Friday 15th May 2015

[gilsey]

Remember how many leaders the tories went through before they landed on TCC? The Labour candidates may be underwhelming but might not last the distance anyway.
Jarvis might feel differently in 3 years time when his kids are older, Starmer will have his feet under the table, others may emerge.

[AngryAsWell]

I saw the few minutes in question, of T Hunt on QT. Between the audience, the others on the panel & Dimbleby smirking, he did well not to walk out. I had to turn it off.

He didn't make it any better at all by saying Labour overspent, in fact it confirmed my view that they can't win on this. Might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb and go full on support for the last Labour govt, apart from banking regulation.

It was a bit of a trap though as he said Yes! you could say Labour overspent if .... and he never got passed the IF because the audience started howling and Dimbleby when straight in on the attack. By the time it quietened down enough for him to speak again the whole point of what he was saying had gone and Dimbleby swiftly move on. He had already taken a lot of barracking before he got to the IF bit as well.

[AngryAsWell]

Ben Bradshaw, on the BBC, in full mourning for Chuka Umunna's withdrawal. Phew! What a lucky escape we've had.

I've seen some murmurings that Ben Bradshaw maybe thinking of standing ...ack

The last declaration date is June 6th (or about 6th) so lots of time yet.....

[Willow904]

For whatever reason Chuka Umunna pulled out, I can't help but feel it's for the best. Labour has an awful lot on it's plate. Having watched Lewis Hamilton at a young age struggle with the totemic element of being the first black driver in formula 1, of carrying the hopes and dreams of British f1 fans and coping with racism (it still exists I'm afraid) both in the paddock and among followers of the sport, I'm afraid to say it may just be a little bit more than he and Labour can deal with right now. Especially as Hamilton barely survived the circus despite genuinely being one of the best drivers of his generation. Umunna is young. If he's good he'll get there eventually and would probably cope better with more maturity anyway. I do hope the newspaper scandal angle is untrue. We still need diverse and talented people to make up a strong cabinet.

[rebeccariots2]

LabourList @LabourList · 2h 2 hours ago
Politicians: I'm the person you're talking about and I might have some useful information, writes @girlsteve http://labli.st/1JMuw5S" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AnatolyKasparov]

It isn't good he has pulled out, because he was a serious candidate and he should have had chance to shine. It may even indicate that the Blairite wing have written off 2020 already.

I still think I wouldn't have voted for him because he is the wrong demographic (London and wealthy).

However, Labour face a huge challenge, it needs a special candidate to address it and I am not seeing them.

Going to full fat Blairism at this point points, if nothing else, to poor judgement (which could be a recurring thing if these rumours have any truth in them)

No, there doesn't seem to be any outstanding candidate right now - which probably means Burnham as the "least bad" option but hoping (and this *is* important) that he can assemble a more inspiring team around him than Ed did. Given the overall quality of Labour's 2010 intake, that should be far from impossible.

Interestingly Burnham seems to have attracted the support of Harry Leslie Smith, a man who is no fool and whose judgement I respect; he is cheerleading for a Burnham/Watson combo and, while I think Watson did a lot of damage to Ed, it may have some merit - you could easily see Watson taking on the Prescott 'enforcer' role, something that was mentioned here earlier this week.

As for Tristram, I think he sunk his chances on QT last night.

I want Creasy as deputy anyway, but think she would especially be a good foil for Burnham. Watson should definitely get a major role, though.

[Willow904]

I saw the few minutes in question, of T Hunt on QT. Between the audience, the others on the panel & Dimbleby smirking, he did well not to walk out. I had to turn it off.

He didn't make it any better at all by saying Labour overspent, in fact it confirmed my view that they can't win on this. Might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb and go full on support for the last Labour govt, apart from banking regulation.

It was a bit of a trap though as he said Yes! you could say Labour overspent if .... and he never got passed the IF because the audience started howling and Dimbleby when straight in on the attack. By the time it quietened down enough for him to speak again the whole point of what he was saying had gone and Dimbleby swiftly move on. He had already taken a lot of barracking before he got to the IF bit as well.

If the right-wingers are going to the trouble of setting Tristram Hunt up on QT it may be because they fear his potential and are trying to put Labour lefties off from picking him.
Likewise Burnham. The main drawback people have with Burnham is the Mid Staffs smear which was the entire point of it. Classic discrediting strategy to neutralise an opponent with powerful arguments.

