Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Whatever happened to Rebecca Long-Bailey? She was the future once. – politicalbetting.com

2456

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616

    Scott_xP said:


    @Smyth_Chris

    Timms confirms that 4-point rule is being dropped. Clause 5 dropped entirely

    Full retreat

    Sounds like when all said and done all they will have to show for this is a very large printing bill.
    Not quite fair. The work capability assessment for ESA/UC is still being dropped I think. Hated by disabled and ill people with a passion and a licence for third party service companies to print money admining it all (badly).

    Plus there's £ for supporting people back to work with work coaches and all that.

    But the main point of the Bill was Treasury orders to get some £billions and that is not happening now.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Steven Swinford
    @Steven_Swinford
    ·
    2m
    The government has effectively abandoned its flagship welfare reform - the overhaul of PIP disability benefits - entirely
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Kendall second out of Cabinet then?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,047
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Common sense from Le Pen:

    https://x.com/MLP_officiel/status/1940003469487677683

    Air conditioning saves lives.

    Leaving children, the elderly, or vulnerable people to suffer because there is no air conditioning, rather than developing an air conditioning plan, is completely absurd.

    To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

    Which planet is she on?
    Planet normal. Climate austerity is killing people. Every home should have air conditioning.
    She needs to work on her plan imo. "Aircon" alone is a tailpipe solution, treating a symptom.

    Traditional air conditioning is horribly inefficient, and it is far better done via heat pumps - which run at approx 1/3 to 1/4 of the energy use and cost, and passive measures before that.
    Traditional air conditioning is a heat pump.

    Aircon is no more treating a sympton than heating is. We have technology that allows us to make our living environment more comfortable and only lunatics would try to prevent people from using it.
    So you approve of heat pumps then?

    It does the same job more efficiently, so is the better solution.
    An air to air heat pump is what air con is. You can’t use an air to water heat pump to do air conditioning if that’s what you’re thinking of.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366

    Kendall second out of Cabinet then?

    Surely she must resign? Utterly embarrassing and humiliating collapse of her bill
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,047
    TimS said:

    MattW said:

    Common sense from Le Pen:

    https://x.com/MLP_officiel/status/1940003469487677683

    Air conditioning saves lives.

    Leaving children, the elderly, or vulnerable people to suffer because there is no air conditioning, rather than developing an air conditioning plan, is completely absurd.

    To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

    Which planet is she on?
    Planet normal. Climate austerity is killing people. Every home should have air conditioning.
    She, like most climate contrarians, is on planet non sequitur.

    I have put a/c in the bedrooms in our French house. It was reasonably priced. It’s powered almost entirely by solar panels, especially on hot days like today. Nobody in France is preventing me from installing it.

    Planet non sequitur. It’s almost up there with “electricity is expensive so we should build less generating capacity” and similar British idiocies.
    We shouldn’t discourage people from using energy, period. If the grid can’t cope with it then we need to add more generative capacity in whatever is the cheapest and most reliable way.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,001
    edited July 1

    kinabalu said:

    The welfare cuts. Tricky one for a Labour MP.

    You can see it's a problem how the cost of health-related benefits is increasing and set to keep doing so when the finances are so stressed. Furthermore you don't want to defeat your own government and give succour to political opponents, most of whom would be tougher on welfare claimants than this is.

    So, being rational, vote for it? Yes, I think so.

    But hang on, forget all that and get back to basics - should any government, let alone a Labour one, be doing something that makes the lives of some of the most vulnerable people in our country worse unless they truly have to? And do they truly have to?

    If it's 'no' and 'no' to that, how can you vote for it even if you've just convinced yourself you should?

    I wonder what PBers would do if they were a Labour MP?

    Its a total dog dinners now of a bill. They need to go back and think more carefully about any reforms. Making policy on the fly in real time is rarely likely to lead to a good result.

    I am reminded of a different time when government were proposing much more sweeping changes to benefits. The reform to pensions under the Coalition. When we compare that, people still lost out, but the person in charge Steve Webb really knew his onions and they had thought really carefully about how to go about such a reform.
    Although in this space "thinking more carefully" almost certainly means forget about saving any money anytime soon. All the reforms with a serious chance of helping lots of people into work have a long run pay-off and cost more in the short term.

    Of course this is what we should be doing anyway, but I bet it would be opposed as spendthrift by plenty of those who are making hay about this debacle (which I agree it is).

    Debacle for the government, btw, but not for the Labour Party. Speaking as a member I'm pleased and proud that we find it very difficult, perhaps impossible, to take money off people who are already struggling far more than most to get by in life. Well done us!
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 25,044
    AnneJGP said:

    boulay said:

    Will she be thrown out of the Tory party?

    https://x.com/RestoreBritain_/status/1940048055962939864

    We are delighted to welcome Susan Hall AM (@Councillorsuzie), Leader of the Conservative Group on the London Assembly, to our Advisory Board.

