100 days to save DLA & AA from the axe

[cally6008]

Claimants have just 100 days to prevent their DLA and AA being abolished.

A government green paper has revealed proposals to stop paying ‘disability benefits, for example, attendance allowance’’ and hand the cash over to social services instead.

Under the plan, current claimants would have their disability benefits converted to a ‘personal budget’ administered by local authorities and used to pay for services – not to spend as they wish.

Scissors cutting DLA and AA labelsOnce the green paper consultation period ends in 100 days time, if an almighty row has not been raised, it is likely that both major political parties will see the lack of outrage as a green light to end both DLA and AA.

We’re looking for a minimum of 1,000 claimants, carers and support workers to join our campaign to save these benefits from being abolished.

Find out how you can take part

We know that many people will take false comfort from the fact that, unlike AA, DLA is not specifically named as being for the axe. But if the government was planning only to abolish AA it is extremely unlikely that they would refer constantly throughout the green paper to ‘disability benefits’, a term which includes not just AA but also DLA.

Others will dismiss this as just another idle discussion document and our concerns as scare mongering.

But it’s much more than that.

36 meetings have already been organised around the country for people working in government and the caring professions to meet to be told about the setting up of a new National Care Service which would oversee the system. In addition, a stakeholders panel of more than 50 voluntary sector organisations, trades unions and academics has been established to offer advice to the government.

Some organisations and individuals, such as RNIB and welfare rights worker Neil Bateman writing for Community Care magazine, have already voiced their alarm.

But not every disability organisation is opposed to the proposals and some even agree with them.

In a press release, Disability Alliance has welcomed the publication of the green paper and said that it ‘looks forward to working alongside Government and all the other stakeholders in bringing these plans into fruition.’ They have even said that they agree that there is a case for ‘integrating disability benefits such as attendance allowance’ into the new system.

One thing everyone does seem to agree on is that huge cuts in public spending will have to take place in the next few years as a result of the credit crunch and global recession.

Political parties are desperately looking for the softest targets to be the victims of these cuts. Dismissing the green paper’s proposals as hot air and not worth worrying about could be the costliest mistake you ever make.

Find out more about the proposed abolition of DLA and AA and how you can join our campaign to fight back:


http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/l ... om-the-axe

[grey owl]

Dear Cally,

I received the e-mail from Benefits and work this morning too. I came on to the message boards to write a post about this only to find you got here first . I have signed up to the campaign and would urge others to do so too. Unfortunately I feel that things are only going to get tougher for disability benefit claimants from now onwards and we need to grasp every possible (rare) opportunity for making our voices heard. I wonder if this topic could be made into a 'sticky' ?

Lets hear it for bendy Bods!

Grey Owl

[curlysue]

I've just been reading about this.

It is a ridiculous proposal... they seem to be saying that instead of giving people money to help them look after themselves, they will send a professional round to do the looking after (after an assessment of needs). This strikes me as MUCH more expensive for the government than simply doling out the cash to each individual. We all know that family carers save the government billions of pounds every year, and if carers were paid the 'going rate' then the government would be spending much, much more than they are currently spending on DLA/AA/CA.

So the amount of money earmarked for each person by social services if these plans go ahead, very likely will not pay for the amount of care needed. So people will go uncared-for and also be financially worse off.

Also, if a person has a trusted family carer, the likelihood is that they will want to be cared for only by that person. What I can see happening is a social worker saying "We'll send someone over to get you up in the morning" and the person saying, "No thanks, I'd rather my spouse did that" etc. Then the person will be taken as refusing care, and of course they won't get the money either way.

Because what the govt don't seem to realise is that people don't necessarily use AA or DLA to pay for a professional carer to care for them. Quite a lot of people, especially those including myself who can't work, use it partly to live on, because IB is such a tiny amount of money. It can also supplement a loss of earnings in a partner (for example) who might have to go part time in order to be a carer. There are a myriad of ways that DLA/AA can be used to make a person's life easier or more enjoyable, and the government are reducing it to just one use, and a very inefficient one at that.

And another thing! On the NHS, sick and disabled people are ALREADY entitled to free aids and adaptations from OT. I had an OT assessment and received several basic items (such as shower stool, perching stool, etc) for free. Now, it seems from this green paper that the government are proposing that social services pay for these items out of your DLA/AA allowance. So they are proposing making the individual pay for something that is currently free!

