Is Access to work helping disabled people or not ?

I myself use Access to work for my part time job as a office worker and find it a key part to my working life. I use it mainly for transport costs to get a taxi to work and back due to the bus's being infrequent and unreliable at best. The last time i reapplied for Access to work i was given a really tough line of questioning from one of the advisors really asking quite personal and almost hostile questions to find out if anyway i can reduce the costs for them. I have found it to be a very good service on the whole and am so keen for it to be continued and even extended as it needs to be if the government are really serious about helping disabled people back to work as they claim. Of course the tories are not about helping disabled people in fact they have made it harder for disabled people who do want to work if anything. A brilliant blog post over at DPAC - Disabled people against cuts a group i'm very close to and support wherever i can takes a look at the mess taht is the Access to work scheme. You can read this in full over at http://dpac.uk.net/2014/10/what-the-f-is-going-on-with-access-to-work-join-the-stopchanges2atw-campaign/ For me as a blind worker Access to work is a god sent but alot in this blog post rings true with me too. In this piece which i'm quoting from the author uses's the term deaf in their piece this as the author is deaf but the message being put is much the same for any disabled people who have experience of Access to work. "More and more people are asking what is happening with Access to Work, the programme that supports Deaf and disabled people to get into and stay in employment, as changes are making it harder and harder to use. Despite the government’s well publicised extra investment in the scheme Access to Work’s clear direction of travel is to cut individual packages, with the result that the employability of Deaf and disabled people is being seriously undermined. When the Tories closed the Remploy factories in 2011-2012 they said there was no place for segregated workplaces in modern society and the money used to fund the factories would be better spent supporting Deaf and disabled people to get into and stay in mainstream employment through the Access to Work programme. Over the past year, with the factory closures out of the way, changes introduced to the AtW programme have decreased eligibility, brought considerable distress and uncertainty to customers who had previously and successfully used the programme for many years, pushed Deaf and disabled people out of jobs and left others fearing for their futures. It is difficult to summarise all the changes: AtW is awarded on a discretionary ‘case by case’ basis and the programme has always denied the existence of any blanket rules for particular impairment groups. What we have seen emerging are some clear patterns around the cutting of packages, lack of information and hostility to AtW customers alongside growing inefficiency and cuts to AtW service delivery. The first clear pattern emerged with respect to Deaf customers who suddenly found themselves labelled as ‘fraudsters’. Individuals contacting AtW advisers, in some cases advisers they had had for many years were greeted with a completely different and hostile attitude. They were told ‘there are high levels of Access to Work fraud in the Deaf community’. Changes brought in including the notorious ’30 hour rule’, requiring Deaf customers using more than 30 hours of BSL interpreters per week to employ a salaried interpreter, have literally left Deaf people unable to continue in their jobs. The government has sought to justify what it is doing by pointing the finger at interpreters, blaming them for ‘costing too much’, meanwhile undermining what is a highly skilled and important profession. A particularly nasty move has been the introduction of retrospective decision making experienced by both Deaf and disabled people who have had their packages cut with the cuts being backdated after support costs have already been incurred. This situation has been compounded by the fact that has review notices are no longer sent out warning AtW customers when their packages are due for renewal which easily leads to people not realising their packages have ended. Deaf and disabled people have been left owing thousands of pounds and has left interpreters and support workers owed thousands of pounds, causing considerable hardship and distress. Successful appeals against changes to packages have been made but many people do not realise they have a right to appeal or how they would go about making a complaint. Others are too worried about losing the rest of their package to make a fuss. This is where the website DeafAtW has been invaluable, providing information and support on how to challenge decisions. There is a growing level of misinformation, confusion and chaos coming from AtW itself as a result of a restructuring that has seen a dramatic reduction in the numbers of contact centres and outsourcing. AtW invoices remain unpaid from months and months ago because the addresses of the payment centres changed but customers weren’t told. Meanwhile application backlogs have amassed. Given that Deaf and disabled people often cannot start a job until their AtW package is in place, yet can only make an application after an employment start date has been confirmed, this has presumably Deaf and disabled people unable to take up job offers. Money pledged by this government for the Access to Work budget has yet to appear. This was highlighted at the Work and Pension Select Committee oral evidence session when Remploy confirmed that the £80million per year “saved” from the closure of the factories hadn’t materialised in AtW support. There was also an additional £17million that hasn’t appeared. These two amounts would mean the AtW budget should have doubled in the past four years, yet cuts are being made. For a government that claims its welfare reform measures are all about supporting more people into employment, the changes to Access to Work appear counter-productive. Moreover, in a time of austerity, changes to the programme represent a cutting back of a scheme that actually makes money for the state: the Sayce report found that for every pound invested in Access to Work, £1.48 is recouped by the Treasury. But for anyone familiar with Tory welfare policies none of this comes as a surprise. Ill-thought through ideologically driven policies are seeking to reduce ‘dependency’ and dismantle the welfare state, removing social security from those that need it and creating situations that will end up costing more. While the Tories describe AtW as a ‘benefit’ and a dependency and fail to understand it as an investment, campaigners have beaten back some of the attacks. AtW eventually conceded that it was not realistic to expect employers to contribute the on costs for salaried interpreters under the 30 hour rule. In May the Minster for Disabled People announced a review into the 30 hour rule and the DWP Select Committee Inquiry agreed not only to take evidence on how changes were impacting on Deaf people but also extended the deadline for submissions whereas originally the inquiry had been intended to focus on employment support for people with mental health support needs and learning difficulties. Individual decisions have also been revised in the face of continued campaigning and challenges. More is needed though. We have yet to hear the outcome of the Minister’s review. Meanwhile we are hearing of cuts to AtW packages impacting ever wider, putting jobs at risk and pushing Deaf and disabled people out of employment. We need to step up our campaign to make sure information is available and accessible and people know what to do if they are impacted by the changes, to fight for the employment rights of Deaf and disabled people and to protect the terms and conditions of BSL interpreters and ensure we are not divided. StopChanges2ATW campaign open meeting – Thursday 23rd October 2014, 6 – 7.30pm, 336 Brixton Road, London, SW9 7AA. For more information read StopChanges2ATW and Inclusion London’s submissions to the DWP select committee inquiry: http://www.inclusionlondon.co.uk/ATW-ILs-%20and%20stop-changes2atw-respond-to-call-for-evidence