    Doesn't Restore Britain say it's a pressure group rather than a party? Bit like the Monday Club was, or The Freedom Association, or numerous other talking shops for like-minded weirdos. So I expect she'll be okay.
    Yes Lowe has specifically set it up not to be a party. The electoral aspect will happen through Advance.
    Lowe will either join Advance later or he will run on a Tory or joint Tory ticket
    He's pushing to restore the death penalty now:

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/1939987694785810625
    Wonder who he has in mind?
    I wonder how many people lie in the intersection on a Venn Diagram of believing in the death penalty, and believing Letby is innocent.

    Of course if we had the death penalty, then the state could kill Letby whether she's innocent or not.
    Surely believing in the death penalty (which I don't, by the way) doesn't force you to believe that absolutely everyone convicted of murder is guilty and there are no miscarriages of justice?

    I mean, it does raise a legitimate concern - that the death penalty means a small number of innocent people would be executed. The two answers open to proponents are, firstly, that they'd introduce an extra burden of "super proof" such that the sentence is reserved for those in whose guilt isn't just "beyond reasonable doubt" but "beyond any doubt". It's a weird one as you'd then have people convicted of murder but not "super" convicted, and I'm unsure it'd really work. The other is to take it on the chin and say yes, very sadly a tiny number of innocent people die but crime comes down serving the greater good.
    That argument will be easier when assisted dying comes in.
    Why?

    Assisted dying is people opting to end their life.

    The death penalty is the state killing people that don't want to die.

    If a prisoner, or anyone else, wants to end their life they should be able to do so, but that's their choice, not an execution.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,724
    edited July 1
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Common sense from Le Pen:

    https://x.com/MLP_officiel/status/1940003469487677683

    Air conditioning saves lives.

    Leaving children, the elderly, or vulnerable people to suffer because there is no air conditioning, rather than developing an air conditioning plan, is completely absurd.

    To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

    Which planet is she on?
    Planet normal. Climate austerity is killing people. Every home should have air conditioning.
    She needs to work on her plan imo. "Aircon" alone is a tailpipe solution, treating a symptom.

    Traditional air conditioning is horribly inefficient, and it is far better done via heat pumps - which run at approx 1/3 to 1/4 of the energy use and cost, and passive measures before that.
    Airconditiong /is/ a heat pump.

    (edit: now I have to go remind myself how air conditioning works again, but the basic point still stands.)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Andy_JS said:

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
    Can you imagine?! Defeated on a gutted bill after u turning on a double u turn backflip
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    No - there's still the UC section. Parts 1 to 4 of the Bill.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Be funny if they still lose.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    No - there's still the UC section. Parts 1 to 4 of the Bill.
    But they have already agreed to protect existing claimants and guarantee inflationary rises
    Its incredibly minor in scope now
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366

    Maybe Starmer should try indicative votes to see what his MPs would be willing to back.

    Customs union?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 15,665
    edited July 1

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Common sense from Le Pen:

    https://x.com/MLP_officiel/status/1940003469487677683

    Air conditioning saves lives.

    Leaving children, the elderly, or vulnerable people to suffer because there is no air conditioning, rather than developing an air conditioning plan, is completely absurd.

    To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

    Which planet is she on?
    Planet normal. Climate austerity is killing people. Every home should have air conditioning.
    She needs to work on her plan imo. "Aircon" alone is a tailpipe solution, treating a symptom.

    Traditional air conditioning is horribly inefficient, and it is far better done via heat pumps - which run at approx 1/3 to 1/4 of the energy use and cost, and passive measures before that.
    Traditional air conditioning is a heat pump.

    Aircon is no more treating a sympton than heating is. We have technology that allows us to make our living environment more comfortable and only lunatics would try to prevent people from using it.
    So you approve of heat pumps then?

    It does the same job more efficiently, so is the better solution.
    An air to air heat pump is what air con is. You can’t use an air to water heat pump to do air conditioning if that’s what you’re thinking of.
    You can cool the floor though. It was an option for us downstairs in France and then the bloody plumber specified the wrong heat pump that didn’t have a reverse gear.

    Air to water cooling is possible, though the downside is it can cause condensation.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366

    Be funny if they still lose.

    MPs reject it based on it being laughably pathetic legislation??
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Timms has got a right headache now for next 12 months or so.

    The rate of increase of claims for PIP has to be slowed and yet he has been committed to working with disabled groups and charities and also knows anything that smells remotely like the 4 point idea will be killed by backbenchers. Nightmare.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616

    Be funny if they still lose.

    MPs reject it based on it being laughably pathetic legislation??
    Come now, that would set a very dangerous precedent!!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616

    Andy_JS said:

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
    Can you imagine?! Defeated on a gutted bill after u turning on a double u turn backflip
    Gold medal diving skills!!!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,047
    TimS said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Common sense from Le Pen:

    https://x.com/MLP_officiel/status/1940003469487677683

    Air conditioning saves lives.

    Leaving children, the elderly, or vulnerable people to suffer because there is no air conditioning, rather than developing an air conditioning plan, is completely absurd.

    To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

    Which planet is she on?
    Planet normal. Climate austerity is killing people. Every home should have air conditioning.
    She needs to work on her plan imo. "Aircon" alone is a tailpipe solution, treating a symptom.

    Traditional air conditioning is horribly inefficient, and it is far better done via heat pumps - which run at approx 1/3 to 1/4 of the energy use and cost, and passive measures before that.
    Traditional air conditioning is a heat pump.

