Iain Duncan Smith resigns!!

originally posted by: crazyewok
Thinking about it there are some common sense savings to be made with disability benifit that dont effect the claimants.

The main one being the mobility part of the DLA and how they aquire the cars.

Someone I know has got a brand knew audi Q3 through DLA.....why?

Not why they have a car, because its vital that they do and a large car like that is needed for there wheelchairs /comfort.

But why is it acquired brand knew from the dealership?

The government could shave £100 a month by leasing cars that are two or three years old. The disabled still get a nice car that suits there needs but you save a bit of money.

I assume because it is still under warranty from the dealership and if an older car it would be the responsibility of the DLA?

Just a guess though.

a reply to: nonspecific

No need for a top of the range car, just a basic runaround.
...or do you think differently? If so, Why?

a reply to: nonspecific

In the past that may have made some sense but these days with high quality German cars 2 or 3 years is a good age and unlikely to have major issues.

The DWP needs to be more adaptable with the times and I think this is maybe something to look at.

Though I have a sneaky suspicion these brand new cars may have less to do with disability wellfare and more of a back door form of corperate welfare for car company's.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: nonspecific

No need for a top of the range car, just a basic runaround.
...or do you think differently? If so, Why?

Well I could only assume that with 3 kids and a budget based on benefits they would need something economical but big enough for the kids and dogs and also enough room left in the boot for a family holiday?

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: nonspecific

No need for a top of the range car, just a basic runaround.
...or do you think differently? If so, Why?

Well I could only assume that with 3 kids and a budget based on benefits they would need something economical but big enough for the kids and dogs and also enough room left in the boot for a family holiday?

Average car then?

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: nonspecific

In the past that may have made some sense but these days with high quality German cars 2 or 3 years is a good age and unlikely to have major issues.

The DWP needs to be more adaptable with the times and I think this is maybe something to look at.

Though I have a sneaky suspicion these brand new cars may have less to do with disability wellfare and more of a back door form of corperate welfare for car company's.

I imagine you are right in that somewhere along the line deals have been done regarding where these disability allowance cars come from.

People that knew this may have even bought shares in certain companies knowing this.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

We are many, and sick of being dictated to by the few. Perhaps this resignation will be the start of something we can use to take this country back for the people who really keep it running.

Maybe some kind of "Political Springs", where the whole 'Wasteminster' system self-implodes, and we elect people for roles/portfolios/etc. instead of electing entire/corrupted parties?

Hah! If only we could be so lucky!

a reply to: grainofsand

Depends on your view of average.

We have a year 2000 suzuki Ignis right now and happen to think it is pretty special dont 'ya know.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Thinking about it there are some common sense savings to be made with disability benifit that dont effect the claimants.

The main one being the mobility part of the DLA and how they aquire the cars.

Someone I know has got a brand knew audi Q3 through DLA.....why?

Not why they have a car, because its vital that they do and a large car like that is needed for there wheelchairs /comfort.

But why is it acquired brand knew from the dealership?

The government could shave £100 a month by leasing cars that are two or three years old. The disabled still get a nice car that suits there needs but you save a bit of money.

Totally agree with the crazyewok.

In fact I wouldn't even make it an option. I would pay for car tax on their existing vehicle or someone that would be their main driver and dispense with providing cars.

For those that don't have someone to drive them around, I would suggest a community transport agreement whereby local residents offer lifts for a set fee. It would be far less expensive than taxis and also give the person offering their services a few quid per week.

a reply to: comfortablynumb

Nah, the honourable member is misguided yet presents his assertions as fact lol

a reply to: nonspecific
I assume you can comfortably go on holiday in that Suzuki car of yours?

*Edit*
Is it hateful to suggest that disabled people could have second hand cars, you know, one or two year old, and breakdown cover of fifty quid a year, instead of a brand new motor? Is that hateful or sensible?

It seems to me, that this government has chosen to target the weakest, and most vulnerable segment of society, because they are not as vocal or able to fight back as others.

I was born deaf, not totally, but enough that I am unable to use telephones, or hear most people speaking. I didn't let this stop me, after school I trained as a laboratory technician for a company manufacturing UV curable plastic films and worked there for many years. Then I got cancer, and while I cannot prove anything, it is my belief that the cancer was caused by the chemicals I was exposed to daily. Many of which are now known to be carcinogens, such as benzene.

I was successful, with the help of the Christie Hospital, at beating the cancer, but the intensive x-ray therapy on my abdomen, damaged my pancreas, to the extent that it could no longer produce sufficient insulin. It in effect, turned me diabetic.

After the cancer treatment which took 2 surgeries and 8 months of x-ray therapy, I really didn't want to go back into the chemical industry, for rather obvious reasons. I got a job in a restaurant, I'm not ashamed to admit, that part of my job was delivering pizza's. Hey, a jobs a job. I worked up to a supervisory role. One night, two of my staff failed to turn in, so I went "back on the road", covering for them, delivering pizza's again. This was the era when pizza delivery was via little mopeds (motor scooters). I was unfamiliar with the roads, having been working "inside" as a supervisor for a while, I wasn't aware of some roadworks that local scallies had removed the bollards and barriers from.

I rode the moped straight into a small but deep hole. Dislocating my shoulder. During my recuperation in hospital, the restaurant fired me for negligence and told me I was lucky they weren't suing me to replace the moped. They may or may not have a point, thats for you to decide.

