for life in modern Britain. The personal, social, health and citizenship strands of the curriculum give students a very good understanding of how to keep themselves safe, and of the law and British political institutions. Students are articulate on subjects of citizenship and how they can make their voices heard, both within the school and wider world. Effective information, advice and guidance about careers and future pathways help a high proportion of students move on to further and higher education or training and employment destinations.

Oh.

Looking at the GCSE results, they started to slip a year before the previous HT left. 61% on the 5 A-E in 2012 became 54% in 2013.

From the report:

Standards have fallen since the last inspection, and the most recent GCSE results showed too little progress for students across many subjects.

Students’ progress in mathematics is weak, and mathematics GCSE results have fallen.

The new headteacher has very accurately identified shortcomings in the school’s performance, but has not been able to implement improvement actions successfully

OK...so standards started to slip, previous HT leaves, new one starts last September and begins to see what's going on, disgruntled staff don't like it and one feeds a line to Gilligan who turns it into a Trojan Horse story.

He really is a seriously nasty piece of crap.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 10:58 am

I haven't the first idea how to sort our SNP, Green & Labour party relationships.
None.

Okay.
I've got one idea.
Don't ever allow Tories & their progeny into government.
That shouldn't need be said though.
And when I write Tory I mean Tory.
The current Labour party is about as Tory as Fidel Castro.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:06 am

I thank my friend, RogerOThornhill, for providing me the name of a shit-stirrer.
Current government are made up of a lot of them.
And their trolls - shit stirrers - the lot.
What is the most effective way to challenge people like Andrew Gilligan?

"Mr. Gilligan, do you give a rats' ass about anything other than your game-playing, time-wasting, resource-plundering?"

I don't think saying the above is effective enough.
It feels good to write it.
But I want to know the most effective way to challenge people who don't care about the well-being or sanctity of place, people, resources & positions they hold.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:09 am

StephenDolan wrote:
Rebecca wrote:Morning.
I see that Caroline Lucas is calling for a progressive alliance with the SNP and plaid in the next parliament because of the green surge.
Hmm.to me this suggests the greens,with possibly one seat,trying to help themselves to a larger slice of the power pie.
Not being a tribalist,but I just don't like them.
I'm not familiar with the policies of these three, can anyone summarise their commonality?

Currently, all I can make out of any of them calling for unity amongst themselves is that they're NotLabour.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:12 am

That may be too harsh.
I doubt it.
No one can underestimate the importance of not returning current government.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:19 am

citizenJA wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
Rebecca wrote:Morning.
I see that Caroline Lucas is calling for a progressive alliance with the SNP and plaid in the next parliament because of the green surge.
Hmm.to me this suggests the greens,with possibly one seat,trying to help themselves to a larger slice of the power pie.
Not being a tribalist,but I just don't like them.
I'm not familiar with the policies of these three, can anyone summarise their commonality?
Currently, all I can make out of any of them calling for unity amongst themselves is that they're NotLabour.

The Greens are pro-independence in Scotland, although their voice was drowned out by the SNP.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:22 am

I apologise for impugning the worth of a rat's ass.
Rats are intelligent, living beings - valuable contributors to our ecosystem.

Andrew Gilligan chooses to use his position & authority to undermine wholesomeness.
That is not okay.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:32 am

"Progressive" has become such a ghastly meaningless term, anyway.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:41 am

: Rangoon-ka-tyhaar-hai-holi3444.jpg (44.48 KiB) Viewed 15346 times

Happy Holi

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 11:45 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/social-care- ... ntegration

manchester-health-social-care-integration
Good article. I like the fact it picks up on the point I have made in comments btl - if devolving responsibility for the NHS to local councils is such a good idea, why did Bevan reject this option when setting the NHS up in the first place.
And why has it been rejected every single time it has been mooted, up to and including the LibDems' manifesto policy in 2010 and, to a slightly lesser extent, the coalition agreement?