    Aircon is no more treating a sympton than heating is. We have technology that allows us to make our living environment more comfortable and only lunatics would try to prevent people from using it.
    So you approve of heat pumps then?

    It does the same job more efficiently, so is the better solution.
    An air to air heat pump is what air con is. You can’t use an air to water heat pump to do air conditioning if that’s what you’re thinking of.
    You can cool the floor though. It was an option for us downstairs in France and then the bloody plumber specified the wrong heat pump that didn’t have a reverse gear.

    Air to water cooling is possible, though the downside is it can cause condensation.
    Yes, you have to be very mindful of what the dew point is but it can work well if you try to keep the floor slab at a constant temperature.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,937
    From the Guardian Live feed

    No 10 guts welfare bill in big new concession as minister says Pip cuts planned for 2026 shelved until after Timms review

    In the Commons Anna Dixon (Lab) has just intervened to say the Timms review should be brought forward. Andrew Pakes (Lab), who has the floor, says he agrees. He says he would like to see Duracell batteries inserted into the review.

    At this point Stephen Timms, the social security and disability minister, intervenes, to make the concession reported earlier. He says the government has heard the concerns from Labour MP about the time his review of Pip assessment will take. He goes on:

    We have heard those concerns, and that is why I can announce that we are going to remove the clause five from the bill at committee, that we will move straight to the wider review, sometimes referred to as the Timms review, and only make changes to Pip eligibility, activities and descriptors following that review.

    The government is committed to concluding the review by the autumn of next year.

    That is another big concession. It has two implications.

    It means there is a chance that new Pip eligibility rules will not come into force in November 2026. (The government said it wanted the Timms review to report in the autumn of next year, and that it would implement its recommendations as quickly as possible, but legislating for welfare reforms is never quick.)

    Much more importantly, it means that the switch to the four-point Pip eligibility rule may never happen at all. It won’t be in the legislation. And there is no guarantee the Timms review will revive the idea – certainly if it is genuinely “co-produced” with disabled people, as the government promises. The four-point rule was the key instrument that was going to deliver the £2.5bn savings that, this morning, the Treasury was going to deliver.

    This means MPs are set to pass a bill that won’t necessarily deliver anything like the level of cuts originally planned. It is a huge win for those campaigning against it.

    Jessica Elgot and Pippa Crerar point out in their story that the last-minute concession that No 10 is set to approve would be a humiliation for Liz Kendall.

    While the move is expected to secure the bill’s second reading, it would be a humiliating climbdown for Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, who just hours before had told MPs the new four-point threshold would apply from November 2026 and emphasised the need for the government to take its time over the Timms review to get it right.

  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,808
    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366

    From the Guardian Live feed

    No 10 guts welfare bill in big new concession as minister says Pip cuts planned for 2026 shelved until after Timms review

    In the Commons Anna Dixon (Lab) has just intervened to say the Timms review should be brought forward. Andrew Pakes (Lab), who has the floor, says he agrees. He says he would like to see Duracell batteries inserted into the review.

    At this point Stephen Timms, the social security and disability minister, intervenes, to make the concession reported earlier. He says the government has heard the concerns from Labour MP about the time his review of Pip assessment will take. He goes on:

    We have heard those concerns, and that is why I can announce that we are going to remove the clause five from the bill at committee, that we will move straight to the wider review, sometimes referred to as the Timms review, and only make changes to Pip eligibility, activities and descriptors following that review.

    The government is committed to concluding the review by the autumn of next year.

    That is another big concession. It has two implications.

    It means there is a chance that new Pip eligibility rules will not come into force in November 2026. (The government said it wanted the Timms review to report in the autumn of next year, and that it would implement its recommendations as quickly as possible, but legislating for welfare reforms is never quick.)

    Much more importantly, it means that the switch to the four-point Pip eligibility rule may never happen at all. It won’t be in the legislation. And there is no guarantee the Timms review will revive the idea – certainly if it is genuinely “co-produced” with disabled people, as the government promises. The four-point rule was the key instrument that was going to deliver the £2.5bn savings that, this morning, the Treasury was going to deliver.

    This means MPs are set to pass a bill that won’t necessarily deliver anything like the level of cuts originally planned. It is a huge win for those campaigning against it.

    Jessica Elgot and Pippa Crerar point out in their story that the last-minute concession that No 10 is set to approve would be a humiliation for Liz Kendall.

    While the move is expected to secure the bill’s second reading, it would be a humiliating climbdown for Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, who just hours before had told MPs the new four-point threshold would apply from November 2026 and emphasised the need for the government to take its time over the Timms review to get it right.

    To Liz, I say the following

    Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey, goodbye!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073

    Andy_JS said:

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
    Can you imagine?! Defeated on a gutted bill after u turning on a double u turn backflip
    I'm assuming a vote is still taking place. Maybe it isn't.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Massive admin costs though.
  • ManOfGwentManOfGwent Posts: 186

    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?

