Dispatches: Britain on benefits......Tonight Channel 4 8pm-8:30pm

  • 24 Replies
  • 5208 Views

Force_Majeure

  • *
  • Gold Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • http://forcemajeure007.wordpress.com/
From sky.com: Channel 4 Dispatches: The Disability Living Allowance helps three million people with disabilities to work. Ade Adepitan examines government plans to reduce the number of claimants.

Sky channel 104 & 135 Channel 4+1 at 9pm-9:30pm

From radiotimes.com:ABOUT THIS PROGRAMME

The Government is planning to stop giving Disability Living Allowance to more than half a million current claimants across the nation. Wheelchair basketball ace Ade Adepitan investigates what this will mean for those who will no longer receive it, and hears the opinions of disabled army veterans, workers and fellow Paralympians.

FM X
Expect the worst and hope for the best!!!  :)

KizzyKazaer

  • *
  • Global Moderator
  • Super Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8774
Thanks for reminding us - the programme was postponed from its original slot to cover the horsemeat business  >erm<

Force_Majeure

  • *
  • Gold Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • http://forcemajeure007.wordpress.com/
You're welcome!  :-)
Expect the worst and hope for the best!!!  :)


Ricardomeister

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 508
Watched the programme and 25 minutes is nowhere near sufficient to do justice to such an important issue.

Paralympians are no more representative of the vast majority of disabled people than Usain Bolt is of the able-bodied community. It was therefore rather lazy, imo, to spend so much time on the Paralympians.

The programme needed at least an hour so that we could see how DLA helps people to work and also how it helps re people's care needs. Some financial figures showing how much DLA contributes to the economy and how it saves money from other departments would also have been good.

It was sad that neither the programme makers nor McVey (unless she was lying) seemed to know that lifetime DLA awards have not existed for quite a few years now. A DLA award is either fixed or indefinite. Indefinite awards can be reviewed and a further medical may be required as part of that review. Therefore, the number of people receiving a lifetime DLA award is 0%, not the 71% that McVey erroneously claimed.

Tanni Grey-Thompson echoed the views of many disabled people when she said it would be better to reform DLA than start from scratch with PIP (don't forget the latest tick box test cost over 700m in addition to the hundreds of millions of pounds going to Atos and Capita). Her point about PIP possibly taking disabled people back to the ghettoisation of 30 years ago was also very valid.

All in all, there was nothing new in the programme and it was disappointing that the huge amount of opposition to the introduction of PIP from charities and dpo's was not mentioned, and neither was the sneaky last minute change to the mobility rules.

DarthVector

  • *
  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1164
Given that they only had 25 minutes, I thought they did a decent job with the available resources. They managed to touch on most of the headline points I wanted to see in there, although I do wish that the sneaky mobility reduction to only 20 metres had been mentioned, as you say, Ricardomeister.

The thing is, doing the Government's unfair treatment of disabled people justice would take an entire TV series all by itself, and I suspect the channel that tried it would encounter some interestingly "unrelated" problems with the Government afterwards. You certainly won't see the BBC do it, given the way the Government would strangle them with their own purse strings.

One thing we can do now is turn the whole "Paralympic superhumans" thing around and say to people, "well, you saw the problems those Paralympic people were having with it, how do you think it's going to be for normal people like me with no PR and no backup?"

I was delighted to see Tanni Grey-Thompson get the tiny 0.5% fraud rate in, though, because that's the first time I've seen it mentioned on TV in the entire two and half years that people have been portraying us as frauds and scroungers.

ATurtle

  • *
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1505
    • The Awesome Turtle Blog
Dame Tanni is bound to get the figures right, she asked for, and received lots of information from disabled people regarding DLA/ESA on twitter.  She is one feisty lady that is fighting for our rights in the Lords.

My annoyance with this programme is that I am visiting my father and could not get to see it and there is no on-demand version on the internet!


Tony.

"I choose not to place "DIS", in my ability." - Robert M. Hensel

Force_Majeure

  • *
  • Gold Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • http://forcemajeure007.wordpress.com/
The program should be available on 4 OD after approx 24 hrs or so, as when I looked up the details of this episode there was the option to watch previous weeks episodes.

Hopefully you can find it on there tomorrow'ish!

FM  :-)
Expect the worst and hope for the best!!!  :)

Force_Majeure

  • *
  • Gold Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • http://forcemajeure007.wordpress.com/
Expect the worst and hope for the best!!!  :)

KizzyKazaer

  • *
  • Global Moderator
  • Super Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8774
Watched the programme and 25 minutes is nowhere near sufficient to do justice to such an important issue.

Paralympians are no more representative of the vast majority of disabled people than Usain Bolt is of the able-bodied community. It was therefore rather lazy, imo, to spend so much time on the Paralympians.