The article is excellent, ~~Robert~~ PaulfromYorkshire, thank you.

http://www.theguardian.com/social-care- ... ntegration" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"If we want good quality, integrated health and social care for all, three changes will be needed. Firstly, instead of the present needs-and-means-tested local authority system, we need to extend the taxation-funded, free-at-the-point-of-delivery NHS model to social care. Local authorities on their own cannot deliver this. Secondly, we will need a person-centred culture for health and social care. And finally, we need health and social care policies and services that are committed to public, patient and service user involvement. Both systems have so far failed to deliver this."

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:01 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:"Progressive" has become such a ghastly meaningless term, anyway.

Yes, overused, and as sincere as a southern Baptist minister.

Any politician would be wise to have a look at a thesaurus and find an alternative.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:08 pm

A green supporter on the guardian is imploring people to stop "trouble making" over Bennett's leadership.

Bless, if only they afforded the same to Miliband.

I'm with Rebecca.

Post by **refitman** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:13 pm

Who's in charge of the Graun election predictions? Is it NickyB? Today they have Tories 276 Labour 271.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:17 pm

A WHISTLEBLOWER who raised the alarm over an abused teen caught in an Oxford paedophile ring was obstructed by the current chief executive of Wokingham Borough Council, it has emerged.

See more at:

http://www.bracknellnews.co.uk/news/wok ... 0LV02.dpuf

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:27 pm

Robert, I apologise.
I know you don't read the G & I see that it's PaulFromYorkshire who'd originally posted the link.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:29 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
refitman wrote:Who's in charge of the Graun election predictions? Is it NickyB? Today they have Tories 276 Labour 271.
Based on the projections in Scotland, this doesn't seem all that wide of the mark does it?

Well, it is a possibility if the SNP *do* win virtually every Scottish seat I agree. Some of us remain sceptical about that, though.

Re the Ashcroft polls in Scotland earlier in the week, yes they make grim reading but there are a few possible glimmers of optimism:

1) they are phone surveys, this is more likely to aggravate any "shy unionist" factor;

2) tied in with the above there are a significant percentage of respondents (6-10 per cent of the total typically) who say they are certain to vote but then respond don't know/won't say. It is a decent guess that relatively few of these will end up voting SNP;

3) as is usual, Ashcroft did not name candidates - had he done so, it is a fair bet that Kennedy and Murphy at least would have done better (possibly the lone Tory MP up there too) The big lead for UKIP in the recent Thanet South poll came after Farage was actually named (this was by Survation)

Populus btw gives Labour another 2 point lead today - "crossover" couldn't possibly have been delayed yet again, could it?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 12:36 pm

Good morfternoon.

I don't know if we've already done this (sorry if that's the case) but this came to my attention via a Labour Party e-mail (where the link doesn't work, which is a bit sloppy). Anyway, I eventually found it on youtube -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxQ6L3kN4n8

It's rather effective.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:09 pm

"Keeping up with the polls is tiring. Every day creates a new headline. Who’s up and who’s down? Our Poll of Polls keeps track of every poll being published by the UK’s major pollsters – and averages them over time, weighing them by everything from time to track record."

http://may2015.com/category/poll-of-polls/

Well, hell, why not tell me who I've decided to vote for, May2015, you're so smart & all - telling everyone reading you know exhaustion levels of the population & why.

Please let me know your thoughts, friends, if you'd like to.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:11 pm

There are also Scottish council by-elections since the referendum, whilst whilst generally showing the SNP doing well don't really back up some of the more outlandish polls we have seen. Luckily for us, there are a clutch of them coming up in the next few weeks too

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:22 pm

I can't spot any TV coverage of the Green Party Spring Conference.

I think that all parties which are "deemed worthy" of inclusion in the debates should get conference coverage. The broadcasters (the BBC in particular) should put their money where their mouth(s) is\are.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:27 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... he-UK.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sir-John-Major-tells-Ed-Miliband-Rule-out-coalition-with-SNP-to-save-the-UK

I still think the best way to save the UK is for Labour to govern with SNP support. The important for me is that any such arrangement must explicitly rule out independence, but seek instead to find a new constitutional relationship that commands broad support across the nations and regions.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:36 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... he-UK.html

Sir-John-Major-tells-Ed-Miliband-Rule-out-coalition-with-SNP-to-save-the-UK

I still think the best way to save the UK is for Labour to govern with SNP support. The important for me is that any such arrangement must explicitly rule out independence, but seek instead to find a new constitutional relationship that commands broad support across the nations and regions.

