I was going too post this on the Esther Mcvey thread,but it appears too have vanished into the Bermuda triangle,https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45870553whatever your thoughts on this policy,it has been a shambles in the implementation,i wonder if this will be quietly dropped before the next General Election,like the idea of the elderly selling their property to pay for Social Care in their twilight years.

It's already in Burnley causing havoc.

Makes no sense to me to roll it out when they haven't ironed out what I'll politely term 'teething issues' in the trial areas.

Falcon wrote:Makes no sense to me to roll it out when they haven't ironed out what I'll politely term 'teething issues' in the trial areas.

Ha, you're asking a lot from any British government to iron out teething issues with their ideas.

Most of them couldn't find their arse with flashlight and mirror

I bet the spongers who have kid after kid with different partners are delighted anything that stops them having to fund their way of life is delayed. Bugs me why the tax payer has to fork out.

Bound to be issues with something so large and complex.

Wouldn’t happen under a Corbyn led labour government.....


They’d just increase everything for everyone, then leave us facing years of austerity to play catch up.

Needed a massive kick up the arse. We throw away millions on plenty who either don’t need it or deserve it, and others who do are left destitute.

A wonderful idea, managed by imbeciles for generations.

How can anyone with any sense (or compassion) see this shambles as anything other than a bad thing? Even McVey admits many will lose loads of money and the fact is it will be the people who are working who, it seems, will lose most. So this is the Tory idea of making work work. There are instances even now, highlighted on TV last night, of people living with the threat of losing their homes and/or having the bailffs call because they cannot pay bills due to this whole badly thought out fiasco, overseen by a woman who comes accross as possibly the most uncaring and arrogant individual I have seen in a long time.

Let's hope the Labout party get their act together because the thought of this lot getting another go at governing after the next election fills me with dread. I've always hated the Tories but this shower have taken arrogance and stupidity to a whole new level.

The people who have put this country in a mess are the ones who have been rerwarded time and again by this lot whilst the ordinary man and woman on the street is paying for it.....again. I genuinely cannot understand why there is such a thing as the working class Tory. Ordinary people with ordinary jobs and wages are not the ones who create financial problems for a country, they don't have that power and influence, but they are always the ones made to pay for the mistakes and/or greed of the wealthy and powerful. And so many people fall for the lies every time.

Being on benefits shouldn't pay but it also shouldn't put people in poverty. I fully believe that any working family should take home more than a non working family, but again I find it hard to get behind any proposal that seems to purposely place families in poverty. That's not how it should be, not at all. Who knows what the answer will be, but I don't think it's universal credit!

What baffles me and my simple mind is that a government can envisage the concept of a universal credit but not the concept of a universal tax to pay for it. If the rate of tax was the same for all cash earning entities along with a sensible universal threshold then in my view that would constitute a universal benefit.

The concept behind Universal Credit is actually very sound, it’s the decisions taken on how it should be implemented that have caused the problems and have left McVey with someone else’s mess to clear up.

houseboy wrote:How can anyone with any sense (or compassion) see this shambles as anything other than a bad thing? Even McVey admits many will lose loads of money and the fact is it will be the people who are working who, it seems, will lose most. So this is the Tory idea of making work work. There are instances even now, highlighted on TV last night, of people living with the threat of losing their homes and/or having the bailffs call because they cannot pay bills due to this whole badly thought out fiasco, overseen by a woman who comes accross as possibly the most uncaring and arrogant individual I have seen in a long time.

Let's hope the Labout party get their act together because the thought of this lot getting another go at governing after the next election fills me with dread. I've always hated the Tories but this shower have taken arrogance and stupidity to a whole new level.

The people who have put this country in a mess are the ones who have been rerwarded time and again by this lot whilst the ordinary man and woman on the street is paying for it.....again. I genuinely cannot understand why there is such a thing as the working class Tory. Ordinary people with ordinary jobs and wages are not the ones who create financial problems for a country, they don't have that power and influence, but they are always the ones made to pay for the mistakes and/or greed of the wealthy and powerful. And so many people fall for the lies every time.

I'm impressed how you're sticking the blame for it all the Tories.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I'm impressed how you're sticking the blame for it all the Tories.

The Tories have been in power for 8 years, who else would you blame? And please let's not have the old 'we're stuck with Labour's mess' nonesense, if that was ever true it certainly isn't after 8 years. No government can blame anyone else after 8 years, so yes, I'm blaming the Tories.