    A moral crusade to bankruptcy by the seems of it
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073
    edited July 1
    A weather system is obviously moving through the country. It's still 33 degrees in London but 10 degrees cooler about 100 miles to the north.
  • scampi25scampi25 Posts: 177
    kinabalu said:

    The welfare cuts. Tricky one for a Labour MP.

    You can see it's a problem how the cost of health-related benefits is increasing and set to keep doing so when the finances are so stressed. Furthermore you don't want to defeat your own government and give succour to political opponents, most of whom would be tougher on welfare claimants than this is.

    So, being rational, vote for it? Yes, I think so.

    But hang on, forget all that and get back to basics - should any government, let alone a Labour one, be doing something that makes the lives of some of the most vulnerable people in our country worse unless they truly have to? And do they truly have to?

    If it's 'no' and 'no' to that, how can you vote for it even if you've just convinced yourself you should?

    I wonder what PBers would do if they were a Labour MP?

    If I was a Labour MP I should be seeking an assessment for full-time support under the mental health act!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
    Can you imagine?! Defeated on a gutted bill after u turning on a double u turn backflip
    I'm assuming a vote is still taking place. Maybe it isn't.
    Yes, there's still some words in the bill to vote on
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,616
    Huge moment for Kemi tomorrow at noon for PMQs.

    She cannot afford not to skewer Starmer like, say, Robin Cook did in the 1990s.

    Total open goal here.
  • eekeek Posts: 30,494
    edited July 1

    Huge moment for Kemi tomorrow at noon for PMQs.

    She cannot afford not to skewer Starmer like, say, Robin Cook did in the 1990s.

    Total open goal here.

    And she will kick the goal into the Tory's own net..
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073
    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Isn't this similar to how the Roman empire collapsed? Not enough resources to go around.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073

    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?

    Sort of implies that other political parties are less moral than Labour.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,808
    So compared to the last OBR forecast:

    - No PIP savings of £5.5bn
    - Extra Winter Fuel of £1.25bn

    Goodness knows if they are still going to abolish the two child benefit cap which they were minded to do - that's approx another £3bn.

    So it's somewhere between £7bn and £10bn more on welfare than the last OBR forecast.

    Throw in everything else - lower growth, more on defence, maybe more public sector pay, goodness knows what else - and it must be a minimum of £20bn more tax rises, the vast majority of which will have to be employers NI as that's the only big revenue raiser most people don't understand so won't complain about.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922
    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,226

    At what point have they made so many concessions, they might as well not bother at all? Seems very much like they are Bodger and Badgering it in real time just to get something through.
    It's a joke now. Drop it and do the Timm's review.
    Its sheer bloody mindedness now. Myopic.
    Kendalls career is over, as is Reeves shortly after
    Reeves has to be shuffled out to another department now.
    She wont take a demotion from the great offices of state. And if shes not good enough to see out the parliament as CoE as guaranteed by SKS less than 6 months ago, shes not fit to run any department
    Not even Accounts?
    HR?

    Actually, joking apart, making her party chairman is what the Tories would do.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,937
    Fom the Guardian live feed I posted earlier this is the crux of the matter:

    'It means there is a chance that new Pip eligibility rules will not come into force in November 2026. (The government said it wanted the Timms review to report in the autumn of next year, and that it would implement its recommendations as quickly as possible, but legislating for welfare reforms is never quick.)

    Much more importantly, it means that the switch to the four-point Pip eligibility rule may never happen at all. It won’t be in the legislation. And there is no guarantee the Timms review will revive the idea – certainly if it is genuinely “co-produced” with disabled people, as the government promises. The four-point rule was the key instrument that was going to deliver the £2.5bn savings that, this morning, the Treasury was going to deliver.

    This means MPs are set to pass a bill that won’t necessarily deliver anything like the level of cuts originally planned. It is a huge win for those campaigning against it'.

    Reeves having failed on WFP, is now facing a total collapse of her quest for £5 billion reduced to £2.5 billion on PIPs meaning she is facing yet another black hole of £5-6 billion entirely of her own making
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Andy_JS said:

    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?

    Sort of implies that other political parties are less moral than Labour.
    I prefer the implication the Labour Party is nothing
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,808
    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,084
    edited July 1
    Andy_JS said:

    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?

    Sort of implies that other political parties are less moral than Labour.
    That's. The. Point

    (the "moral crusade or it is nothing" is a quote from Harold Wilson. "This party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" -
    speech at the Labour Party Conference, 1 October 1962; in Times 2 October 1962
    )
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,937
    Mortimer said:

    At what point have they made so many concessions, they might as well not bother at all? Seems very much like they are Bodger and Badgering it in real time just to get something through.
    It's a joke now. Drop it and do the Timm's review.
    Its sheer bloody mindedness now. Myopic.
    Kendalls career is over, as is Reeves shortly after
    Reeves has to be shuffled out to another department now.
    She wont take a demotion from the great offices of state. And if shes not good enough to see out the parliament as CoE as guaranteed by SKS less than 6 months ago, shes not fit to run any department
    Not even Accounts?
    HR?