Surely John Major should be concentrating on the mess that is his own party, rather than Labour. As someone who wanted to debate Blair in 1997, has he expressed an opinion on Cameron's cowardice yet?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:43 pm

Great Tweet

Tudor Evans ‏@CouncillorTudor Mar 5
Mrs Thatcher stole the milk, now #Cameron has lost the bottle.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:48 pm

GP Conference Leeks ‏@GPconfLeeks 4 hrs4 hours ago

HELLO TO JOURNALISTS FOLLOWING THE #gpconf HASHTAG. GIVE US A WAVE. And feel free to ask us any questions if you need anything explaining.

Green Party Conference.
I've only just got in, so haven't had a chance to see what their hashtag is throwing up.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:51 pm

Alex Braithwaite ‏@labour52rose 25 mins25 minutes ago Lambeth, London
A huge by election win for Labour ...
St Pancras & Somers Town (part of Holb&StPanc seat)
LAB - 1481
CON - 243
GRN - 213
LDEM - 96

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 1:55 pm

danesclose wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... he-UK.html

Sir-John-Major-tells-Ed-Miliband-Rule-out-coalition-with-SNP-to-save-the-UK

I still think the best way to save the UK is for Labour to govern with SNP support. The important for me is that any such arrangement must explicitly rule out independence, but seek instead to find a new constitutional relationship that commands broad support across the nations and regions.
Surely John Major should be concentrating on the mess that is his own party, rather than Labour. As someone who wanted to debate Blair in 1997, has he expressed an opinion on Cameron's cowardice yet?

It's a highly speculative piece. I doubt the SNP would enter a formal coalition with Labour, but if they did, there is no way of knowing what they would demand until it happened. To rule it out before you even know what "it" is would be foolish.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:05 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:The ironic thing is that it looks as though Cameron may succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams in Scotland - he got to 'save' the Union AND potentially see the loss of Labour Scottish MPs.

The speech Cameron made the day after the referendum might have been astonishingly stupid, but it might have also been tactically brilliant. He knew there were no Tories to save in Scotland, but by pissing off a vast number of people who had voted No in return for greater powers for Scotland at a stroke, he could conceivably have realised that Scotland would punish Labour instead.

It sounds too far fetched, but with the short termist animal cunning of Crosby and Osborne taken into consideration...

Nah.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:10 pm

Being reported just now that Sturgeon is willing to compromise over Trident.

I have long thought we might end up with it downgraded rather than scrapped completely - this only confirms that if anything.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:12 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Being reported just now that Sturgeon is willing to compromise over Trident.

I have long thought we might end up with it downgraded rather than scrapped completely - this only confirms that if anything.

Presumably we can keep it, but only if it is painted with the Scottish flag and a thistle gift tag added.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:13 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... he-UK.html

Sir-John-Major-tells-Ed-Miliband-Rule-out-coalition-with-SNP-to-save-the-UK

I still think the best way to save the UK is for Labour to govern with SNP support. The important for me is that any such arrangement must explicitly rule out independence, but seek instead to find a new constitutional relationship that commands broad support across the nations and regions.

The SNP represent at most around 5% of the UK electorate (even assuming the polls are accurate). To engage in any formal agreement with them would, imo, permanently reduce the Labour Party in Scotland to the same status as the Tory Party in Scotland.

Scottish Labour MPs are apparently telling Ed M to rule out any pact:

With the Labour leader due to deliver a keynote speech at the Scottish Labour conference in Edinburgh on Saturday, his Scottish MPs used their weekly group meeting yesterday to insist he kill off speculation about the prospect of a deal with the Nationalists.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3709520

The 'no' campaign panicked when the SNP drew ahead in pre-referendum polls and made promises which the SNP are now capitalising on. (I know of no 'no' voter who was voting for more power, or who was swayed by 'the vow'). I sincerely hope the Labour Party stick to their guns this time!

