"Benefit cuts: Monday will be the day that defines this government..."

I am also saddened that there has been little resistance from any other party - no one has been quick to point out the flaws or lies in the government's case.


With any luck, it will leave his party unelectable for a very long time.

Don't these two statements clash slightly? Surely the fact that there has been so little resistance from other parties suggests that not one of them is capable of doing a better job!

If you want the Conservatives out, who would you prefer to be in government?

Oh Polly....She is an absolute embarrassment to the left. Many of my friends who consider themselve to be left wing make it abundantly clear that people like her do not represent them. This kind of reporting is crass and hyperbolic, and all it serves to do is perpetuate myths among the middle classes, who take her word for gospel.

She is the worst kind of liberal - how much does a Guardian columnist earn? 110k? And then there's also the villa in Tuscany. What does she know about the lives of working people?

The first problem I have is that these changes are driven by ideology and not necessity.

The second problem I have is that the electorate in this country are actually idiots and they have a very poor choice of who they wish to vote for anyway.

The whole Guardian vs Daily Mail thing is pretty juvenile though, I read both every day and there are good and bad articles and comments on both sites.

Well I'll probably vote for the party with the greatest chance of winning who I believe to be less worse.

I don't think the point you raise in your first paragraph is entirely made out, however I do see where you are coming from.



Is there anything in particular in Polly's article which you disagree with?

...x...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/28/benefit-cuts-monday-defines-government

Worth a read. I know some, particularly on this forum (which seems to be UKIP HQ for some reason), will believe it to be liberal, wishy washy, hand ringing nonsense. However it is without a doubt that, as the piece points out, the changes will bring challenges. They will hurt many more people than the "scroungers" we have been told about and all with access to legal advice severely restricted.

I believe that the government has acted in a disgusting manner when it has come to welfare. I am also saddened that there has been little resistance from any other party - no one has been quick to point out the flaws or lies in the government's case.

I think the last paragraph in the piece is a good summary: "People should know that historians will record the earthquake of social destruction that happened in their name, while they read of nothing but "scroungers" and the 'soaring benefit bill'."

Cameron and his boys will be judged for this. With any luck, it will leave his party unelectable for a very long time.

In what world???

A £45 asda shop (that includes the cost of delivery a cost which could be cut if i was really struggling) will last me 3 weeks and there are some items i buy which i don't need. Another £10 MAX over the next three weeks will get me milk and bread. If we take out delivery costs then food costs me a little over £50 for three weeks and i eat fairly well.
People on benefits arguing about the cost of food need to do their shopping better, there's nothing wrong with smart price or basics food!

I don't think the Guardian and the Daily Mail are even in the same category.


OP, I feel exactly the same. The Tories had no intent on tightening up on benefit fraud- through improving strategies to identify fraudsters, through increasing the punishment, fixing any loop holes in the system etc. That I whole heartedly agree with. But they are attacking EVERYONE on welfare.

I feel sickened that our country is going to have to endure this, but what I despise is the sly, underhand way they are going about it. Calling their own people 'scroungers'. That's worse than Thatcher. They should at least have the self-respect to be open and honest about it. I'd have much more respect for them if they simply state that they believe too much money is being put into the benefit system and they want to reduce it, but they are justifying themselves in a deceitful, almost manipulative way.

Labour made mistake, they ****ed up in numerous ways, on numerous occasions, but at least they had integrity and respect for the people.

An avalanche of benefit cuts. There is more going on other than the bedroom tax. For a start we have a benefit cap coming in. There are changes to the council tax benefit – the Scottish Government has agreed that people will not receive less than they did under the old system. The same is not true in England where the amount of money available to councils has been reduced. We also have changes to disability benefit and ESA. I am sure that there are other changes coming in – all will come with adverse effects.