[AngryAsWell]

Kinnock talking about John Smith on Radio 5 right now

[PorFavor]

Ben Bradshaw, on the BBC, in full mourning for Chuka Umunna's withdrawal. Phew! What a lucky escape we've had.

I've seen some murmurings that Ben Bradshaw maybe thinking of standing ...ack

The last declaration date is June 6th (or about 6th) so lots of time yet.....

He said in his interview, a bit earlier, that he would make an announcement in a couple of hours' time regarding standing for the deputy leadership.

[thatchersorphan]

https://opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ja ... own-graves" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; from a peoples assembly economist at NEF. He was on the panel at one of the peoplesquestiontimes and I was impressed by the confident way he changed the narrative away from the tory framing when answering questions.

[ohsocynical]

It isn't good he has pulled out, because he was a serious candidate and he should have had chance to shine. It may even indicate that the Blairite wing have written off 2020 already.

I still think I wouldn't have voted for him because he is the wrong demographic (London and wealthy).

However, Labour face a huge challenge, it needs a special candidate to address it and I am not seeing them.

Going to full fat Blairism at this point points, if nothing else, to poor judgement (which could be a recurring thing if these rumours have any truth in them)

No, there doesn't seem to be any outstanding candidate right now - which probably means Burnham as the "least bad" optionhoping (and this *is* important) that he can assemble a more inspiring team around him than Ed did. Given the overall quality of Labour's 2010 intake, that should be far from impossible.

Interestingly Burnham seems to have attracted the support of Harry Leslie Smith, a man who is no fool and whose judgement I respect; he is cheerleading for a Burnham/Watson combo and, while I think Watson did a lot of damage to Ed, it may have some merit - you could easily see Watson taking on the Prescott 'enforcer' role, something that was mentioned here earlier this week.

As for Tristram, I think he sunk his chances on QT last night.

I don't know that much about Tom Watson, except he impressed me with the bulldog like way he persisted with Levenson and child abuse.
For me he comes across as tough, and if he likes the limelight I can't see much wrong with that if Labour is to find a strong voice to keep them in the limelight.
He strikes me as someone who won't be afraid to take on the establishment ie: newspapers, media, and that is going to be crucial.

[thatchersorphan]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ca ... er-5700641" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Cancer sufferer wishes he was dead' after ongoing battle to claim £50-a-week sick benefit
Unfortunately he also watches benefit street and has bought into the scroungers rhetoric, so is blaming them at least as much as the govt. Really annoys me when even the sick and disabled, who know how much of a struggle getting benefits is buy into propaganda, and think they can diagnose someone else despite not having medical training & seeing their medical notes. Disability and illness is diverse and its not a competition (especially not of deserving and undeserving).

[AngryAsWell]

Just in from Labour, full details about the leader election
Soon, you’ll be able to vote for the next Leader and Deputy Leader of our party.

Below is a guide to how and when it will happen. If you have any questions not answered here, get in touch with us at the email address at the bottom and we’ll try to get back to you.

1. You have one vote to cast for your choice of Leader and another for your choice of Deputy Leader

Unlike previous leadership elections, this election will be held on a one-person-one-vote basis. There are three sets of people who can vote:
1.Labour Party members — that includes you
2.Affiliated supporters — people who’ve signed up as a Labour Party supporter through one of our affiliated organisations or unions
3.Registered supporters — people who’ve registered that they support the Labour Party by signing up online and paying a one-off minimum fee of £3
2. The nomination process will start on 15 May

Anyone that wants to be a candidate for the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Labour party needs to be nominated by 35 MPs.

MPs can nominate their preferred candidates for Leader and Deputy Leader from 9 June — you can track the progress of each candidate on our website where we’ll update the nominations at 12.30pm and 5.30pm each day. Nominations close on 15 June (Leader) and 17 June (Deputy Leader).

There will be more information to come later on how Constituency Labour Parties can make a supporting nomination.

From early June, the names and bios of any MPs putting themselves forward for nomination will be hosted on our website at http://www.labour.org.uk/leadership" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3. We will let you know the candidates for Leader on 15 June and the candidates for Deputy Leader on 17 June

We’ll send all members an email on 15 June to let you know who’s in the running to be Leader, and to give as many members as possible the chance to watch the different candidates speak, there will be a hustings in Scotland, Wales, and every region of England — we’ll email you details of your nearest hustings once the dates have been set.

