[access-uk] Re: Incapacity and DLA
- From: <Clive.Lever@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:05:48 +0100
Hi David and all,
I had to look for the article from the Disability Now "Latest News" page
at:
http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/latest-news2
because the link you sent appeared to be broken when I tried it.
Best,
Clive
Clive Lever
Diversity Advisor
01622 221163 (extension 7000 1163) Room 1.15, Sessions House, County
Hall, Maidstone, ME14 1XQ.
Diversity is a strength and we will value and harness difference for the
benefit of all service users, the individual and KCC.
-----Original Message-----
From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of David Griffith
Sent: 26 October 2010 00:12
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Incapacity and DLA
As far as I am aware nothing has been announced on DLA, apart from the
plan announced in the spending review, to withhold the mobility
component from people living in residential care.
Under the previous government there were however, proposals to re-locate
the care component of DLA from individual allowances to become part of
the social care budget that could be accessed by local authorities. I am
not aware of these proposals becoming concrete plans beyond Green paper
talk yet but it is likely that this will be a fight to come It should be
remembered that the original policy remits of these benefits were to
address the extra costs of living with a disability and certainly not a
simple care allowance. . The government of the day came under pressure
to introduce these benefits after the famous OPCS survey identified
multiple sources of increased expenditure of living with a disability.
The eligibility criteria for the Care Component has, over the years,
drifted the understanding of this benefit from addressing the extra
costs of disability to a benefit focussing on care. This, however, is a
completely incorrect interpretation of the policy pressures for the
introduction for these benefits. Care was only one of the multiple
living costs identified.
This is after all why it was called disability Living Allowance as
opposed
to the earlier Attendance allowance. Attendance Allowance was branded
for
people over 65 only as for this age group it suited the government to
present this as a largely care element. The OPCS survey identified
heavy lifelong costs of living with a disability which the government
had to respond to. So effectively Attendance allowance was re-branded as
disability Living Allowance for people under 65 to provide politicians
of the time with a argument that they had responded to the poverty
caused by living with a disability identified in the survey. Nowadays it
suits politicians to completely ignore this original policy context and
pretend that DLA was after all simply introduced as a Care Allowance. It
is important to remind them that this is simply not true . The
continuing issues of increased costs of disability living, that the
benefit was designed to respond to , are as present today as they were
then.
By the way, Have you seen the disability Now article ?
http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/latest-news2/news-focus/concern-grows-ov
er-d
la-future
Although sadly it does not discuss the need to remind politicians of the
original policy remit of DLA, it is nevertheless interesting.
Regards
David Griffith
-----Original Message-----
From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of ANDY COLLINS
Sent: Monday, 25 October 2010 16:48
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Incapacity and DLA
Hi all -
Don't want to get a thread going on here, but have been searching the
online press, trying to get clarification as to whether incapacity and
DLA benefits are now to be means tested, following Ozzie Osborne's
spending review.
I know that Incapacity is going to be replaced, it's the means testing I
want to know about.
Can anybody give me a link where I can get some answers to such
questions?
No good looking at the .gov website as yet, so maybe this info isn't yet
available? Anybody know? -
Andy
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5561 (20101025) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5561 (20101025) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5562 (20101025) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5562 (20101025) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
** To leave the list, click on the immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe]
** If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
** and in the Subject line type
** unsubscribe
** For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
** immediately-following link:-
** [mailto:access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq]
** or send a message, to
** access-uk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the Subject:- faq
Other related posts:
