- This topic has 13 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Topic
.. and I expect that would be the same for many of us, and what effect for the car industry of swamping early returns and fewer sales? The electric vehicle help towards net zero? Our capacity to look after ourselves, and avoid going into a care home, or in—home council funded care? These are all genuine concerns that hopefully the government’s Green Paper will dispel, but if it doesn’t do write to your MP, and let’s remember that most things we worry about don’t happen.
Recent cars: Hyundai Kona Ultimate EV; Volkswagen Caddy Maxi wheelchair accessible; Skoda Enyaq iV SportLine; Vauxhall Mokka-E; Kia Soul EV, Hyundai Kona (again)
- Replies
On the one hand the Gov. say too many people are claiming benefits and need to get back to work, on the other they tout possible means testing…the two don’t exactly go hand in hand. It Pays to be poor is the phrase that springs to mind.
All conjecture at this point, but the govt “people handling” playbook is offer a catastrophe, then water it down to a calamity, which we take thinking we were lucky…followed by misdirection..oh, look, a squirrel…
In life, it's not who you know that's important, it's how your wife found out.
On the one hand the Gov. say too many people are claiming benefits and need to get back to work, on the other they tout possible means testing…the two don’t exactly go hand in hand. It Pays to be poor is the phrase that springs to mind. All conjecture at this point, but the govt “people handling” playbook is offer a catastrophe, then water it down to a calamity, which we take thinking we were lucky…followed by misdirection..oh, look, a squirrel…
I think that you are right, they probably will freeze it next year, and tighten assessments.
Recent cars: Hyundai Kona Ultimate EV; Volkswagen Caddy Maxi wheelchair accessible; Skoda Enyaq iV SportLine; Vauxhall Mokka-E; Kia Soul EV, Hyundai Kona (again)
All conjecture at this point, but the govt “people handling” playbook is offer a catastrophe, then water it down to a calamity, which we take thinking we were lucky…followed by misdirection..oh, look, a squirrel…
That’s certainly the approach taken by all governments before a budget. Leak something horrendous that’s never going to happen, so that when some bad news is announced we are just grateful that it wasn’t worse. They think we are all stupid not to see through it.
They went after a range of pensioners by removing the winter fuel payment. They refused compensation to the Waspi women after saying they would go ahead with it during the general election. etc etc.
I hope I am wrong, but fear I’m not, when they say they are going to change the PIP eligibility criteria and alter the way the payments are allocated. I fear some will be left in a really bad situation. Roll on the 26th!!!
All conjecture at this point, but the govt “people handling” playbook is offer a catastrophe, then water it down to a calamity, which we take thinking we were lucky…followed by misdirection..oh, look, a squirrel…
That’s certainly the approach taken by all governments before a budget. Leak something horrendous that’s never going to happen, so that when some bad news is announced we are just grateful that it wasn’t worse. They think we are all stupid not to see through it.
Yes that’s how it works, an example, our council wants to change bin collection from every two weeks to four weekly collection so of course everyone is up in arms about it, but in a month or so I’m sure they will come back and say they got a compromise and the bins will be collected every three weeks.
Everyone will be celebrating that they stopped the four weekly and myself knowing that the three week collection is what they had in mind in the first place.
Oddly I think this bunch of chancers will hit us with draconian measures a government quite clearly right wing in all but name and as usual it’s us who can least defend ourselves will be the ones victimised
I would expect this would have an effect quite a few scheme user’s if this happened however, as of yesterday there were at least 80 of Labours MP’s rebelling on the governments intentions or more accurately reported intentions. I’m however, expecting a much softer landing when it comes to things happening and very much agree with what @Abercol & @Glos-Guy have said.
They are Marxist, not right wing. In line with the famous quote, sooner or later, they will run out of other people’s money. Much , much sooner and even more inept than the shower that bankrupted the country in the 70s. Easy pickings were inheritance tax on direct contribution pension pots ( not on public sector gold plated direct benefit), farmers and small business owners. Vat on private school fees that will be a net negative, but hey ho dogma prevails as with Crossland and grammar schools in the 60s. Then winter fuel payments. No shame. Guess we are next, but as with most decisions, they are incapable joined up thinking foreseeing the inevitable consequences. The minister was supposed to make a statement today, but last minute postponement for a week due back bench revolt. At least some have a conscience. Or a small majority. Rant over.
It will face a number of hurdles, as well as have to change some legislation in due course, which will take time, consultation, various readings in parliament and the lords. So any big changes, al conjecture at the moment, will not really come into force until 26/27 financial year.
I am on UC and just the mobility element of PIP, which obv i have my car, for which i’m grateful and makes a massive difference in my life.
As usual the words, rhetoric and media sensationalisation is to demonise and cast negative perspectives on the most vulnerable and disabled in society, an easy target.