Likewise we'll send all members an email on 17 June to tell you the candidates for Deputy Leader. Candidates for both positions will be on our website.

4. We must receive your votes by 12pm on Thursday 10 September for them to count

Voting ballots will be sent out on Friday 14 August. You’ll be able to vote by post or online.

5. Our next Leader and Deputy Leader will be announced on 12 September

We’ll announce the results at a Special Conference on 12 September, as well as on our website and via email. If you’re interested in attending the Special Conference, we’ll provide full details nearer the time.

Got a question that isn’t answered here?

If you can’t find an answer to your question, email us at leadership2015@labour.org.uk and we’ll try to get back to you.

Thanks,

The Labour Party

[rebeccariots2]

https://opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ja ... own-graves from a peoples assembly economist at NEF. He was on the panel at one of the peoplesquestiontimes and I was impressed by the confident way he changed the narrative away from the tory framing when answering questions.

Good article. A painful read - but pretty honest. The most depressing part is how powerful he says the Blairites were in the last 5 years and still are. Feels like they've got Labour in a stranglehold.

Seriously good leftwing martial artist needed for leader - needs to be able to deliver karate chops swiftly wherever necessary - and be on guard all the time.

[frightful_oik]

So a vote costs £3.

[Willow904]

So a vote costs £3.

I know. I'm not that impressed by that. Hopefully if they don't advertise this widely it won't be a problem, otherwise the voice of real Labour members and union members could be completely drowned out.

[AngryAsWell]

Just in from Labour, full details about the leader election

Did you get that by email AAW? I haven't had one. Wonder if I joined too late to get a vote?

Yes came in about half an hour ago - note sure what the time limit is on right to vote maybe drop them a line at the email address give at the bottom ?

[gilsey]

Interestingly Burnham seems to have attracted the support of Harry Leslie Smith, a man who is no fool and whose judgement I respect;

On reflection, I agree with Harry.

Leave aside for one moment the last election and the next one, the country needs someone to stand up for the unemployed, sick and disabled, the NHS and human rights. Burnham has to be the man for that, surely.

If the economy crashes Labour will find it easier to win in 2020, and if it doesn't they probably can't win anyway.

[tinybgoat]

I've been trying to work out whether it would have been (theoretically) possible for voting in marginals to be affected by changes to registration.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aa230076-e419 ... ab7de.html

I know there was a worry that the drop in registered voters, which would tend to be in Tories favour.
Would it have been possible for campaigners in marginals to encourage people to register & either deliberately (or possibly unintentionally) cause a higher number of likely Conservative voters to register?

[ohsocynical]

Just in from Labour, full details about the leader election

Did you get that by email AAW? I haven't had one. Wonder if I joined too late to get a vote?

Yes came in about half an hour ago - note sure what the time limit is on right to vote maybe drop them a line at the email address give at the bottom ?

Sure within the last couple of days I saw that it was being a member for at least eight weeks but not sure whether it was before the nominations were in or before the actual day the leader is announced.

[StephenDolan]

I'm slightly confused. Registered supporters. Is that anyone who has in the past donated to the Labour Party?

[tinybgoat]

Did you get that by email AAW? I haven't had one. Wonder if I joined too late to get a vote?

Yes came in about half an hour ago - note sure what the time limit is on right to vote maybe drop them a line at the email address give at the bottom ?

Sure within the last couple of days I saw that it was being a member for at least eight weeks but not sure whether it was before the nominations were in or before the actual day the leader is announced.

Sorry, that might have been me,
think it takes at least 8 weeks for membership to be fully processed, and only then can you vote.
but there may be other restrictions.

[AnatolyKasparov]

So a vote costs £3.

I know. I'm not that impressed by that. Hopefully if they don't advertise this widely it won't be a problem, otherwise the voice of real Labour members and union members could be completely drowned out.

People could join as members for just a quid to take part in the Labour contest five years ago.......

I don't think we need to worry about "entryism" or anything like that - the vast majority of those who sign up in the next few months (by whatever means) will wish the party well.

[WelshIan]

Just in from Labour, full details about the leader election

Did you get that by email AAW? I haven't had one. Wonder if I joined too late to get a vote?

