New report exposes government's hidden disability benefit reforms
A NEW REPORT entitled Responsible Reform, published today by disabled people (9 January 2012), finds that government misled MPs and peers over the hostility to disability benefit reform.
It finds that Parliament has been given only a partial view of the overwhelming opposition to the Coalition's planned reforms of a key disability benefit, Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
It also finds that this opposition was previously not released to public scrutiny by the Government.
The report is based on the responses to the government's own consultation on its planned DLA reforms, which were only made public once disabled people requested them under the Freedom of Information Act.
Findings include:
* 98 per cent of respondents objected to the qualifying period for benefits being raised from three months to six months
* 99 per cent of respondents objected to Disability Living Allowance no longer being used as a qualification for other benefits
* 92 per cent opposed removing the lowest rate of support for disabled people
Read reactions to this report here: http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/16008
Read the full report "Responsible Reform: Changes to Disability Living Allowance" here: http://www.ekklesia....dla_reforms.pdf
New Report Exposes Government's Hidden Disability Benefit Reforms
Started by
Apparelyzed
, Jan 09 2012 05:15 PM
5 replies to this topic
#5
Posted 10 January 2012 - 12:47 AM
While I heartily agree with the points of this report,,, I can't help but ask the question ( since we are among ourselves, here),,, who was it exactly that were consulted,, and got to cast a vote on their views? From reading the report, it struck me that they were made up exclusively from the diabled community,, by that I mean we who HAVE a disability and those whose paychecks depend on helping us.
It strikes me as highly unlikely that there would be such a great consensus if the same questions were asked of the general public. I only wish it were the case,,, but I am too pragmatic to eccept that it could be.
ed
It strikes me as highly unlikely that there would be such a great consensus if the same questions were asked of the general public. I only wish it were the case,,, but I am too pragmatic to eccept that it could be.
ed
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users






Top









