20 minutes ago, Rooney said:

He's followed the advice of the audit and the auditor has now changed her mind and suggested we do need one. I'd also suggest politically there is some motivation too.

Indeed. I'm happy with the government's process here, rather than kneejerking into inquiries (which all too often can be exercises in kicking the can down the road) based on public and media demand, waiting for the audit recommendations. I hope it helps bring the process closer to justice.

If the new enquiry finds nothing new, I hope the Daily Mail will offer to pay for it.

11 minutes ago, Suedehead2 said:

If the new enquiry finds nothing new, I hope the Daily Mail will offer to pay for it.

Pretty much every victim has called for a national inquiry for sometime. Council/regional led inquiry’s cannot compel people to give evidence which renders them pointless. Oldham council which originally called for a national inquiry on the basis the issue was too big and expensive for them to deal with. It’s run fully by Labour too. The daily mail comment makes no real sense honestly

https://www.oldham.gov.uk/news/article/2816/a_statement_from_oldham_council_leader_arooj_shah

17 minutes ago, Liam Sota said:

Pretty much every victim has called for a national inquiry for sometime. Council/regional led inquiry’s cannot compel people to give evidence which renders them pointless. Oldham council which originally called for a national inquiry on the basis the issue was too big and expensive for them to deal with. It’s run fully by Labour too. The daily mail comment makes no real sense honestly

https://www.oldham.gov.uk/news/article/2816/a_statement_from_oldham_council_leader_arooj_shah

There has already been a national enquiry. The last government didn't implement any of its recommendations. You've been told that before. Why are you still ignoring the facts?

The winter fuel payment reversal is a big mistake! I agree that those struggling should get help but 34k a year and no mortgage is not struggling, it's more than I will get when I retire and I wouldn't expect it. Those who genuinely need it should get it paid directly to the fuel companies and that's it.

This is what I was thinking should happen but didn’t think would ever happen. So good to see.

First polling I’ve seen on the issue

I guess Suede is in the 3%

Edited June 16Jun 16 by Liam Sota

Vicky Foxcroft had resigned as a whip over the disability benefits cuts!

This is crazy

26 minutes ago, Liam Sota said:

This is crazy

Whilst I doubt it is her intention, it would be ironic if this ended up giving additional funding to Reform and soon to be Reform-led councils, and away from Labour and Lib Dem ones.

I mean the country is so uneven development wise it makes sense to me completely!

11 minutes ago, Steve201 said:

I mean the country is so uneven development wise it makes sense to me completely!

Exactly. The north is largely under developed and under invested, loads of tax goes in to the south east & London commuter belt.

4 hours ago, Rooney said:

Exactly. The north is largely under developed and under invested, loads of tax goes in to the south east & London commuter belt.

That's true but you could argue that it's because they generate the most tax revenue.

It would be interesting to see a map of tax revenue vs expenditure for various areas. Although I do agree with this to an extent to help funnel more investment further north to try and reduce the north/south divide. Particularly as to make areas generate more tax revenue you need to invest first (The SE/London have a rather nice cycle currently of investment/growth - it would be great to see that replicated further north in places such as Newcastle or Leeds).

It’s relative because London is much more expensive for everything. Earning more doesn’t mean your standard of living is better. There is probably more people in poverty in London than the 10 biggest Northern cities combined.

Strange thing to do

5 hours ago, Envoirment said:

That's true but you could argue that it's because they generate the most tax revenue.

It would be interesting to see a map of tax revenue vs expenditure for various areas. Although I do agree with this to an extent to help funnel more investment further north to try and reduce the north/south divide. Particularly as to make areas generate more tax revenue you need to invest first (The SE/London have a rather nice cycle currently of investment/growth - it would be great to see that replicated further north in places such as Newcastle or Leeds).

Yeah but part of that reason is we are London and south east centric as an economy, a decision that was made 40 years ago, but it holds massive repercussions. Take HS2 as an example, all that’s going to do is funnel money and economic growth in to the south.

There’s so much potential in the north but it’s massively under invested, and all these towns which are suffering and bleeding votes to Reform, either need better transport links to major metropolitan nearby hubs or some form of economic input.

Looks like this welfare bill is going to cause a massive divide within Labour. Probably will only pass with Tory votes. It will be interesting to see how a HR manager control freak type personality like Starmer handles a big type of rebellion like this.

It’ll be fun indeed even if I am in favour of less people getting dla. The amount on it is ridiculous. I should apply due to my chronic sticky mattress syndrome I usually get at 6am on a Monday morning when my alarm goes off.

19 hours ago, Steve201 said:

It’ll be fun indeed even if I am in favour of less people getting dla. The amount on it is ridiculous. I should apply due to my chronic sticky mattress syndrome I usually get at 6am on a Monday morning when my alarm goes off.

As a profoundly deaf person myself who doesn’t claim DLA as I was found to be too self sufficient by PIP, I say, walk a mile in a disabled persons shoes before judging whether they deserve DLA or not. The country continues to be predominantly an able bodied world. Just to see a film with captions I had to drive to Sheffield and I live in Leeds which has several cinemas but none of them were showing on weekends… which costs me more money than it would the average person to see same said film on the multiple non-captioned screenings. I can never go to the theatre in Leeds city centre which is 20 mins away from me as they don’t offer captions, instead I have to travel to Bradford as they do… again costs me more money than the average person who could just see the show in Leeds… Then there is the struggles to get fire alarms at work whenever I move jobs. I was on a fire safety risk plan where several people have to come and check I’ve heard the alarm as access to work are dragging their feet providing a vibrating alarm. I ended up buying a pager out of my own money for staff to page should the alarm go off. Again, costs me more money that no able bodied person had to pay…

Those are just three examples, the list is endless and DLA is often just a few hundred pounds a month to top up, it’s rarely a full salary unless it’s a very severe disability in which case, they 100% should be funded anyway.

I agree PIP is important to help disabled people live a normal life. But the facts show the amount claiming it has risen hugely in the past five years. There’s people who claim it who shouldn’t be entitled to it.

Surely as a working tax payer I have every right to a say in where tax payers £££ goes to:

It might be a good idea to look into why the number of people claiming dla has increased. Given the stories I’ve heard about how many hoops people have to jump through to receive it, I imagine it’s because we have an increased number of people living with a disability rather than that it’s just too easy to get your hands on.

There’s many different reasons and trends - The amount of people reporting chronic illnesses has increased due to an aging population, there’s been an increase in awards for mental illness, Covid due to its impact on people’s health including not being able to access normal nhs care, cost of living meaning more have applied due to seeking financial support, increased awareness of the award and its eligibility criteria in the 10 years since its introduction and easier reviews for people with long term conditions.