The Mail article on Mary Creagh's leadership bid said that you could vote if you joined before 12th August. Not sure if we should believe the Mail, though...

[Eric_WLothian]

Need Nicola Sturgeon look quite so pleased to see David Cameron (ref photographs on the Guardian Election Blog)? I realise that it's customary for politicians not to spit in one another's faces on occasions such as these - but I have seen pictures of politicians meeting with considerably less unalloyed joy written across their faces.

There's a new whistleblower in No 10:

DAVID Cameron has outed Alex Salmond as the source of reports suggesting the SNP would press ahead with a second independence referendum against the UK Government’s will.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3774131

[SpinningHugo]

Going to full fat Blairism at this point points, if nothing else, to poor judgement (which could be a recurring thing if these rumours have any truth in them)

No, there doesn't seem to be any outstanding candidate right now - which probably means Burnham as the "least bad" option but hoping (and this *is* important) that he can assemble a more inspiring team around him than Ed did. Given the overall quality of Labour's 2010 intake, that should be far from impossible.

Interestingly Burnham seems to have attracted the support of Harry Leslie Smith, a man who is no fool and whose judgement I respect; he is cheerleading for a Burnham/Watson combo and, while I think Watson did a lot of damage to Ed, it may have some merit - you could easily see Watson taking on the Prescott 'enforcer' role, something that was mentioned here earlier this week.

As for Tristram, I think he sunk his chances on QT last night.

I want Creasy as deputy anyway, but think she would especially be a good foil for Burnham. Watson should definitely get a major role, though.

Oh God, not Burnham. A better looking Miliband (with extra baggage).

[SpinningHugo]

Eurosceptic David Davis could oppose government on human rights reform
Tory MP’s comments show growing backbench rebellion over plan that could lead to withdrawal from European court of human rights

Lets hope enough of them see common sense and decency over this dangerously undemocratic proposal, to put a stop to it.

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/may ... hts-reform" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't think the numbers are there to stop it. There are only a two or three at most.

If interested in human rights, I have some musings here


https://spinninghugo.wordpress.com/2015 ... ights-act/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Willow904]

Just in from Labour, full details about the leader election

Did you get that by email AAW? I haven't had one. Wonder if I joined too late to get a vote?

I joined on May 9th. I had an e-mail yesterday saying they were struggling with the sheer volume of new members over the last few days so people may be processed more slowly than normal.

[AnatolyKasparov]

More articulate and passionate, less able to be painted as a PPE spad wonk (he has, after all, had a "real job") and less "weird" looking.

Also, not Jewish (if you don't think that was a significant part of the anti-Ed subtext - and would have been against his brother too - you weren't looking hard enough)

But yes, his "baggage" is what I am most worried about too. Burnham needs a convincing answer to that in the next few months......

[RogerOThornhill]

Oh God, not Burnham. A better looking Miliband (with extra baggage).

Like what?

[StephenDolan]

More articulate and passionate, less able to be painted as a PPE spad wonk (he has, after all, had a "real job") and less "weird" looking.

Also, not Jewish (if you don't think that was a significant part of the anti-Ed subtext - and would have been against his brother too - you weren't looking hard enough)

But yes, his "baggage" is what I am most worried about too. Burnham needs a convincing answer to that in the next few months......

Francis. Francis. Francis.

Unfortunately vases and 1300 are deeply ingrained. Some heavy duty tweezers needed to extract those 'truths'.

[PorFavor]

Interestingly Burnham seems to have attracted the support of Harry Leslie Smith, a man who is no fool and whose judgement I respect; he is cheerleading for a Burnham/Watson combo and, while I think Watson did a lot of damage to Ed, it may have some merit - you could easily see Watson taking on the Prescott 'enforcer' role, something that was mentioned here earlier this week.

As for Tristram, I think he sunk his chances on QT last night.

I want Creasy as deputy anyway, but think she would especially be a good foil for Burnham. Watson should definitely get a major role, though.

Oh God, not Burnham. A better looking Miliband (with extra baggage).

This "looks" thing is highly subjective, though. I find Andy Burnham quite physically unattractive. Strange looking, even. If that's relevant. I know I've defended Ed Miliband on the general looks appeal front but I probably wouldn't have felt the need to do so if that hadn't been one of the main lines of attack adopted by his opponents. It won't take much for a fresh leader (whoever that may turn out to be) to be monstered or turned into a figure of ridicule in some way or another.