These proposals make no sense. They will siphon money away from sick and disabled people, and put it into a very inefficient system of sending out professional carers. The result is that many people will end up much poorer. Even if they only do this to AA, that will mean millions of disabled old people being even worse off than they are already.

I've signed up for B&W's campaign and I hope more people do!

CSx

[Englishgremlin1]

I knew they were looking at gong to reform benefits related to the contributory system (especially Incapacity benefit) but not DLA and AA. There language is epaking of individual control but to my mind the best way for that is to let me make my choices.

DLA specically was set up not to cover health care and carer costs but as a seperate source of funding to allow access to a more normal life (transport etc..). when it was introduced it was made plain that is was not to cover care costs. I can only the this as a flawed way of reducing budgets.

[l00pyp0u]

fully agree with all the above coments, and have already put my name on the list, though I am still waiting to hear about my DLA.

Reading through the site, shouldn't we have 1 section for all of these things? I have set one up in Doctors and Diag, trying to get them to reconsider prioritising HMS, and in my own personal case I am succeeding, then we have Grey Owls post on Radio 4 and the ESA, then this one as well. Not complaining, just commenting

Curly sue and English gremlin, do you mind if I copy and paste these for my MP? In fact I think we should all get on to our MP's, again. More we shout, maybe one day we'll be heard

Louisa

[Englishgremlin1]

no problem - stir what pots you can

[curlysue]

Yeah that's fine! Let us know how you get on. I'll be writing to my MP too, at some point soon.

CSx

[grey owl]

Dear Curley Sue,

How utterly amazing. I have just realised that you live in Leeds. I was brought up in Leeds and the rest of my family still live there. Now I live in the Lakes (well not actually in them - I am not 'Bownessie' ) but go 'home' every now and then. Maybe we could meet up some day, I have only knowingly met one other HMSer! My chaps live quite near Roundhay Park. A northern meet would be good some day (here's hoping).

Sorry, didn't mean to change the thread at all. I really should contact my MP re. HMS when I can think which partic. issue to highlight. I keep him busy with all sorts of issues inc. autism, Leonard Cheshire campaigns, World Vision and other things. However he is threatening to give me the 'order of Lenin' (he is Lib. Dem.! ) as I sacrificed the well being of my right ankle (perhaps permanently) when I broke it delivering leaflets for him .

However I don't have any first hand experience of ESA (yet) as I am still on I.B. although review happening literally any day . I have joined the DLA campaign though, it will be interesting to see what Steve Donnison has us doing.

All the Very Best
Grey Owl

[l00pyp0u]

Okay here's what I sent, ta for the contributions, it was much easier that way

Dear Michael Meacher,
I am sorry about this and appreciate that you are incredibly busy. Having contacted you a few weeks ago with regard to prioritising HMS as a condition through the system, I feel really cheeky contacting you again. However, I have applied for Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and Attendance Allowance (AA), as I am struggling so much. I am waiting for their decision at present, which is why I am writing to you now.
The Government currently have a green paper which has revealed proposals to stop paying ‘disability benefits, for example, attendance allowance’’ and hand the cash over to social services instead.

Under the plan, current claimants would have their disability benefits converted to a ‘personal budget’ administered by local authorities and used to pay for services – not to spend as they wish.
It is a ridiculous proposal... they seem to be saying that instead of giving people money to help them look after themselves, they will send a professional round to do the looking after (after an assessment of needs). This strikes me as MUCH more expensive for the government than simply doling out the cash to each individual. We all know that family carers save the government billions of pounds every year, and if carers were paid the 'going rate' then the government would be spending much, much more than they are currently spending on DLA/AA/CA. (Carers Allowance).

So the amount of money earmarked for each person by social services if these plans go ahead, very likely will not pay for the amount of care needed. So people will go uncared-for and also be financially worse off.

Also, if a person has a trusted family carer, the likelihood is that they will want to be cared for only by that person. What I can see happening is a social worker saying "We'll send someone over to get you up in the morning" and the person saying, "No thanks, I'd rather my spouse did that" etc. Then the person will be taken as refusing care, and of course they won't get the money either way.

Because what the gov-t don't seem to realise is that people don't necessarily use AA or DLA to pay for a professional carer to care for them. Quite a lot of people, especially those including myself who can't work, use it partly to live on, because IB (Incapacity Benefit, Or Employment Support Allowance)is such a tiny amount of money. It can also supplement a loss of earnings in a partner (for example) who might have to go part time in order to be a carer. There are a myriad of ways that DLA/AA can be used to make a person's life easier or more enjoyable, and the government are reducing it to just one use, and a very inefficient one at that.