You need to go back to Edwardian times to find ministers and commentators so viciously dismissing all on low incomes as cheats, idlers and drunks. I agree that this is emotive language. However I think it is justified. I am of the opinion that there has been a demonization of those on benefits. I remember the remarks made by Osbourne who spoke about the neighbours with ‘the blinds still drawn’ whilst you go out to work. This is a clear, albeit clumsy, attempt at stirring up emotions and creating a ‘them and us’ culture – even between those in receipt of benefits. The ‘scroungers vs strivers’ rhetoric is another example. Ignoring the fact that the benefit changes are affecting households where people work very hard indeed as well as those who genuinely can’t work, this language was designed to bolster support for changes to the welfare state by leading people to believe that the changes were there to help hard workers and punish the lazy.

It's all a fraud, since IDS knows that 660,000 tenants with a spare room can never be found smaller properties, they will pay the extra or fall into debt and arrears until they are evicted. While you take issue with the point, you only seem to be concerned with the fact that Polly has suggested that some affected people will fall into arrears or be evicted. I agree that this will not always be the case and I am led to believe that some councils will not be evicting tenants. However, the wider issue, that the bedroom tax will not work and that what we have been told about the benefits of the policy is all a fraud, is a legitimate point.

When in dire straits, there will be no more crisis loans, only a card for buying food, with not a penny for bus fares. Councils will be responsible for helping those who would have usually applied for a crisis loan. There is no universal requirement as to how councils should help – most are going to give out food stamps while at least one will use its funds to set up a food bank. Bus travel is not free for those on JSA.

Personal Independence Payment - the details are still being figured out at the moment, I don't think we can draw any hard and fast conclusions on whether this will be a disaster. However, ATOS assessments for ESA don't fill me with confidence. There will also be a long, difficult transition process from ESA to PIP - e.g. people even now are still being transitioned from Incapacity Benefit to ESA.

A lot of these policies either make no sense at all or haven't been thought through. Whilst I do understand the need for a benefit cap, they've gone the wrong way about it.

I claimed it as my parents required me to for supporting me. This was 6 years ago... there was no limit on how long you can claim JSA nor do I know of any limit now. I stopped claiming because I became self-employed instead of complaining that there's no jobs.

PIP is a replacement to DLA - DLA/PIP is a non-income assessed benefit (so payable to people in work, children, pensioners and out of work) and is designed to cover the additional costs that living in a non-accessible society placed on disabled people. David Cameron claimed DLA for his son while he was alive. It is also a passport benefit to get a Blue Badge, disabled persons railcard, buspass etc etc.

ESA is the replacement to incapacity benefit and is for people who are unable to work (either short or long term) for 3 months or more due to illness or disability. As IB it was paid out based on evidence from GPs, consultants, social workers etc. As ESA eligibility is based on work capability assessments carried out by Atos. 20 minutes with a "healthcare professional".

PIP (which is live NOW for new applicants in 2 regions) includes a similar move from NHS/social services to Atos/capita administered assessments. The DWP projections estimate 20-30% reduction in claimants gaining help but no overall reduction in the cost of PIP over DLA (as the money saved from removing it from disabled people will be swallowed up entirely by the contracts with Atos/Capita).

I agree that the impact of DLA > PIP won't be clear until the transition is complete in 2015. But wanted to be clear that PIP has nothing to do with ESA apart from the unfortunate decision to replicate the assessment methodology that has proved such a problem in the transition from IB > ESA.

Although i partly agree with this response, its such a Labour like thing to say.

Perhaps the lack of response in Parliament is because Labour have finally realised that if they oppose everything the tories do, for the needless sake of opposing it, the country will go nowhere.

In order for countries to move forward economically, people need to make decisions that have to be put into action.

Constantly saying everything everyone is ever doing is completely wrong and bad and OMG CONSEQUENCES doesnt help anything at all.

The Conservatives were elected to do a job, why is everyone trying to stop them.

Do you not consider the possible benefits in the long run when looking at benefit cuts?

Met with the loosening of regulation in businesses in the last budget such as National Insurance cuts means more people will be employed.

Do you have any plausible alternatives?