One can only hope that Jim Murphy is right:

SCOTTISH Labour leader Jim Murphy insists the party can still get “back into the contest” in Scotland ahead of the May election and reverse its “bloody awful” poll ratings.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3711005

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:16 pm

More amendments to ESA regulations......

Until now, there has been a thing called the 6-month-rule.
This involves claimants who are found fit for work after a WCA and are removed from ESA; they could claim again in 6 months at the basic (Assessment Phase) rate as long as they provided certification from their GP.
No more. Now they must prove that they have a new condition or a deterioration in their existing condition before they can claim ESA again.

DWP insists that there is a problem with claimants who "loop" - ie. continually fail the WCA, do not fulfil jobsearch conditions for JSA,then re-claim ESA as soon as they can with the same condition they had before.
According to DWP, these people did not have limited capability for work at their WCA, so unless things have changed, they don't have it when they re-claim either.
This "looping", apparently, causes people not to get the the "support" they would get from JSA in their search for work.

Despite a consultation (who knew?) DWP have decided to abolish the rule. They say that they have found "many" cases of this "looping".
In fact, there have been 26,000 from a claimant count of 2.6 million.

DWP have also decided, against all advice, that any claimant found fit for work after a WCA who asks for a Mandatory Consideration of Review or who decides to go on to appeal if it fails may not be paid any ESA at any rate, they must claim JSA and fulfil the conditions for it.

We know that back when we didn't have the MCR system and when people could appeal immediately, of those who were found fit for work, 40% won their appeal outright and up to 90% won if they had legal representation.
The numbers of people going to appeal have dropped, mainly because they can't go to appeal straight away and/or because they cannot get the legal advice they need to do so. They have to lodge the appeal themselves and many just can't do this.

The only lifeline people had was the 6-month-rule - if they could cope for 6 months, they could at least make a new claim and start over.
As the WCA is a lottery anyway, they had a chance they might get a better decision.
Now that lifeline has gone - if they were not considered to have limited capability for work before, that status will apply to the new claim too unless they can prove significant change has occurred.

This is a statement from the report -
"The Government's very firm view is that claimants, who have been found not to have LCW, should get the necessary help and support to enable them to move closer to the labour market through JSA"

JSA, of course, requires that all claimants are available for and actively seeking all or any work, and they must be capable of that; the Claimant Commitment makes no allowances for health problems, and all JSA claimants must be capable of any workfare imposed on them.

Amendments like this are the sort of thing that I was making such a fuss about when the WRA was railroaded through Parliament.
The Secretary of State can make these amendments any time he chooses.
The Act allows this - and it would seem that very few of our elected representatives knew (or cared) that throughout the text of that Act the recurring phrase saying that any amendments can be made to any clause without further recourse to Parliament means exactly this - IDS can do what the fuck he likes.

The new rules are on the http://www.gov.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; website under ESA repeat Assessment Regulations SSAC Report.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:19 pm

Rosa Prince ‏@RosaPrinceUK 45 mins45 minutes ago

I'm liveblogging the @TheGreenParty conference with @MichaelPDeacon & @mattholehouse They say there's free booze:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -live.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 06 Mar, 2015 2:21 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Being reported just now that Sturgeon is willing to compromise over Trident.

I have long thought we might end up with it downgraded rather than scrapped completely - this only confirms that if anything.
Presumably we can keep it, but only if it is painted with the Scottish flag and a thistle gift tag added.

Nicola Sturgeon: Scrapping Trident my red line for propping up Labour
The First Minister says halting the renewal of Britain's nuclear deterrent would be her "absolute priority" if the SNP holds the balance of power

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... abour.html

Nicola Sturgeon says Trident conflict would not stop SNP backing other Labour policies
Scottish first minister says party’s support for minority Labour government would not be conditional on Ed Miliband scrapping nuclear missile system

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ion-labour

The SNP are the same as the Lib Dems - all they want is power (the ultimate power being independence). They are really not interested in the best interests of the UK (or Scotland).