On the NHS, sick and disabled people are ALREADY entitled to free aids and adaptations from Occupational Therapy. Now, it seems from this green paper that the government are proposing that social services pay for these items out of your DLA/AA allowance. So they are proposing making the individual pay for something that is currently free!

These proposals make no sense. They will syphon money away from sick and disabled people, and put it into a very inefficient system of sending out professional carers. The result is that many people will end up much poorer. Even if they only do this to AA, that will mean millions of disabled old people being even worse off than they are already.
DLA specially was set up not to cover health care and carer costs but as a separate source of funding to allow access to a more normal life (transport etc..). when it was introduced it was made plain that is was not to cover care costs. I can only see this as a flawed way of reducing budgets.



Yours sincerely,

Louisa Price
Cut copy and paste the bits you want, go to mysociety.org, our projects, write to them, enter your postcode and hey bingo there you go!!

[l00pyp0u]

My mp's sec is out of the office until Tuesday 11 August 2009. so have to wait for reply, will update you when I get one.

Louisa

[curlysue]

Grey Owl - yes, definitely up for a meet-up some time - I live quite near R'hay Park too so would be very easy! Feel free to PM me any time, and we can arrange something next time you're 'home'.

Anyway back on topic - I think the DLA campaign involves writing to MPs, so I'll wait for B&W's say-so and then put something together (which will probably be based on my post!). I am still on IB too, up for review in 2011 but wouldn't be surprised if they sprung something on me before then.

This whole DLA/AA thing makes me very fearful for the future... my OH assures me we'll be fine but if I lose my IB (possibility, as the ESA tests are more stringent so I'm told) and my DLA I will have zero income and will have to be dependent on him 100%. This is not a good thing for a person's self esteem or independence... part of the good thing about IB and DLA being non means tested is that regardless of your partner's income, you still get your own money. It seems the government want to treat disabled people like children. I am not very fond of the phrase 'nanny state' but it is appropriate in this instance I think.

CSx

P.S. Louisa - you're welcome!

[nonyanomemory]

Perhaps this post could be a 'sticky'!

Looks like the Disability Alliance are backtracking....

http://www.disabilityalliance.org/care6a.htm

I don't trust them though after their support for ESA.

Just in case you are too tired to get to the link mentioned in the first post to sign the petition here is a direct link to it:-

Petition Link Below

http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/disabi ... la-aa-cuts

For those that have a moment to spare link to the Green Paper available for download

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsand ... /DH_102338

nonya

[poppy]

i've signed up and emailed everyone on my contact list. also mentionng it on twitter several times a day. thinking about asking my stepdad to write to mp because mum told me he's good at writing letters and my brain is barely functional at the moment, it is getting better as i'm getting more used to the morphine but i'm still pretty out of it

[Englishgremlin1]

I have just wrttine to my Mp and though you all may like to see what I have said - I am not that clever with letter as some of you know but I have tried to point out an extra point on EDS and HMS as well in the hope that it will get through. I used an internet system called "write to them" which claims to send an email confirming delivery. If anyone is writing to their MP I would say please make sure that you read the documents carefully and write their own letter - MP's will ignore it if people send a standard letter wich has not been thought out.

Dear XXXXXXXXXX

I am not sure if you would remember me but we have met a couple of times and chattered after funeral is at St Albans. Since we met my health has continued to deteriorate which forced me to retire from most of my work three years ago.

I am writing to you with reference to the consultation in progress at the moment for the new National Care Service. There are several points of concern I have regarding this and some features of the discussion which I think could improve the system quite a lot.

The idea of greater integration between all the agencies and parts of the system for social care and support is one I am very much in favour of. Under the present system it is very hard work on the part of the one needing care to work out what they are entitled to, how to access this and then to get any coordination between care, hospital and occupational therapy. They all seem to work with their own rules and guidelines which often leave gaps. The new structure will have to involve bringing together Occupational Therapy, Social Services support, carers, and the benefits system.

One concern that I do have is that the Green paper mentions "disability benefits" and the idea seems to be that this new system will supersede all disability benefits available at the moment. I have concerns over this aspect of the reform.