[LadyCentauria]

'lo all Been thinking about the PIP case that started at the High Court yesterday and there was something troubling me about what the new Minister for Disabled People (Justin Tomlinson) was quoted as saying, in yesterday's press:

Mr Tomlinson said: "Figures released on 12 March reflect the significant progress made over the past year and show that claims are now being processed at five times the rate they were in January 2014.
"In addition 21% of claimants have been awarded the highest rate, compared to 16% under DLA, demonstrating that the benefit is being targeted at those who need it most."

(my bold)
http://www.careappointments.co.uk/care- ... high-court

Two things trouble me about that statement, in particular the part I've highlighted in bold. Firstly, in terms of the awards available in PIP as compared to DLA: DLA offered three tiers of award for care needs whereas PIP offers only two; and those who would, previously, have received a Low Rate Care award under DLA will be unlikely to meet the higher threshold now required for the lower care rate of PIP. I can't calculate exactly the effect that would have on the percentage of people receiving the benefits without delving much further into the figures published by the DWP or ONS but, clearly, fewer people are intended to qualify for an award.

Secondly, it was an avowed intent of the DWP, in framing the new benefit, to reduce the caseload by 20% (@Ephe please correct me if I'm wrong!). Well, here I can do a sum: if only 80 people per hundred are receiving the higher rate of PIP, versus 100 per hundred receiving DLA, surely that '21% of claimants' under PIP is only equal to 16.8% of what would have been under DLA. So, it's barely any increase at all of people receiving the higher rate. I know that I'm hearing more people deciding not to make a claim in the first place, or thinking there'll be no point in going through with the transfer-reassessment when the time comes for it, because they do not think they'll qualify for PIP whereas they thought they might (or knew they did) qualify for DLA, and this alone is reducing the potential caseload.

Now, I'm far from the world's greatest mathematician or statistician but it seems clear to me that if you reduce the cohort (and the strata) the new percentages will look higher. Anyone can correct me, please, if I'm hopelessly muddled about this – but it's been bugging me so I had to take a tilt at it!

[PorFavor]

Former News of the World editor Andy Coulson has gone on trial in Scotland accused of perjury.

The trial has been adjourned until Tuesday of next week. (BBC News website)

[PorFavor]

So Nigel Farage, who isn't at all interested in the cult of (his) personality, and who has not himself been able to win a UK parliamentary seat after 7 attempts, is happy to potentially lose the one Ukip MP that the party does have.

[PorFavor]

Staying with Ukip for a moment, the plot doesn’t just thicken... it becomes positively clotted. A report in the Spectator claims Ukip leader Nigel Farage never wrote a letter to the party’s chairman tendering his resignation.

Ukip sources have told the magazine that Farage didn’t submit a formal resignation to avoid a leadership contest, despite telling the media he would write to the party resigning.

Party rules dictate that a leadership contest must be called if a written resignation is received - regardless of whether the party accepts or rejects the decision.

Just what is going on? (Guardian Politics Blog, 16.10)

[citizenJA]

Good morfternoon.

@rebeccariots

Thanks for the link to the opinion polling article. I'd just finished reading this one,

Why did the election pollsters get it so wrong? (Guardian)

written by Robert Booth.

I know his sister - Poll Booth. Boo- boom!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... t-so-wrong

"It is the pollster’s nightmare."

No, it's the nightmare of non-Tories.
A big group, non-Tories.

Good late afternoon, early evening, friends.

[LadyCentauria]

On another thing -

This work we're doing with plans for the Bronllys Hospital estate - has anyone here got any experience of Community Interest Companies? If so, I'd be grateful for any advice or links to same.
We are thinking of setting up a CIC, but are a bit concerned about - a) how to do it properly; b) how to ensure any funds we raise are safe; c) what the best CIC structure should be; and d) whether it is better to register as a charity rather than a CIC.

The idea is to buy or lease the estate and build a well-being park - some of the existing buildings could be used for elderly care, physio, and convalescence as they are now; we want to raise money to build affordable homes for purchase by leasehold and for rent; we plan to have various green things like a small solar park, beekeeping, permaculture, depending on planning from the National Parks (the site is in the Brecon Beacons NP); possibly hostels or supervised places for people recovering from acute mental illness/addictions; a communal facility where rooms could be rented out to people who practice alternative medicine or for therapies; and a Maggie centre for people with cancer.