    Actually, joking apart, making her party chairman is what the Tories would do.
    Err - Party Chairperson !!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073
    "Kevin Pietersen🦏
    @KP24

    Stop moaning about the heat in London. It’s AMAZING!
    Considering how bad this last winter was, enjoy the sunshine. It’s healthy!"

    https://x.com/KP24/status/1939970756659544345
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,107

    From the Guardian Live feed

    No 10 guts welfare bill in big new concession as minister says Pip cuts planned for 2026 shelved until after Timms review

    In the Commons Anna Dixon (Lab) has just intervened to say the Timms review should be brought forward. Andrew Pakes (Lab), who has the floor, says he agrees. He says he would like to see Duracell batteries inserted into the review.

    At this point Stephen Timms, the social security and disability minister, intervenes, to make the concession reported earlier. He says the government has heard the concerns from Labour MP about the time his review of Pip assessment will take. He goes on:

    We have heard those concerns, and that is why I can announce that we are going to remove the clause five from the bill at committee, that we will move straight to the wider review, sometimes referred to as the Timms review, and only make changes to Pip eligibility, activities and descriptors following that review.

    The government is committed to concluding the review by the autumn of next year.

    That is another big concession. It has two implications.

    It means there is a chance that new Pip eligibility rules will not come into force in November 2026. (The government said it wanted the Timms review to report in the autumn of next year, and that it would implement its recommendations as quickly as possible, but legislating for welfare reforms is never quick.)

    Much more importantly, it means that the switch to the four-point Pip eligibility rule may never happen at all. It won’t be in the legislation. And there is no guarantee the Timms review will revive the idea – certainly if it is genuinely “co-produced” with disabled people, as the government promises. The four-point rule was the key instrument that was going to deliver the £2.5bn savings that, this morning, the Treasury was going to deliver.

    This means MPs are set to pass a bill that won’t necessarily deliver anything like the level of cuts originally planned. It is a huge win for those campaigning against it.

    Jessica Elgot and Pippa Crerar point out in their story that the last-minute concession that No 10 is set to approve would be a humiliation for Liz Kendall.

    While the move is expected to secure the bill’s second reading, it would be a humiliating climbdown for Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, who just hours before had told MPs the new four-point threshold would apply from November 2026 and emphasised the need for the government to take its time over the Timms review to get it right.

    This is a core point. They are at risk of reprising the mistake of the Conservative Government when they tried to close ticket offices without properly exploring the implications first.

    They missed things such as certain ticketing options only being easily available via the ticket office. On that occasion they had to back down as we know.

    If the Lab Government continue to try a similar Elon Musk style chainsaw approach, they will continue to come the same cropper.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    edited July 1
    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Costs are not static. They will vary week to week, month to month, season to season
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922
    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Timms needs to find disabled people and organisations as pissed off as everyone else about these bandwagon jumpers, who are willing to engage with how to target a decent level of support to those who need it, whilst weeding out all these dodgy claimers.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,001

    Maybe Starmer should try indicative votes to see what his MPs would be willing to back.

    Lol. I can picture the bow tie revolving as you thought of that one, William.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?

    Sort of implies that other political parties are less moral than Labour.
    That's. The. Point

    (the "moral crusade or it is nothing" is a quote from Harold Wilson. "This party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" -
    speech at the Labour Party Conference, 1 October 1962; in Times 2 October 1962
    )
    History suggests that staging an inadequately funded crusade can be a fruitless venture.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922

    Mortimer said:

    At what point have they made so many concessions, they might as well not bother at all? Seems very much like they are Bodger and Badgering it in real time just to get something through.
    It's a joke now. Drop it and do the Timm's review.
    Its sheer bloody mindedness now. Myopic.
    Kendalls career is over, as is Reeves shortly after
    Reeves has to be shuffled out to another department now.
    She wont take a demotion from the great offices of state. And if shes not good enough to see out the parliament as CoE as guaranteed by SKS less than 6 months ago, shes not fit to run any department
    Not even Accounts?
    HR?

    Actually, joking apart, making her party chairman is what the Tories would do.
    Err - Party Chairperson !!!!!!!!!!!!!
    No, the Tory party really is that much behind the times.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,001
    Andy_JS said:

    Labour backbenchers have rediscovered that Labour is "a moral crusade or it is nothing." ?

    Sort of implies that other political parties are less moral than Labour.
    One can make that case.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,937
    kinabalu said:

    Maybe Starmer should try indicative votes to see what his MPs would be willing to back.

    Lol. I can picture the bow tie revolving as you thought of that one, William.
    It's a good line mind you !!!!!!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    edited July 1
    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Timms needs to find disabled people and organisations as pissed off as everyone else about these bandwagon jumpers, who are willing to engage with how to target a decent level of support to those who need it, whilst weeding out all these dodgy claimers.
    Which ones? PIP fraud is at almost zero percent.
    Obviously implied PIP fraud according to the Alf Garnett Gazette is about 99%
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922
    edited July 1
    MikeL said:

    So compared to the last OBR forecast:

    - No PIP savings of £5.5bn
    - Extra Winter Fuel of £1.25bn

    Goodness knows if they are still going to abolish the two child benefit cap which they were minded to do - that's approx another £3bn.

    So it's somewhere between £7bn and £10bn more on welfare than the last OBR forecast.

