Ian
Administrator
![[Avatar]](http://uploads.vforums.co.uk/forums/breathingforlife/sleeping_cat_avatar-m6r.jpeg)
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | | Re: Welfare Reform (15th Dec 12 at 11:25am UTC) | | Sixty nine per cent oppose Osborne's benefit cuts, new poll shows
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2012/12/sixty-nine-cent-oppose-osbornes-benefit-cuts-new-poll-shows
Unlike the Chancellor, the majority of voters believe that benefits should rise in line with inflation or more.
One of the assumptions commonly made in the current debate over welfare is that the public are on the government's side. George Osborne's plan to cap benefit increases at 1 per cent for the next three years is viewed as a vote winner for the Tories, with Labour's opposition to it viewed as a vote loser. But a new poll by Ipsos MORI suggests this may not be the case. Asked how much benefits should rise by, 59 per cent said they should increase in line with inflation, 10 per cent said they should rise by more than inflation, 16 per cent should they should rise by less than inflation (the government's policy) and just 11 per cent said they should not rise at all (an option considered by Osborne but vetoed by the Lib Dems). Thus, in total, 69 per cent believe that benefits should increase in line with inflation or more.
The poll contrasts with an earlier survey by YouGov, which found that 52 per cent believe Osborne was right to increase benefits by 1 per cent, with 35 per cent opposed. What explains the discrepancy? One difference is that MORI's question, unlike YouGov's, named specific benefits - Jobseeker's Allowance, Income Support and Child Benefit - that would be affected by the policy, something that is likely to have increased opposition to it.
Ahead of next month's vote on the Welfare Uprating Bill, the discovery that voters do not inevitably side with Osborne should have the effect of stiffening Labour's resolve. Provided that it continues to make the case against the bill in reasoned terms, not least by pointing out that more than 60 per cent of those families affected are in work, the argument can be won. Indeed, MORI's poll suggests that it may have been won already. | |
|
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | | Re: Welfare Reform (22nd Dec 12 at 11:18am UTC) | | 20 December 2012 – Welfare Up-Rating Bill Introduced
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/press-releases/2012/dec-2012/dwp138-12.shtml
The Department for Work and Pensions says people on disability benefits will not be affected by the 1% cap. But Scope, the disability charity, says that some 317,000 people receiving employment and support allowance who are in the work related activity group (meaning they are deemed capable of work if they receive support) will be covered by the bill.
Richard Hawkes, Scope's chief executive of disability charity, has put out this statement.
The ‘benefit scrounger’ rhetoric has gone too far. Some people need benefits. Get over it. The vast majority of disabled people need support. They aren't feckless, they aren't workshy and they aren't scroungers.
Benefits mean disabled people can do things everyone else takes for granted. Every Paralympic athlete will have had some state support at some stage.
This bill doesn’t protect disabled people. In fact it cuts support for the many disabled people who are looking for work.
Disabled people face massive barriers to finding work. The fitness for work test is failing and the Work Programme isn't delivering.
A 1% increase in Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) for the next three years is effectively a cut. This will make it even tougher for disabled people looking for work in this challenging economic environment.
| |
|
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
Ian
Administrator
Posts: 7,436
Status: Offline
Gender: Male
Joined:
pm | |