1. Disability living allowance was established so that disabled people could access normal life rather than be excluded from it. It was made explicit in this benefit that it was not simply for personal care but to help somebody live as near a normal life as possible. Certainly in my case without this benefit I would not be mobile any longer as I depend on the mobility component to run my car and pay for transport.
2. If this benefit disappeared it would also mean that I could not afford a lot of the disabled equipment which I require. In most areas Occupational Therapists can advise on equipment that is needed and can arrange for the provision of things like walking frames, raised toilets etc but when it comes to equipment like writing slopes, adapted cutlery, and other things necessary for normal functioning they cannot just give them the person has to take their advice and go and purchase them. For people in my situation it is the disability living allowance and other disabled benefits which make getting these essential items possible.
3. The social model of disability aims for inclusion to the maximum degree possible for disabled people. There are unfortunately extra costs if you are disabled in terms of travel, paying for help and carers when travelling etc. I cannot see where in the discussion paper on this reform these aspects are covered.


One example of this from my own very recent experience is when the Occupational Therapist told me that I will have to either have two electric wheelchairs (one for upstairs and one for downstairs) or move into residential care (which I certainly do not want to do). When she approached the wheelchair service their reply was that it is local policy to only ever give one electric wheelchair per person. I can understand this from the point of view of their budget and trying to be fair to everybody. However this did mean that I have to find funds for a second wheelchair and my only income is from my Disability Living Allowance.

The idea of one national assessment to be used for the whole system could be brilliant or could be an absolute disaster. The weakness of the present system is that it works fine for well-known disabilities but for less well recognised ones it can be a very stressful and long battle to access the care and support that is needed. I myself suffer with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome hypermobility type (also sometimes called Hypermobility Syndrome). Some people from our support group have do battle for years to get any help whilst others seem to get help much easier. The system at present seems to work in a too subjective way.
The ideal of a National Care Service with a single national assessment on the surface seems to be a good idea but how a national assessment is designed would be absolutely critical to its success.

The idea of personalised care and support is one that I would like to see. However the proposals themselves seem to work against this in some regards. At the moment somebody who is disabled can have quite a bit of choice in how they receive services, this comes partly from the benefits they receive and how they choose to spend them and partly from the right to have personal control over who they choose to care for them through direct payments for their care needs. Under the structure propose in the consultation paper and the Green paper some of this control will be taken from the individual and it would depend on the national assessment as to what support they receive. This seems to be providing less personalised care and support than the present system.


On page 130 it lists six things which service users should receive. In one sense this question is a bit silly because nobody would say that the values listed there are wrong. As with all things it is the implementation that is most critical. It is interesting that choice and providing the maximum possible integration in society is missing from this list though.

Overall I think that this green paper has some good ideas but I have one big fear with the whole thing. In changing the entire system with a national assessment there is a very large risk of the new system itself swallowing up large amounts of money in Administration and organisational costs so that in the end it does not improve the care for disabled and elderly people at all.

There are some good ideas within the Green paper and the discussion document and I see the partnership option as the only really workable one in terms of funding. This would allow people on low income to receive the help they need but also mean that those with their own resources contribute some of their care costs. The idea of funding it via insurance would work well for people who get disabled in old age after a lifetime of work; however it would not work in the case of people who become disabled at a younger age or are born disabled.

I have the feeling from the Green paper and discussion document that the aims of the reform are good but I do not see the aim being fulfilled, especially in the area of personalised care and support, by the proposals that are put forward. I am not in favour of disability benefits going directly to care services rather than to the person needing care. This takes away the personal control which disabled people lose in many aspects of their lives.

One other thing not covered in the Green paper is the cross-border problem. I think that legislation like this should apply to all parts of the United Kingdom and not just to England. At present there is already major disparity in areas like wheelchair services and social care and if reforms such as this proposal are introduced they need to apply to all people. At the moment services vary both in what is offered and in quality not just in terms of different parts of England but also in different parts of the United Kingdom.

Sorry for this being a fairly long letter but this is a major issue and it would not do it justice to write less. I would appreciate it if you would take my views into account when this comes up for discussion in Parliament.

[l00pyp0u]

GO, ENGLISH,
well done much better than I wrote. Write to them is part of mysociety.org, which is a site I hugely recommend.

I thought your arguments were very well phrased, as I am on a kids limited Broadband, I can't do what I want on it, so cant get to the papers yet, hopefully, my replacement will manage to sort out my broadband today, and I can get back on MY PC and actually do some proper research.
Lou