Who exactly has introduced Universal Credit?
Who has reduced corporation tax when it was already among the lowest in the world (thus making a mockery of the need for austerity)?
Who has spent the last 8 years punishing the less well off in society with austerity, which harms the well off not one jot?
Who has overseen the closure of police stations on an unprecedented basis?
Who has done absolutely nothing about tax loopholes and legal (and illegal) tax 'avoidance' by those individuals and companies who can well afford to pay what they owe?

I could go on and on but you get the idea. The current government (I use the term loosely) cannot blame anyone else for what is happening here, they can't even blame Brexit because it hasn't even happened yet.

8 years of misery and austerity inflicted on those who were blameless for any of the alleged problems we had or have whilst those who cause these things are laughing all the way to their (offshore) bank.

You're saying we can't blame anyone else but you're basically ignoring what's gone on before hand.

Neither party is effective at dealing with the benefits system properly, one throws money at it hoping it fixes it, the other chops it all back thinking it will sort it.

Same with the NHS.

You can carry on blaming one party, you're clearly entrenched with that view, but plenty of people will think you're wrong and they'd be right.

Years of watching people proper take the Mick out of the benefits system from when I was a kid, to now shows me that it's a mess, needs fixing and neither party have a clue

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:You're saying we can't blame anyone else but you're basically ignoring what's gone on before hand.

Neither party is effective at dealing with the benefits system properly, one throws money at it hoping it fixes it, the other chops it all back thinking it will sort it.

Same with the NHS.

You can carry on blaming one party, you're clearly entrenched with that view, but plenty of people will think you're wrong and they'd be right.

Years of watching people proper take the Mick out of the benefits system from when I was a kid, to now shows me that it's a mess, needs fixing and neither party have a clue

OK Sid so if plenty of people would be right about him being wrong to blame the Tories then the logical answer is that it's labours fault, right?

ClaretAndJew wrote:OK Sid so if plenty of people would be right about him being wrong to blame the Tories then the logical answer is that it's labours fault, right?

Sidney is saying blame both isn't he

Blame both, neither party actually fix the system, they just hope it doesn't get worse most of the time.
They'll put someone in charge who usually doesn't have the first clue about the system in the first place.

Just like the NHS.

I just see people who're so entrenched in their views about one party or the other that they're blinded to what goes on.

Can anyone honestly deny that virtually everything this government do is a complete shambles

Even some staunch Tory voters have criticized this government who couldn't organise a p1ss up in a brewery

taio wrote:Sidney is saying blame both isn't he

Doesn’t he always?

Criticise the Tories for anything and sooner or later Sidney will be along to say “but what about Labour?”

Why the sympathy for the callous McVey having to implement this shambles. She was voted out of Parliament and decided to come back, like May with Brexit, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Neither of them were forced into their positions, unlike thousands of people who find themselves having to claim benefits, probably not many bankers amongst them.

Pimlico_Claret wrote:Why the sympathy for the callous McVey having to implement this shambles. She was voted out of Parliament and decided to come back, like May with Brexit, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Neither of them were forced into their positions, unlike thousands of people who find themselves having to claim benefits, probably not many bankers amongst them.

No sympathy from me! I live in her former constituency and am happy to take part of the credit for voting her out (genius move by Corbyn by the way to appoint the woman who defeated her in the election as her shadow). She isn’t however to blame for this particular shambles.

martin_p wrote:No sympathy from me! I live in her former constituency and am happy to take part of the credit for voting her out (genius move by Corbyn by the way to appoint the woman who defeated her in the election as her shadow). She isn’t however to blame for this particular shambles.

Agree obviously that she isn't to blame, but she has put herself forward as the face of defending it, and a pretty poor job she's doing at that.
She had plenty of notice from Frank Field about the women in Birkenhead being forced into sex work due to the failings of UC, but chose to simply say other jobs are available.
She has absolutely zero empathy with the least fortunate in society and as such makes an excellent Tory minister.