    Throw in everything else - lower growth, more on defence, maybe more public sector pay, goodness knows what else - and it must be a minimum of £20bn more tax rises, the vast majority of which will have to be employers NI as that's the only big revenue raiser most people don't understand so won't complain about.

    Extending the freeze in allowances raises a fair bit of forward funding, I think? Soon we will all be 40% taxpayers.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,827
    Scott_xP said:

    Trump's bill passes the senate

    "It's gonna be beautiful!"
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,084
    ...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,937
    IanB2 said:

    Mortimer said:

    At what point have they made so many concessions, they might as well not bother at all? Seems very much like they are Bodger and Badgering it in real time just to get something through.
    It's a joke now. Drop it and do the Timm's review.
    Its sheer bloody mindedness now. Myopic.
    Kendalls career is over, as is Reeves shortly after
    Reeves has to be shuffled out to another department now.
    She wont take a demotion from the great offices of state. And if shes not good enough to see out the parliament as CoE as guaranteed by SKS less than 6 months ago, shes not fit to run any department
    Not even Accounts?
    HR?

    Actually, joking apart, making her party chairman is what the Tories would do.
    Err - Party Chairperson !!!!!!!!!!!!!
    No, the Tory party really is that much behind the times.
    As a conservative you should note I am not

    After 81 years you learn to adapt, adopt and encourage change
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Timms needs to find disabled people and organisations as pissed off as everyone else about these bandwagon jumpers, who are willing to engage with how to target a decent level of support to those who need it, whilst weeding out all these dodgy claimers.
    Which ones? PIP fraud is at almost zero percent.
    Obviously implied PIP fraud according to the Alf Garnett Gazette is about 99%
    How else do you explain the explosion in younger people needing financial support and apparently mostly unable to work; a post-Covid phenomenon that isnt hitting, to anything like the same extent, any other developed economy?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Theyve managed apparently to leave in the clause applying the 4 point pip rule to Northern Ireland
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,107
    edited July 1
    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    That could be a bit of a minefield. There is plenty of important kit which is not often supplied, and plenty of opportunities to improve things whilst saving money.

    There are also many potential areas where having a far better public policy could make adaptations far easier, and needed less often.

    An example is our continued 1970s approach to infra which can inhibit personal autonomy for disabled people, and there a need for expensive alternatives to be used eg clip on wheelchair power adaptations (typically £2k to £5k) are best used with mobility tracks, 20mph limits etc, and are not available on Motability (similarly for power wheelchairs more tolerant of difficult surfaces / potholes). So some people have no option other than to use more taxis and/or get a car on Motability which costs maybe 7x-10x more. A wheelchair power adaptor for travel within 5-10 miles plus occasional use of a car from a car club could be a cheaper option for the individual and the public purse. Or buses, or trains, if the bus and train systems were accessible.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073
    It's 13 degrees in Edinburgh right now. Must feel a bit chilly.
  • Andy_JS said:

    A weather system is obviously moving through the country. It's still 33 degrees in London but 10 degrees cooler about 100 miles to the north.

    17c and overcast here in west-central Scotland. For once I'm decidedly happy with the Scottish Weather, 33c would boil me like a bag of rice.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,827
    Andy_JS said:

    A weather system is obviously moving through the country. It's still 33 degrees in London but 10 degrees cooler about 100 miles to the north.

    34 in London today
    25 in London tomorrow!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Timms needs to find disabled people and organisations as pissed off as everyone else about these bandwagon jumpers, who are willing to engage with how to target a decent level of support to those who need it, whilst weeding out all these dodgy claimers.
    Which ones? PIP fraud is at almost zero percent.
    Obviously implied PIP fraud according to the Alf Garnett Gazette is about 99%
    How else do you explain the explosion in younger people needing financial support and apparently mostly unable to work; a post-Covid phenomenon that isnt hitting, to anything like the same extent, any other developed economy?
    I wouldnt try to explain it. Id leave that to the medical professiom who provide reports to the DWP for claims.
    Id not want to be the person saying 'well you dont look/seem very sick' without any basis for it other than a hunch
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,001

    Huge moment for Kemi tomorrow at noon for PMQs.

    She cannot afford not to skewer Starmer like, say, Robin Cook did in the 1990s.

    Total open goal here.

    Not sure. She needs to stick to "shambolic" rather than get into the policy. Because everyone knows the Tories are not the friend of people who rely on welfare. It's the Labour Party here who are reinforcing those credentials against the wishes of the leadership.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073
    Not sure I can remember a 20 degree temperature difference between London and Edinburgh before. 33 v 13.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Timms needs to find disabled people and organisations as pissed off as everyone else about these bandwagon jumpers, who are willing to engage with how to target a decent level of support to those who need it, whilst weeding out all these dodgy claimers.
    Which ones? PIP fraud is at almost zero percent.
    Obviously implied PIP fraud according to the Alf Garnett Gazette is about 99%
    How else do you explain the explosion in younger people needing financial support and apparently mostly unable to work; a post-Covid phenomenon that isnt hitting, to anything like the same extent, any other developed economy?
    I wouldnt try to explain it. Id leave that to the medical professiom who provide reports to the DWP for claims.
    Id not want to be the person saying 'well you dont look/seem very sick' without any basis for it other than a hunch
    All the 'how to get your free money' guides on social media are another clue
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    kinabalu said:

    Huge moment for Kemi tomorrow at noon for PMQs.