Ricardomeister, I was thinking of the exact same thing about the length of the programme, it deserved a full hour really... 

I had additional thoughts about the emphasis on Paralympians (plus a wounded soldier thrown in) - were they supposed to represent the 'deserving disabled' so loved by those who believe every word written in the right-wing tabloids? If the programme had been an hour long, we could have maybe seen some 'ordinary' disabled people's experiences mixed in with those of the athletes.

Though it was good that all the Paralympians emphasised that, outside their sport, they were affected by the same everyday limitations as others rather than being 24/7 'superheroes'!

hemiman

  • *
  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 49
on watching this last night, when interviewing the paralympian for horseriding ( the one with CP) they stated not being able to walk 200m, i thought it was 20m not 200m? if anyone watched it did you think differently or hear anything different?

KizzyKazaer

  • *
  • Global Moderator
  • Super Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8774
200 m was the figure being used that I noticed - but actually, it could be either, depending on which of the six descriptors for the 'moving around' activity is being referred to!  (the numbers at the end in bold font are the points that can be awarded per descriptor.)  Compare and contrast A/B with C/D/E....

A Can stand and then move more than 200 metres, either aided or unaided. 0
B Can stand and then move more than 50 metres but no more than 200 metres, either aided or unaided. 4
C Can stand and then move unaided more than 20 metres but no more than 50 metres. 8
D Can stand and then move using an aid or appliance more than 20 metres but no more than 50 metres  10
E Can stand and then move more than 1 metre but no more than 20 metres, either aided or unaided.  12
F Cannot, either aided or unaided (i) stand; or (ii) move more than 1 metre. 12



>edit for typo<
« Last Edit: 26 Feb 2013 02:14PM by KizzyKazaer »

hemiman

  • *
  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 49
thankyou for that reply Kizzy, i fear i'll get 4 points as often than not i have to park more than 50m from my office but i use a stick to get around. I'm assuming 4 points will get me nothing, i'm more worried about losing my blue badge than the money as my BB allows me to park onsite at work and near to my house, without it i wouldnt get parking on site or be able to park near my house, i may need to park 100s of meters away which is no use to me!!! oh hum what will be wil be i suppose!!!

Force_Majeure

  • *
  • Gold Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • http://forcemajeure007.wordpress.com/
KizzyKazaer,

With regards to the following:- F Cannot, either aided or unaided (i) stand; or (ii) move more than 1 metre. 12

Does 'aided' include using a wheelchair and moving it more than 1 metre even if you can't stand. Coz most wheelchair users that I know have adapted vehicles paid for by their DLA mobility component. If they were to lose this, then it's not just a blue badge that they'll lose, it'll be their car and therefore their biggest access to independence? Then how on earth are they supposed to be able to pay for a car themselves, never mind the adaptations, even if they are not required it would be impossible to buy and run a car if they lose their eligibility for mobility, under the new criteria for the mobility component of PIP.

So when the government 'learn lessons' from what they class as their 'mistakes' they don't make things better for the people, they make things better for themselves.

Disabled people have begged for their independence but not like this, without support we can never truly be independent.

FM
Expect the worst and hope for the best!!!  :)

Force_Majeure

  • *
  • Gold Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • http://forcemajeure007.wordpress.com/
With respect to the article that I linked above and here:-

http://atosvictimsgroup.co.uk/2013/0...alympic-games/

Maybe if a large portion, if not all of England's Paralympian superstars had chosen to walk out of the games on day one of the paralympics; (especially as it was sponsored by ATOS) it would have been a great platform, a worldwide platform, to express all disabled people's grievances about the cuts to benefits. I think that they would have got a lot more respect for that, than by winning any medals for our country.

Did ATOS sponsor the paralympics on purpose as a political move to ensure that they also got the government contract to do the medical assessments for PIP? There are many huge global and British companies that could have been approached to sponsor this international event. ATOS purposefully pitted disabled people against disabled people, they exploited the paralympians to showcase to the media what (some) disabled people are capable of and then our government let the media run with it.

Even media personnel and their families are not immune to disabilities, what if they or their children are born or become disabled, and then they get called scroungers and benefit cheats, but just like the Paralympians who had no way of foreseeing how their achievements would be twisted and used against the non-paralympian disabled people, the media also have no way of foreseeing what the future holds for them, except by what they choose to write next, as most of the population believe what is written in the news and the media are well aware of how they influence public opinion.

FM

P.S.
I know this is a big ask, but maybe, just maybe, if some, if not all paralympians give back their medals in front of a media spotlight, people might wake up and see how the paralympians were manipulated by ATOS to gain public support for disability benefit cuts? Or is it too late now to show their support?
Expect the worst and hope for the best!!!  :)