My partner and myself both self employed are now in this Universal Credit farce. Are we getting less than Tax Credits yes but that isn't the issue. Here is some of our experiences.
1. The extra admin involved in the monthly reporting is just nothing but a pain to both us and our accountants
2. To date we have not had a matching payment despite or monthly incomes remaining steady. On a couple of occasions we have had payments of zero due to double reporting of salaries to HMRC. Makjng it almost impossible to budget for bills.
3. As a this is linked to Council Tax we have had monthly council tax bills ranging from £80 a month to £220 a month. (Currently getting approx new bills a month) Again making monthly budgeting difficult.
4. We have been on since April. Due to admin errors on there part we currently stand at around £2000 in overpayments with no information about how to repay.
5. Constant delays in requests for information following up queries questions etc etc.

Does this system work. From us it's a a resounding NO

Pimlico_Claret wrote:Agree obviously that she isn't to blame, but she has put herself forward as the face of defending it, and a pretty poor job she's doing at that.
She had plenty of notice from Frank Field about the women in Birkenhead being forced into sex work due to the failings of UC, but chose to simply say other jobs are available.
She has absolutely zero empathy with the least fortunate in society and as such makes an excellent Tory minister.

Can’t disagree with that.

d1sc0 wrote:My partner and myself both self employed are now in this Universal Credit farce. Are we getting less than Tax Credits yes but that isn't the issue. Here is some of our experiences.
1. The extra admin involved in the monthly reporting is just nothing but a pain to both us and our accountants
2. To date we have not had a matching payment despite or monthly incomes remaining steady. On a couple of occasions we have had payments of zero due to double reporting of salaries to HMRC. Makjng it almost impossible to budget for bills.
3. As a this is linked to Council Tax we have had monthly council tax bills ranging from £80 a month to £220 a month. (Currently getting approx new bills a month) Again making monthly budgeting difficult.
4. We have been on since April. Due to admin errors on there part we currently stand at around £2000 in overpayments with no information about how to repay.
5. Constant delays in requests for information following up queries questions etc etc.

Does this system work. From us it's a a resounding NO

Real peoples unfortunate experience, hard for even the most extreme Tory lovers on here to defend.
Hope you get things sorted out soon.

Anyone who has had to deal with this shambles, or attempt to help people suffering from its roll out will tell you how bad it has been, including the poor staff at the sharp end, such as job centres.

How out of touch would you be to expect people on the bread line to cope without payments for 6 weeks, then introduce an advance payment with a difficult to deal with repayment period?

It is not a bad idea in theory, from the most evil looking Tory but the implementation has been terrible. This area chosen amongst others to take the early pain.

Isn't the prime objective of all this to make people claim less and earn more themselves?

basil6345789 wrote:Isn't the prime objective of all this to make people claim less and earn more themselves?

Ultimately, but not to force them to commit suicide in the short term. Bankrolling the corrupt financial institutions after the crash wasn't delayed, in fact it was ushered in immediately with no debate.

basil6345789 wrote:Isn't the prime objective of all this to make people claim less and earn more themselves?

Yes and in theory that makes sense,however if people are on short-term contracts,irregular hours and often low pay,or in the case of a poster above,are self-employed,their finances are harder to manage,many people in receipt of these payments are working (not benefit scroungers),and due too wages not keeping pace with the cost of living are finding themselves having to make hard choices,unlike the sheltered elite in Westminster who can put everything on expenses,the rest of us have too get by as best we can,BTW i don't claim any benefits so have no vested interest but this has been shambolic-ally handled from the start.

According to Theresa May austerity is over,let's see what the upcoming budget brings,https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45863582

The IFS seem to think tax rises are unavoidable if the books are to be balanced as Philip Hammond wishes,which is probably why the chancellor is being coy about his future spending plans.

tiger76 wrote:Yes and in theory that makes sense,however if people are on short-term contracts,irregular hours and often low pay,or in the case of a poster above,are self-employed,their finances are harder to manage,many people in receipt of these payments are working (not benefit scroungers)

To be fair the benefit was designed to deal with the very issue. The current system doesn’t incentivise working more as you lose your JSA and have to claim tax credits once you work a certain number of hours. That would mean a lot of hassle and a break in the benefit you were receiving. Universal Credit is supposed to react to increased earnings by reducing your benefit, but by an amount less than the increase in your earnings. In theory it means the more you work the more money you have. Stories such as the one above show that it’s not working as it should.