Once I recovered A friend of mine gave me a job landscape gardening with his company. One evening, after work, we went rock climbing, on a local sports centres training wall. A mutual hobby for us both. Unfortunately, during a climb, I lost my grip and fell. The drop wasn't long enough for the ropes to effectively arrest my fall, and I fell backwards in such a way that my right foot landed half on the mat and half off the mat, and this uneven landing caused me to pivot on that foot, shattering the right leg and talus bone in the right ankle. The leg was no issue, but the damage to the ankle was permanent.

The doctors confined me into a wheelchair for 3 years, to give my talus bone the best chance to heal, but it necrotised (died) anyway. This means that the bone in my ankle is crumbling away, which makes walking exceptionally painful. If I have to walk more than 1 or two house lengths, I have to take crutches, and tank up on painkillers beforehand. Even then it feels like my ankle is full of glass. To compound this, I do have to keep it semi-mobile, short frequent walks across the room, if I don't, it freezes up, and hurts even worse when I do finally need to move it (believe me, waking up is not fun).

Now remember how I mentioned the x-ray therapy essentially made me diabetic? Well, thanks to a condition known as diabetic retinopathy, 3 years ago, they took my drivers licence off me (didn't bother me because I hadn't driven since 2005), saying that my eyesight had degraded to such an extent because of diabetic retinopathy, that I could no longer drive. I am going blind.

It saddens me that people seem to think that the disabled need punishing. That we're malingerers. I would love to still be working, sitting here day after day, lacking human contact, unable really to do anything is soul destroying.

I mobilize to the store by means of a push bike, its just a few hundred meters, and I can let my bad leg hang while my good leg turns the pedals. It sounds odd but I've gotten used to it.

I get the low rate mobility DLA (not PIP) but when my DLA comes up for review, my benefit will cease, as the low rate is the one thats being removed. It helps pay for my very frequent taxi journeys to the eye hospital. When I'm not going to the eye hospital, it helps pay the rent. When it gets terminated, I will basically lose everything, not that I have much anyway, through not being able to meet my rent any more.

It does not buy me any luxuries.

Yes, I know a large number of people are soulless enough to say that its my own fault, as I shouldn't have gone rock climbing. Perhaps thats true, but I can't change the past.

a reply to: grainofsand

I never intended to suggest that I thought it was right just that from a financial point of view that it might be cheaper and easier to have them from new and covered by warranty and some kind of fleet purchase deal from the manufacturer as opposed to having to employ people to go and find second hand cars, buy them, service them and then have to deal with any problems that may arise from it.

Just a guess though, as someone said probably a back handed deal with the car manufacturer

Can't we go after a more vulnerable demographic. I mean the jobless, single mothers and the disabled is so 1980s we need to muster our angst against a new weaker more vulnerable demographic to get stuck into. Once this EU debate is over the claws will start coming out for new scape goats. because we would never have had the economic Collapse of 08 if it hadn't been for those living it up on disability and child benefit.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

I don't think there has been a single reply in this thread supporting the disability cuts has there?
It would seem we all find agreement for once.

Just seems people are going after the wrong targets again.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Lol, I started my civil service career in the DWP then got my degree and fast-tracked to the senior civil service.
I've done face to face decisions on the front line turning down crisis loans getting threatened with a stabbing and I've made and signed decisions on behalf of Secretary of States in Whitehall with other departments.
Don't have any preconceptions about my experiences fella, I've got heroin addict mates and millionaire mates lol.

There are many lazy bastards out there spilling coffee stains on job application forms, not offering or accepting a handshake at job interviews, etc, doing everything legal to negotiate the rules and not get the job as a result, but doing enough so they don't get sanctioned.
That is not recorded as fraud, it is the grey area of staying on benefits while avoiding having to work.
If you aren't aware of that then, lol, not much I can say to help.

*Edit*
I actually started with the Dept of Health and Social Security, then it changed to the Department of Social Security, then the Benefits Agency, and finally DWP which I transferred from shortly after it's creation.

*Edit again*
After resigning from the service I worked in local authority Social services as a 'welfare officer' helping council service users get the maximum they could from central government to mitigate the cost to the council. After that I worked for CAB as a welfare/debt advisor/advocate.
Lots and lots of lazy bastards in the UK, and lots of people who make stupid choices like £100 per month on the iphone contract instead of buying food and having a £10 a month pre-pay phone.
Bleat and break your heart as much as you like but the fraud/scam/game is deeply ingrained in UK society...you just don't see it lol

From the senior civil service to a welfare officer at the council? Good going.

Then again, I don't know a senior civil servant who doesn't know the plural of secretary of state is secretaries of state. As for those signed decisions, isn't that working out and signing a benefit letter? That's your best example. Not briefing ministers, not interdepartmental work, not secondments, not helping with speeches or pushing through policy or legislative changes - benefit claim letters.

You're going to have to try harder to convince us.

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

I'm not trying to convince anyone fella, don't believe me no worries, tiz only the interwebs lol
Now, your on-topic comments are what exactly?

a reply to: grainofsand

Just the kind of writing style that helped you to cruise through the CSSB and FSSB process, eh?

No matter. IDS is positioning himself for the post-referendum carnage that will rock the Tories, no matter what the outcome.

He couldn't give a monkey's toss about the disabled and he is doing Osborne a favour. The media, with their insatiable need for fast and shallow news, are paying attention to him and the "civil war" instead of the cuts.

Win-win. The anti EU Tories are happy. Cameron and Osborne are happy. The non-dom billionaires who own the British press are happy. The usual useful idiots follow the script.

What's more, the talent base in today's Tory party is embarrassingly small. IDS stands every chance of getting a ministerial post again.

IDS doesn't need made up credentials, he knows exactly what he is doing.

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

Oh I agree completely, and I think IDS is very clever the way he's playing his cards.
Of course he doesn't care about the disabled, only a fool would think he does.