    She cannot afford not to skewer Starmer like, say, Robin Cook did in the 1990s.

    Total open goal here.

    Not sure. She needs to stick to "shambolic" rather than get into the policy. Because everyone knows the Tories are not the friend of people who rely on welfare. It's the Labour Party here who are reinforcing those credentials against the wishes of the leadership.
    As you say, she will go on shambolic, and then try to tie in with weakness in the chancellor and her rules poisoning everything.
    Or dolphins knowing her
  • eekeek Posts: 30,494
    Andy_JS said:

    "Kevin Pietersen🦏
    @KP24

    Stop moaning about the heat in London. It’s AMAZING!
    Considering how bad this last winter was, enjoy the sunshine. It’s healthy!"

    https://x.com/KP24/status/1939970756659544345

    I don't remember last winter being bad either up north or London for the 2 days a week I was there.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,675
    This is like Truss’s fracking vote - absolutely shambolic.

    Heads are surely going to roll for this?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,631
    It’s sooo lovely and cool in the Toon now.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,675
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
    Can you imagine?! Defeated on a gutted bill after u turning on a double u turn backflip
    I'm assuming a vote is still taking place. Maybe it isn't.
    I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if it gets pulled. No-one seems to have a clue what they’re voting on.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 36,073
    edited July 1
    2 local by-elections tomorrow in North Tyneside, and 7 on Thursday including 2 Reform defences, the first time they've defended seats at by-elections I think.

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19403/local-council-elections-july-2025
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,289

    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    There is effectively no bill. They are voting on nothing at all. Shambolic.

    And maybe Starmer still gets defeated despite that?
    Can you imagine?! Defeated on a gutted bill after u turning on a double u turn backflip
    I'm assuming a vote is still taking place. Maybe it isn't.
    I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if it gets pulled. No-one seems to have a clue what they’re voting on.
    McDonald says: "We've just heard that a pivotal part of this Bill, clause five, is not going to be effective.

    "So I ask the question, what are we supposed to be voting on tonight?

    "Is it the Bill as drawn, or another Bill, because I'm confused. I think people in this chamber will need that clarification."
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Now talk of chief whip being the sacrifice for the chaos
    Lol. Shambles plus
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,047

    kinabalu said:

    Huge moment for Kemi tomorrow at noon for PMQs.

    She cannot afford not to skewer Starmer like, say, Robin Cook did in the 1990s.

    Total open goal here.

    Not sure. She needs to stick to "shambolic" rather than get into the policy. Because everyone knows the Tories are not the friend of people who rely on welfare. It's the Labour Party here who are reinforcing those credentials against the wishes of the leadership.
    As you say, she will go on shambolic, and then try to tie in with weakness in the chancellor and her rules poisoning everything.
    Or dolphins knowing her
    "It's lucky he didn't need his MPs to tell him what a woman is, otherwise he still wouldn't know."
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922
    edited July 1
    Andy_JS said:

    2 local by-elections tomorrow in North Tyneside, and 7 on Thursday including 2 Reform defences, the first time they've defended seats at by-elections I think.

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19403/local-council-elections-july-2025

    councillors who haven't even stuck it for two months? Impressive stuff
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,613
    edited July 1

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    IanB2 said:

    MikeL said:

    It's very clear - once you start handing money out to people you can't stop.

    Article on the BBC last week said in many (most?) countries, disabled people get their additional costs paid for, ie:

    - if they need equipment, Govt buys the equipment
    - if they need taxis, Govt pays the taxi company

    etc etc.

    That would change the whole dynamic and dramatically reduce amount paid out re mental health.

    Certainly it seems that the well-meaning desire to have mental health issues treated with equivalence to physical ones is a big reason why we’re now in this financial mess. For while there are undoubtedly many people with serious mental health issues meriting treatment and support, it is also easier to fake a mental health condition, as the many videos on social media telling people how to complete their PiP claims clearly indicate, and without any face to face assessment it’s obvious that people who shouldn’t be getting the benefit are slipping through.
    It's blindingly obvious.

    You do every assessment face to face.

    You ask the claimant what their extra costs are.

    The Govt then pays those costs or gives the claimant specific vouchers to pay those costs - up to a maximum which is the current benefit amount.

    Do that and the whole thing changes overnight.
    Timms needs to find disabled people and organisations as pissed off as everyone else about these bandwagon jumpers, who are willing to engage with how to target a decent level of support to those who need it, whilst weeding out all these dodgy claimers.
    Which ones? PIP fraud is at almost zero percent.
    Obviously implied PIP fraud according to the Alf Garnett Gazette is about 99%
    How else do you explain the explosion in younger people needing financial support and apparently mostly unable to work; a post-Covid phenomenon that isnt hitting, to anything like the same extent, any other developed economy?
    I wouldnt try to explain it. Id leave that to the medical professiom who provide reports to the DWP for claims.
    Id not want to be the person saying 'well you dont look/seem very sick' without any basis for it other than a hunch
    The proper way to change it would be for the government to revise the assessment criteria, which (for PIP) are here, for anyone interested.

    https://assets.ctfassets.net/vms0u05139aw/pip_descriptors.pdf/93820be60dcc6420191292ed56e2c95f/pip_descriptors.pdf

    Check what the daily living scores mean
    If you get between 8 and 11 points in total, you’ll get the daily living component of PIP at the standard rate.
    If you get at least 12 points in total, you’ll get the daily living component at the enhanced rate.