I think we all focus on the benefit cheats/dossers because I assume we are all working class on here and we all know someone who is a professional Jeremy Kyle watcher, but we don’t know someone who has an expensive accountant who specialises in tax avoidance

It’s frustrating but let’s not forget the money they get for doing nothing is a drop in the ocean compared to tax money that is being avoided both legally and illegally.

Let’s start looking up for reasons we are in the **** financially, not down

We all focus on those people because that’s the way the media portray the benefits system.

It is easier to look down, when that is where we are directed to

Loyalclaret wrote:We all focus on those people because that’s the way the media portray the benefits system.

It is easier to look down, when that is where we are directed to

Very true. And it doesn’t help that those in charge of the media are also probably involved in tax avoidance

Old people and children are clearly the real problems

I don't get how people think you can live on £72 a week?

The ones with Plasma screens etc must be selling class As on the side.

Pimlico_Claret wrote:Real peoples unfortunate experience, hard for even the most extreme Tory lovers on here to defend.
Hope you get things sorted out soon.

Thanks Pimlico. Like I said it's not the amount of money that's the issue. We both work hard and don't expect anyone to keep us. We are both successful intelligent hard working individuals and we have found it almost impossible at times.

Anyone with any kind of illness or difficulty in either aental or physical capacity. The elderly etc I really do feel for them.

aggi wrote:Old people and children are clearly the real problems

This is an inconvenient truth for those determined to focus on the 'bone idle'. The fact is the biggest proportion by far of the overall benefit spend goes to those who work and those who are too old or disabled to work. Sorting out the 'huge problem' of 'scroungers' would barely make a pin prick of a difference on benefit expenditure.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:You're saying we can't blame anyone else but you're basically ignoring what's gone on before hand.

Neither party is effective at dealing with the benefits system properly, one throws money at it hoping it fixes it, the other chops it all back thinking it will sort it.

Same with the NHS.

You can carry on blaming one party, you're clearly entrenched with that view, but plenty of people will think you're wrong and they'd be right.

Years of watching people proper take the Mick out of the benefits system from when I was a kid, to now shows me that it's a mess, needs fixing and neither party have a clue

Tax avoidance in whatever form it takes costs this country more, far more, than the social security bill but all we ever here from the Tories and their media is 'we must stop the scroungers'. The real scroungers are those with vast amounts of money and clever accountants who help them avoid paying what they could well afford to pay whilst they sit and watch the rest of us put up with declining services and policing.

Whatever needs doing in this country I would make it a priority to clamp down hard on these people and make laws making it virtually impossible to dodge paying tax.

bfcjg wrote:I bet the spongers who have kid after kid with different partners are delighted anything that stops them having to fund their way of life is delayed. Bugs me why the tax payer has to fork out.

..and the loudest response in the room is when,
Timothy Winters roars "Amen!"

Back when the campaign against the vulnerable and the disabled was ramping up, and the government was preparing the groundwork for cutting spending on them - as though the national finances depended on it - their own figures showed that benefit fraud accounted for about one percent of the total paid out in benefits, and in fact the amount paid out erroneously by the system was double that. It's probably the case that the money the government has spent on combating benefit fraud has also exceeded what they estimated the fraud to be, and most certainly dwarfed any savings realised by their efforts. During this time the headcount at HMRC was reduced, and in order to settle cases HMRC resorted to sweetheart deals with big companies, writing off billions off their tax bills. It's obvious that austerity was never about the national finances, but an attack on the social fabric of the country.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:You're saying we can't blame anyone else but you're basically ignoring what's gone on before hand.

Neither party is effective at dealing with the benefits system properly, one throws money at it hoping it fixes it, the other chops it all back thinking it will sort it.

Same with the NHS.

You can carry on blaming one party, you're clearly entrenched with that view, but plenty of people will think you're wrong and they'd be right.

Years of watching people proper take the Mick out of the benefits system from when I was a kid, to now shows me that it's a mess, needs fixing and neither party have a clue

Have you ever looked into how much money is lost in tax evasion, that Tories actively encourage?

that pie chart is interesting in that having lived in the USA system for 12 years that disability chunk simply wouldn't be that material. I cite my own family as an example. My sister and brother-in-law, both now deceased through smoking-related causes, were each entitled to a car due to their "disability." A frikkin car - each! At the same time they were self-employed, and through their disability the staff ran the business (selling and installing cheap carpets), meanwhile the tax payer is paying for their cars.

