FINALLY!! Ian Duncan Smith Releases Death Statistics!

Original post by Bornblue

That list covers just over half of all (male) deaths - i'm guessing the female list won't bee too different.

So out of the 2380 people, chances are over half had something on that list. And it's way, way down on the list before you get to causes such as road accidents.

But you don't know that.

You've assumed that.

Reply 42

Original post by Midlander

If the trebling in the number of deaths since the Tories took charge is attributable to something else why must the DWP feel the need to begrudgingly release the information? Simply put it in context and explain that it's all a coincidence?

They didn't begrudgingly release the figures.

A FoI request went in for the information And was answered with 'these figures will get released officially in the very near future so you can wait to get them when they get released officially.'

I don't know where this idea that they weren't young to get released came from. Probably from the same people who said we we're in a triple
Dip recession and the giver enemy was manipulating the figures to hide it.

Reply 43

Original post by Jammy Duel

Because of this thing
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents
Along with what most of the this thread, along with the others, is a prime example of: manipulation, rhetoric, blind hate and a lack of critical thinking.

You do realise that the scope of the FOI Act will be greatly reduced in the next few years to prevent even basic information such as this from being released?

Reply 44

Original post by MatureStudent36

They didn't begrudgingly release the figures.

A FoI request went in for the information And was answered with 'these figures will get released officially in the very near future so you can wait to get them when they get released officially.'

I don't know where this idea that they weren't young to get released came from. Probably from the same people who said we we're in a triple
Dip recession and the giver enemy was manipulating the figures to hide it.

Your last point is facetious though you know statistics can be measured and reported in any way so as to make something look better or worse than it is. Expect to see that with measures of poverty in the near future.

Reply 45

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by Midlander

You do realise that the scope of the FOI Act will be greatly reduced in the next few years to prevent even basic information such as this from being released?

Do you actually have any proof, or is this just more baseless anti-Tory rhetoric?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 46

Original post by Jammy Duel

Do you actually have any proof, or is this just more baseless anti-Tory rhetoric?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Don't think the Telegraph is known for producing that:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11748233/Freedom-of-Information-Act-could-be-watered-down-as-review-is-launched.html

Reply 47

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by Midlander

Don't think the Telegraph is known for producing that:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11748233/Freedom-of-Information-Act-could-be-watered-down-as-review-is-launched.html

I see you didn't read past the headline though

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 48

Original post by Jammy Duel

I see you didn't read past the headline though

Posted from TSR Mobile

OK so we're going to see the scope of FOI increased? Unlikely, the government already moved quickly to close the loopholes that allowed the Guardian to publish Charles' correspondence. The politicians quoted express concern that they cannot speak freely during private meetings lest it come to an FOI request, it is not hard to derive from that that information will become harder to obtain, not easier.

Reply 49

Original post by Midlander

You do realise that the scope of the FOI Act will be greatly reduced in the next few years to prevent even basic information such as this from being released?

Good. Like most things like this it started out as a good idea and then the massively beurocratic problems never got factored in.

The massive costs associated with answering in many cases trivia.

The complaints that FoI's aren't getting answered when they're asking for officially releasable numbers in advance of their release date. ( as witnessed in this example)

Or that fact that FoI's get used by every bat **** crazy loon or retired Victor Meldrew with too much time on their hands.

Reply 50

Original post by MatureStudent36

Good. Like most things like this it started out as a good idea and then the massively beurocratic problems never got factored in.

The massive costs associated with answering in many cases trivia.

The complaints that FoI's aren't getting answered when they're asking for officially releasable numbers in advance of their release date. ( as witnessed in this example)

Or that fact that FoI's get used by every bat **** crazy loon or retired Victor Meldrew with too much time on their hands.

I think the DWP's naughty made up stories are in the public interest. FOI keeps the government on its toes precisely for things like that.

Reply 51

Original post by Midlander

I think the DWP's naughty made up stories are in the public interest. FOI keeps the government on its toes precisely for things like that.

Which made up stories?

A meaningless statistic is published and the usual suspects howl at the moon.

90 people a month out of a population of 65 million people die but we don't know of what.

Reply 52

Original post by Jammy Duel

Because of this thing
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents
Along with what most of the this thread, along with the others, is a prime example of: manipulation, rhetoric, blind hate and a lack of critical thinking.

The DWP have today refused to release another request citing sec. 22, this time on the number of disabled people worse off under PIP - a proxy for how many have been downgraded on the severity of their disability compared to DLA.

We can only assume with all these sec. 22's that the dauntless folk at the DWP are beavering away on a monster "future information release" the like of which the country has never before seen.

Maybe they will have the good grace to release the statistics before the election this time, or will they make us wait another five years, it having taken three and a half to get this data out of them?

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 53

Original post by MatureStudent36

They didn't begrudgingly release the figures.

A FoI request went in for the information And was answered with 'these figures will get released officially in the very near future so you can wait to get them when they get released officially.'

I don't know where this idea that they weren't young to get released came from. Probably from the same people who said we we're in a triple
Dip recession and the giver enemy was manipulating the figures to hide it.

Disability campaigners have been trying to get this information out of the DWP for the past three and a half years.

Reply 54

Original post by MatureStudent36

Good. Like most things like this it started out as a good idea and then the massively beurocratic problems never got factored in.

The massive costs associated with answering in many cases trivia.

The complaints that FoI's aren't getting answered when they're asking for officially releasable numbers in advance of their release date. ( as witnessed in this example)

Or that fact that FoI's get used by every bat **** crazy loon or retired Victor Meldrew with too much time on their hands.

Over two thousand people dying after supposedly being found well enough to work by a government medical assessment? That's TRIVIA to you?

Reply 55

Original post by MatureStudent36

Which made up stories?

A meaningless statistic is published and the usual suspects howl at the moon.

90 people a month out of a population of 65 million people die but we don't know of what.

The leaflet.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 56

RollerBall

20

Original post by scrotgrot

Over two thousand people dying after supposedly being found well enough to work by a government medical assessment? That's TRIVIA to you?

He never said that. Stop using a straw man.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 57

Original post by scrotgrot

Over two thousand people dying after supposedly being found well enough to work by a government medical assessment? That's TRIVIA to you?

I've known many people who have been fit as a fiddle and died.

As I've said before. A pointless statistic lacking any meaningful supporting data to make an informed decision.

Reply 58

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by scrotgrot

Over two thousand people dying after supposedly being found well enough to work by a government medical assessment? That's TRIVIA to you?

It is a triviality.
In the same time in the region of a quarter of a billion around the world died, about 1.5m in this country, nearly 300,000 of working age.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 59