We've got quite a few people involved now, including a few experts on architecture and the green stuff; we are all volunteers at the moment but that might have to change in time if the project gets the support of the Welsh government. We're already in talks with the AMs dealing with health, but obviously we're a long way from actually doing anything yet.

We think we need a formal CIC or charity to compete with the developers who will be after this very beautiful place - bits of it have been sold off already. We want to keep the estate for the community, with people living there plus keeping a health and well-being element to use the site for its' original intended purpose. We have a good moral case here - but we know we have to be as hard-nosed as the people we'll be competing with, so all/any advice gratefully received.

We're on Facebook - Bronllys Park - Wellbeing Centre

I can't think of anyone involved in CICs off the top of my head but can offer a few links, which you might have already seen, but:
http://www.companylawclub.co.uk/topics/ ... _cic.shtml,
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2009 ... st-company,
http://shepherdscothealinggarden.ning.c ... y-interest – clearly lays out advantages/disadvantages re charity vs. CIC,
http://www.diycommitteeguide.org/resour ... -companies - good links to advice sheets and more, and finally,
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisat ... -companies;
that last being the the relevant department's own home-page (or 'portal' :shudder: ...)
I'll wrack my memory to see if any of the local projects I know about have gone through the process or faced the decision of charity/CIC and get back to you. Power to your elbow, @Ephe

[LadyCentauria]

http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/on_the ... five_years

Austerity predictions.

I suppose it all comes down to whether Cameron really believes in the growth-boosting virtues of austerity, or whether austerity was just an excuse to roll back the state a bit and achieve some Tory ideological imperatives.

I stand firmly in the latter view, which will probably surprise no-one here! Excellent article. Thanks @Stephen.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Paxo, in what's presumably a taste of the future where he rants about lots of stuff he doesn't understand, untramelled by having to appear neutral.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4ea9052-f989 ... ab7de.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's not surprising he's against it, but it's just such a dreadful article. Basically a long man in the pub rant. Sign of how good it is- he doesn't even get the HS2 budget right.

[PorFavor]

Paxo, in what's presumably a taste of the future where he rants about lots of stuff he doesn't understand, untramelled by having to appear neutral.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4ea9052-f989 ... ab7de.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's not surprising he's against it, but it's just such a dreadful article. Basically a long man in the pub rant. Sign of how good it is- he doesn't even get the HS2 budget right.

Sorry - I tried to read the article but I'm not a subscriber. Is it possible for you to give a few salient quotes, please?

[ephemerid]

Lady C - the government released stats in March which cover the period to January 2015.

There's a lot of guff and figures for "clearances" which are claims that get withdrawn at the new claim stage or the migrating from DLA stage - this is included in a vain attempt to make it look as though they are dealing with the massive backlog.

Claims for PIP with no existing DLA award -
Since April 2013, there have been 692,400 new claims and 102,400 reassessments.
New claims under Special Rules for Terminally Ill People - 99% get a PIP award.
New claims not under Special Rules - 51% get a PIP award.
Reassessments - these are being done for PIP more often - 77% get a new award or keep their PIP award.

Claims for PIP with an existing DLA award -
There have only been 54,000 of these - this is 16% of the total PIP caseload.
The figures do not tell you how many people on Lower Rate Care Component lost their awards.
They only say what percentages got higher awards.
It says that 73% got Enhanced Rate but doesn't specify if that's one or both components.
It says that 36% were already receiving the Higher DLA awards for both components.
So we don't know how many DLA cases lost one of their higher rates - this is a bit cheeky because they must know what that figure is.
Many people were concerned that they's lose HR mobility because of the new descriptors, that figure would be useful to know.

Of the 692,400 PIP new claim registration since April 2013, 607,700 cases have been cleared; leaving about 80,000 people waiting.
The waiting times for a decision have been cut by half.
Sounds good - but the wait from registering the claim to the award decision is on average 20 weeks.

Half of those who make a new claim do not get a PIP award at the first attempt. (This was the case with DLA)
I can't find any information for people who try again having been turned down.

Tomlinson is wrong - claims are being processed at twice the rate, not five times; DLA higher rates were 36% of claims not 16%.
He has read the headline "key messages" and misinterpreted them.