People I tell this story to in the US are in utter disbelief. Having lived in Scandinavia and Austria I'm a proponent of social economics and the taxation that comes with that to the greater good, but what those countries show is that it needs to run very efficiently otherwise society can quickly lose faith in the system that is supposed to be mutually supportive. And I would cite free cars as an example of perhaps going too far....

NRC:

They wouldn't have been given a free car!
They may have chosen to give up the mobility component of their DLA or PIP
in order to have a motability car for around £74 per week, or they could have chosen to keep
that £74 per week for themselves and pay for taxis. It's up to them what they do with the money.
However, describing it to everyone as a 'free car', and spreading hysteria about it is bordering on a 'hate crime'.

Carpet business? Are you saying that all disabled people cannot/shouldn't be allowed to work?

I'm not going to argue what I don't know enough about, but wouldn't that weekly allowance enable them to lease a car, which they did, which didn't cost them anything? Having something that doesn't cost you anything is free in my book.

As for them working, they "worked" for themselves, so in essence they did the books for a business that ran itself, but my point is their common disability came about through smoking themselves into it, and you lot are left with stumping up their mobility allowance. I think disability is one thing and self-inflicted disability quite another, and not one anyone over this side of the pond would get away with....

NRC
Perhaps best explained by leasing. They have leased the car at £74 per week, is that easier for the Americans to understand? But please don't tell them it's free. Talking of Americans, I've had my brother in law over recently and we discuss differences between our two countries.
Land of the 'brave and free', as long as you aren't black, I often tell him.
He has saved up all his operations until he was 65 so that he could afford them. He has just bought himself a pair of hearing aids for $7,000.
I suppose you could say they are free over here, but we pay a lot higher rates of tax and National Insurance, so are NHS hearing aids free?
Same for smoking, 20 cigs cost at least £8, £5 of which is tax. So 50 years at £5 per day is £91,000. Do you honestly begrudge your smoking friends/relatives £74 per week for the last few years of their lives?
I bet smokers in the US don't pay that much tax, do they?

Nrc. The free car for disability is far from it.

As pointed out you have the choice of a benefit being paid to you or put towards a vehicle. You have the choice to contribute upto say 5k for a top end car but you have to give the car up after 3 years and you lose whatever you paid. You have to change the car every 3 years and the old one is sold 2nd hand.

A scheme to help the car industy more than disabled people in my eyes.

It's a slippery slope if you're going to deny the 'self-inflicted disabled' state support. Where do you draw the line? Should they be denied treatment on the NHS? What counts as 'self-inflicted'? If I have an accident on the motorway going at 90mph and end up n a wheelchair is that self-inflicted because I was going too fast?

Any benefit should be means tested. There are disabled millionaires who are entitled to a car. It doesn’t make sense.

Everyone is entitled to 80 quid a month for there first child and 20 quid a month for any other children. Why? Me and my wife are both nurses and we earn a modest salary but we really don’t need the 100 quid a month we get for our two children. I’m pretty sure a millionaire doesn’t either. We just stick it in a savings account for them.

My uncle is a millionaire and is intitled to winter fuel allowance, although he doesn’t claim it. It doesn’t make sense, all benefits should be means tested.

Free bus passes to pensioners, why? If your pension is 30k a year why do you get a free bus pass when you can afford to buy one.

Because it costs more to do the means testing than it would save.

Inchy wrote:Any benefit should be means tested. There are disabled millionaires who are entitled to a car. It doesn’t make sense.

Everyone is entitled to 80 quid a month for there first child and 20 quid a month for any other children. Why? Me and my wife are both nurses and we earn a modest salary but we really don’t need the 100 quid a month we get for our two children. I’m pretty sure a millionaire doesn’t either. We just stick it in a savings account for them.

My uncle is a millionaire and is intitled to winter fuel allowance, although he doesn’t claim it. It doesn’t make sense, all benefits should be means tested.

Free bus passes to pensioners, why? If your pension is 30k a year why do you get a free bus pass when you can afford to buy one.

Child Benefit has sort of been means tested for a number of years now. If either parent is in the 40% tax bracket (i.e. earns more than 40 odd thousand) the child benefit starts to raper away to nothing (at about 60k a year I think).

I agree on the others, but it would cost an awful lot of money to means test.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I'm impressed how you're sticking the blame for it all the Tories.

Sid why have you changed your name?