    Check what the mobility scores mean
    If you get between 8 and 11 points in total, you’ll get the mobility component of PIP at the standard rate.
    If you get at least 12 points in total, you’ll get the mobility component at the enhanced rate.


    Whether changing those criteria would be fair, easy, or even possible, given the internal opposition within Labour, I leave for others to decide.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 10,175
    Who should Sir Keir be sacking for this debacle?
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,060
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Common sense from Le Pen:

    https://x.com/MLP_officiel/status/1940003469487677683

    Air conditioning saves lives.

    Leaving children, the elderly, or vulnerable people to suffer because there is no air conditioning, rather than developing an air conditioning plan, is completely absurd.

    To fail to plan is to plan to fail.

    Which planet is she on?
    Planet normal. Climate austerity is killing people. Every home should have air conditioning.
    She needs to work on her plan imo. "Aircon" alone is a tailpipe solution, treating a symptom.

    Traditional air conditioning is horribly inefficient, and it is far better done via heat pumps - which run at approx 1/3 to 1/4 of the energy use and cost, and passive measures before that.
    Traditional air conditioning is a heat pump.

    Aircon is no more treating a sympton than heating is. We have technology that allows us to make our living environment more comfortable and only lunatics would try to prevent people from using it.
    So you approve of heat pumps then?

    It does the same job more efficiently, so is the better solution.
    How about a header on Heat Pumps? Feel the time for it is now. You can dress it up as a political tome on how the US banning green subsidies means they get hot under the collar.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,047

    Who should Sir Keir be sacking for this debacle?

    Sue Gray.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    IanB2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    2 local by-elections tomorrow in North Tyneside, and 7 on Thursday including 2 Reform defences, the first time they've defended seats at by-elections I think.

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19403/local-council-elections-july-2025

    councillors who haven't even stuck it for two months? Impressive stuff
    Both quit immediately as they preferred their jobs and didnt expect to win. Why they ran, a mystery
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,856
    Stephen Timms bending over and taking everything from the back benchers.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Andy_JS said:

    2 local by-elections tomorrow in North Tyneside, and 7 on Thursday including 2 Reform defences, the first time they've defended seats at by-elections I think.

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19403/local-council-elections-july-2025

    Yes, first defences. Durham vs Lab and Newark in Jenricksville vs the Cons.
  • eekeek Posts: 30,494
    IanB2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    2 local by-elections tomorrow in North Tyneside, and 7 on Thursday including 2 Reform defences, the first time they've defended seats at by-elections I think.

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19403/local-council-elections-july-2025

    councillors who haven't even stuck it for two months? Impressive stuff
    In the case of the Durham candidate he should never have stood as he was employed by the council and should have resigned before standing..
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,289
    edited July 1
    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,366
    Some Labour MPs livid at being expected to vote on a 2 page bill of fluff
    This might be a massive backfire.......
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,579

    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo

    Didn't the BBC used to have a plot showing how the current year compared to previous years? I wonder why they stopped making that.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,922

    Who should Sir Keir be sacking for this debacle?

    Falconer, obvs
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,442

    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo

    Utterly catastrophic

    What a year of government. Dramatic failure on every front

    Who expected them to be THIS bad?
  • isamisam Posts: 42,128

    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo

    Smashing!
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    Is the Vanilla embed on the main site down again?
  • eekeek Posts: 30,494
    GIN1138 said:

    Is the Vanilla embed on the main site down again?

    nope, I'm posting from it
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,579
    isam said:

    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo

    Smashing!
    I still can't believe that during the election campaign they had declared the Rwanda scheme to have failed, despite it not actually starting.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,047
    https://x.com/WarMonitor3/status/1940095070100705423

    Trump hinting at deporting naturalised citizens in recent speech:
    Trump- “We also have a lot of bad people that have been here for a long time… many of them were born in our country. I think we ought to get them the hell out of here too"
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,908
    Leon said:

    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo

    Utterly catastrophic

    What a year of government. Dramatic failure on every front

    Who expected them to be THIS bad?
    If you think this is bad just wait until the doctors fk Wes Streeting
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,938
    Leon said:

    Nearly 20,000 people arrived in the UK in the first half of this year by crossing the English Channel in small boats - up 48% on the first six months of 2024. The figure for the first six months of this year is also 75% higher than the equivalent figure for 2023, which was 11,433.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2vv4ndl4zo

    Utterly catastrophic

    What a year of government. Dramatic failure on every front

    Who expected them to be THIS bad?
    Remember, they were elected to "end the chaos" 😂
Sign In or Register to comment.