[LadyCentauria]

Until now Dan Jarvis has made clear he will not reconsider his decision not to stand. Has that, just maybe, changed now?

Who knows? But as I said earlier - there's now room for one more.

Technically, there's room for as many as would like to put themselves forward. MPs can't make formal nominations for any of the candidates until June 9th and that stage of the contest doesn't close until June 15th for the leadership and June 17th for the deputy-leadership. Those are the points at which there could only be a maximum of six candidates left in the race. Of course, should ten people put themselves forward then at least four of them would be disappointed once nominations close. Bearing that in mind, I wouldn't blame anyone for holding back on their declaration until they're fairly certain they could get enough supporters amongst other MPs.

And I'm a bit disappointed that CU has withdrawn from the race, purely because there does need to be as wide a range of candidates as possible. I'm still hoping we'll hear a declaration from Angela Eagle and, perhaps, someone even newer to The House. Still want to see and hear more of Hunty, 'though, as I'm keeping as open mind as I can about all who want to come forward.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Can't see this EHCR stuff can happen. It's a question of how much time and money is wasted before it's dropped.

[ohsocynical]

All you Northerners, I'd print this off and frame it....

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/commentisfree

[PorFavor]

Until now Dan Jarvis has made clear he will not reconsider his decision not to stand. Has that, just maybe, changed now?

Who knows? But as I said earlier - there's now room for one more.

Technically, there's room for as many as would like to put themselves forward. MPs can't make formal nominations for any of the candidates until June 9th and that stage of the contest doesn't close until June 15th for the leadership and June 17th for the deputy-leadership. Those are the points at which there could only be a maximum of six candidates left in the race. Of course, should ten people put themselves forward then at least four of them would be disappointed once nominations close. Bearing that in mind, I wouldn't blame anyone for holding back on their declaration until they're fairly certain they could get enough supporters amongst other MPs.

And I'm a bit disappointed that CU has withdrawn from the race, purely because there does need to be as wide a range of candidates as possible. I'm still hoping we'll hear a declaration from Angela Eagle and, perhaps, someone even newer to The House. Still want to see and hear more of Hunty, 'though, as I'm keeping as open mind as I can about all who want to come forward.

Hello.

Yes - I really meant that psychologically there is room for one more, or the field would have started to look very unrealistic and too crowded. I believe 6 is about the realistic ceiling, though, or the numbers don't work out and it skews the pitch.

I'm getting a bit tired of hearing (on the news) people saying that Chuka Umunna is young, needs time to grow, and suggesting that his youth is a lot to do with his inability to cope with the pressures. He's 36 - not 19, for God's sake!
I hope that if Tristram Hunt throws his hat into the ring (not that I'm an advocate) he doesn't have a fit of the vapours. After all, he's only 40.

My take is that Chuka Umunna was worried that he'd mis-timed his bid and decided he might be better served to wait until next time or, at best, it was all a bit too much like hard work. He strikes me as a bit of a lightweight.



Edited

Tidy up

[citizenJA]

'lo all Been thinking about the PIP case that started at the High Court yesterday and there was something troubling me about what the new Minister for Disabled People (Justin Tomlinson) was quoted as saying, in yesterday's press:

Mr Tomlinson said: "Figures released on 12 March reflect the significant progress made over the past year and show that claims are now being processed at five times the rate they were in January 2014.
"In addition 21% of claimants have been awarded the highest rate, compared to 16% under DLA, demonstrating that the benefit is being targeted at those who need it most."

(my bold)
http://www.careappointments.co.uk/care- ... high-court

Two things trouble me about that statement, in particular the part I've highlighted in bold. Firstly, in terms of the awards available in PIP as compared to DLA: DLA offered three tiers of award for care needs whereas PIP offers only two; and those who would, previously, have received a Low Rate Care award under DLA will be unlikely to meet the higher threshold now required for the lower care rate of PIP. I can't calculate exactly the effect that would have on the percentage of people receiving the benefits without delving much further into the figures published by the DWP or ONS but, clearly, fewer people are intended to qualify for an award.