No system it perfect and every system is open to misuse & fraud but the vast majority of people claiming UC or DLA/PIP are absolutely genuine, honest and need it. No disabled person, is deliberately disabled and the welfare system is meant to be there to protect and support us.
I think there will be understandably a call for everyone to report any change of circumstance, which has always been the case.
In terms of freezing benefit levels, they are now in the public domain for 25/26, all showing an uplift, including PIP.
I cannot see how they would ‘means test’ PIP, it’d not just have a huge impact on claimants – say for the sake of argument – PIP was means tested say based on a cut off of a income of £50k and / or having savings over £16k – it would have a huge impact, I’ve no idea the number of PIP claimants earning £50k plus or savings more than £16k, but I’d make an educated guess they’d be a high number.
The gov can’t risk putting the scheme in danger, with almost 850.000 leases on the Motability scheme alone, any drastic cuts, lowering or revoking claimants PIP, would put a number of dealerships at risk, would impact on cars sales (which includes leases/pcps etc..) and serious damage the motor manufacturing sector too. More importantly the personal, therapeutic and freedom aspects of having a lease on the scheme.
I’ve no idea the split of people on the scheme who are purely surviving on benefits like UC and those who don’t due to level of salary in work or other income / savings. Anyone know?
I stopped working 4 years ago, due to other health conditions and commodities, over and above my main disability. I’m in my 50’s never had a private pension, i have no savings / nor assets (just debt), i rent my accommodation. I receive the basic UC and LCWRA and PIP mobility component high (covers my car).
I just survive tbh, watching every penny, and with the impact of cost of living, l definitely have a limited quality of life and rely on the benefits i do recieve. I worked for 35 years, paid hundreds of thousands in tax, and became disabled at 27 years old.
I’m hoping there will be clarity from gov in the coming weeks & months on exactly what they intend to do & a lot less scare mongering in the media and especially social media
An excellent post @Dante2
I agree that if they decide to pursue a means tested route it will affect hundreds of thousands of people plus, if they do go down that route, I wonder if they will take partners income & savings into account, as they do when assessing for care costs?
My wife (the PIP recipient) has a small private pension, but it’s still worth more than the combined enhanced rates of PIP for both daily living and Mobility. However, as PIP is tax free, she isn’t a tax payer, but she will be when she starts to receive a state pension in 4 years time, albeit at just 20%. My private pension is significantly higher than my wife’s, but I have deliberately restricted my pension income to (just) avoid triggering higher rate tax, as I can foresee a scenario where partners of higher rate taxpayers are deemed not be in need of benefits which would, of course, be deeply unfair. However, when my state pension commences I cannot avoid higher rate tax any longer, so she may be at risk then if this approach is adopted.
Savings is, of course, another area they may look at. We have gifted large sums to our kids, both to help get them on the property ladder and also as we are concerned that it would otherwise go on care costs in years to come, and the majority of our remaining savings are in my name, but if it works the same as care cost assessments they will still take money that is in my name into consideration, which could still cause a problem for my wife. The ba*tards get you one way or the other!
I am wondering if they might start making all benefits taxable (as my small Carers Allowance is) but, of course, that would fly in the face of ‘making work pay’. It’s all a minefield and I’m finding it difficult to call what might happen. I think that what’s throwing me is that this is all coming from a Labour government. Their normal political ideology, and inherent tendency towards the ‘politics of envy’, usually makes them go after those who have worked hard and been prudent with their money, in order to fund whose who do neither. I can’t see them doing a complete reversal of their usual form, which is why I keep coming back to them adopting some form of means assessment, but how they do that in a way that still makes work pay is beyond me.
You are correct that the impact on Motability and indeed the motor industry of any means testing changes could be severe, but the ZEV mandates are already crippling the motor industry and this government is still saying that they are sticking with the current targets and deadlines. However, the emergency consultation on this concluded at the end of last month and all industry bodies consulted will have undoubtedly said that the targets are unachievable, so it will be fascinating to see if they will finally wake up to the obvious fact that the targets have to be relaxed. The problem will be whether they can overcome their own political dogma. The VAT issue on private schools has been a case in point, as the costs of having to absorb the displaced kids into the state education system is likely to exceed the new VAT take. This is what happens when you have a government of political ideologists, activists and previous councillor types, almost none of which has any business experience so don’t understand the basics of supply and demand 🙄
An interesting article from the Daily Fail, regarding Starmer making a personal plea to MP’s who are again’t to back him on benefits cuts, as he recalls his late mother and brother were disabled!
Obviously you take many of these press article with a pinch of salt, but remember Kier the toolmakers son and our Rach from accounts have allready hit pensioners hard, many of whom were on the poverty line to begin with.
Lots and lots of media coverage but, unusually, absolutely no details on exactly what is being proposed 🙄
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.