There are some 700 PFI contracts with a capital value of £57bn, and around £160bn still to be paid for their use and maintenance.
-
Looking for a smarter way to manage your heating this winter? We’ve been testing the new Aqara Radiator Thermostat W600 to see how quiet, accurate and easy it is to use around the home. Click here read our review.
Welfare reform bill vote today
- Thread starter Notch7
- Start date
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 45,845
- Reaction score
- 3,514
- Country
It's certainly not easy.
You may think it is, but it isn't. You have to get medical reports, attend regular and repeated assessments even when your conditions are known to be chronic, debilitating and life-long. You face being refused and having to reapply or appeal and face a tribunal.
It's not what you think. Dosser fills in piece of paper and collects wonga thank you very much, it is not.
What it is, is demeaning. You feel that every condition you have is being questioned. Are you really ill? Are you really unable to do X, Y or Z?
And the worst thing is, you face being assessed by people who are not highly medically trained. People who ask "What's that? I've never heard of that?" when you tell them the name of your condition.
And they have reports in front of them from all your consultants who are highly trained in their field.
And this all happens when they know you have a serious ill health pension from your employer (in my case).
You feel less than worthless. You really do. It's dreadful.
No wonder people losing disability benefits and PIP have committed suicide.
Strange. Not doubting your personal experience but I heard the opposite only yesterday from a friend who is a landlord of a couple of flats. The bloke that does her masticating and is also a landlord, damaged his back a while ago. He’s better now and was told by one of his tenants to apply for PIP. Apparently the whole family were getting it. They helped him fill in the form, no interviews or phone calls and he got it no problem. I don’t know how much though but it’s not means tested either.
I thought that’s exactly what they have done.
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 45,845
- Reaction score
- 3,514
- Country
No, it's not means tested.
And there are two parts to it: daily living and mobility.
The first if you need help with everyday stuff and the second if you need help getting around.
And there are two parts to it: daily living and mobility.
The first if you need help with everyday stuff and the second if you need help getting around.
That sounds like a job somebody could really get their teeth into.
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 7,051
- Reaction score
- 1,173
- Country
I disagree. IMO that's squeally pathetically over-exaggerated ignorant bohlox from people who would always react like that regardless of the facts.
The eligibillity level they're talking about is an inconvenience, like needing some rails etc to hang on to or a stool to sit on in the shower. There might be odd things in specific cases to be paid for, which could be recoverable, but paying me routinely £73 or £100 a week, for life, because I got old age problems a bit early, is a nonsense.
If someone is a little more serious such that they need help, then they WOULD qualify for the payments.
PIP is about independence, not having a few age-related issues to deal with.
Both govs have made a mess of it.
lol. She calls him her mastic man. I’m typing on a phone so missed that auto correct!
No those are the fantasies of the Reform party.
Which have fallen for
Mottie is easily conned
How else - sovereign wealth fund "war chest" excepted - do you expect such capital infrastructure to be paid for?
Government borrowing. It turns out a lot cheaper in the end.
I know. But they end up paying a lot less.
I agree.
However, coz of FPTP / two party / tribal nature of UK politics, that option is fraught with peril, especially for Labour.
Why?
One of Labour's fundamentals is public investment in infrastructure.
Tories, very much less so. So they don't have the problem to deal with.
Basically, Tories let it crumble ("saving" money - "We are the party of fiscal responsibility!"-type crap), knowing that Labour will have to pick up the poisoned chalice of fixing it.
The financing of which the Tories then use as a stick to beat them with - "They've increased the debt! They've put up your taxes! We are the party of fiscal responsibility!"
How to fund it?
Taxation - Tories go on the attack, and the electorate fall for the "Labour are the tax and spend party!"
Borrowing - Tories go on the attack, and the electorate fall for the "Labour just grow the national debt!"
Given the parless state that the Tories left schools and hospitals in, Labour had to do something to rebuild, while avoiding the traps above.
PFI was a solution.
PFI is crap, but it is only countenanced because enough of the electorate are the way they are i.e. tribal, stupid, deluded, childish.
I agree with all of that.
It is many times harder to put up taxes than to cut them. Over eighteen years, the Tories under Major and Mrs T recklessly slashed public investment in order to obsessively cut taxes. Then their private sector chums made a killing out of PFI because that was the only politically acceptable way to reverse the damage. We are now left with the worst of all worlds.
I think it is more that many simply don't want to face tough choices any more. Labour learnt that the hard way in 1992.