Secondly, it was an avowed intent of the DWP, in framing the new benefit, to reduce the caseload by 20% (@Ephe please correct me if I'm wrong!). Well, here I can do a sum: if only 80 people per hundred are receiving the higher rate of PIP, versus 100 per hundred receiving DLA, surely that '21% of claimants' under PIP is only equal to 16.8% of what would have been under DLA. So, it's barely any increase at all of people receiving the higher rate. I know that I'm hearing more people deciding not to make a claim in the first place, or thinking there'll be no point in going through with the transfer-reassessment when the time comes for it, because they do not think they'll qualify for PIP whereas they thought they might (or knew they did) qualify for DLA, and this alone is reducing the potential caseload.

Now, I'm far from the world's greatest mathematician or statistician but it seems clear to me that if you reduce the cohort (and the strata) the new percentages will look higher. Anyone can correct me, please, if I'm hopelessly muddled about this – but it's been bugging me so I had to take a tilt at it!

Why are the DWP are withdrawing support from people who need it? Getting sick, having a disability or having care obligations of family & friends isn't a choice made for ourselves or our loved ones. Withdrawing social security provision previously provided for sick or disabled people & carers is a choice Tory government are making. Their deliberate withdrawal of support services are policies with have known consequences. People needing assistance but not getting it will live in physical pain & they won't live long - those are two obvious consequences, there are others. People will live painful, shorter lives because current, Tory government have & continue to withdraw social security entitlements. Withdrawing social security entitlements won't alter the fact people need continue to need help.

Social security provision is in place for people who became sick making employment impossible during their illness & recuperation. Some people with disabilities require adaptive assistance in order for them to pursue their career in the workplace. Others needing social security are the primary carers of family members. Caring for others is a job preventing a person from entering another workplace without alternative care being available.

It's not necessary to withdraw social security provision from people in this country for any reasonable purpose. The resources are available to continue supporting people who need help. I know you all know this information. I'm writing this to clarify my own observations & to communicate my feelings of dread, confusion & anger.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Paxo, in what's presumably a taste of the future where he rants about lots of stuff he doesn't understand, untramelled by having to appear neutral.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4ea9052-f989 ... ab7de.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's not surprising he's against it, but it's just such a dreadful article. Basically a long man in the pub rant. Sign of how good it is- he doesn't even get the HS2 budget right.

Sorry - I tried to read the article but I'm not a subscriber. Is it possible for you to give a few salient quotes, please?

Worth subscribing free. You get a certain number of articles every months.

This is a good indication of it.

It will not be £50bn of course, because that is just the estimate, and cost controls on public spending projects such as this are laughable.

Overlook the fact that the Welsh Assembly building came in 300 per cent above budget and the Scottish parliament almost ten times more expensive than the original estimate. The first high speed rail link, from London to the Kent coast, cost one-third more than its initially projected cost, the channel tunnel almost twice as much as expected, and for heaven’s sake don’t mention the ill-fated National Health Service IT project.

It isn't £50bn- it's £36bn, including trains. You need new trains on any line.

HS1 didn't go a third over budget (whatever the "initial cost" is, I don't know).

And the NAO last time they looked at the NHS IT project found a net benefit, though with some uncertainty surrounding it.

Also complete non-sequiturs like this

It is unarguable that Britain has suffered a terrible sedimentation of power and wealth, to the benefit of London and the detriment of points north. Chancellor George Osborne (a Cheshire MP) repeatedly protests his faith in a “northern powerhouse” stretching across the Pennines. Yet to get from Leeds to Manchester on HS2 you would have to travel south to Birmingham and then north again on the other side of the country.

And non-arguments like this

The story goes that Mr Osborne was seized with enthusiasm for the idea when he went to China and travelled on a high-speed train.
His thought — “Why haven’t we got one of these?” — crossed my own mind briefly when I travelled on a very fast train from Beijing to Tianjin.

I'd have thought he'd been on in Europe before. They've been in France for nearly 30 years.

And moaning about "back of an envelope" calculations, because he can't be bothered to look them up.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Tomlinson is wrong - claims are being processed at twice the rate, not five times; DLA higher rates were 36% of claims not 16%.
He has read the headline "key messages" and misinterpreted them.

Drawn to this last bit. Sounds like there's a complaint to Dilnot in that.

Appreciate your eagle eye.

[ohsocynical]

Robert MacDonald ‏@RFMacDonald 9 mins9 minutes ago

'Andy Burnham has deep roots in the N of the country, in the WC but (BUT!) at the same time he's deeply intelligent'