Many families in Eastern England one pay cheque away from loosing their homes

HUNDREDS of thousands of families with children in the East of England could not pay their rent or mortgage for more than a month if they lost their job, new figures from Shelter reveal today (Monday, April 14). The YouGov survey of working adults who pay rent or a mortgage found that with little or no savings to fall back on, 45% of all working families in the East could be just one pay cheque away from losing their home. The research also found that in the east of the country, a quarter of all families face the nightmare scenario of immediately being unable to afford their home if they lost their income. More than 200,000 families (26%) said that if they lost their job this month and could not get another one straight away, they would not be able to make their next rent or mortgage payment from their savings. Kate Murray lives with her five year old daughter and disabled mother. She lost her job as a business manager with only three days’ notice when the company she worked for went bankrupt in October 2013. Kate said: “Before my employer went bankrupt they hadn’t been paying me properly for a while, so I’d started to fall behind on my mortgage. Then I got the letter through the door saying they wanted to take my house back. I was petrified. It’s not the best house but at least it’s our house. I thought, what am I going to do? How am I going to tell my daughter and my mum that we have to move out?” The latest government figures on savings mirror Shelter’s research, revealing that there are 15m working age adults in the UK with no savings at all. The charity’s findings showed that 3.8m working families from across the UK could not pay their rent or mortgage from their savings for more than a month if they lost their job, and 2.4m of these families have no savings to fall back on at all. Liz Clare, who is a helpline advisor at Shelter, said: “This research highlights the financial knife-edge that millions of us now find ourselves on – living month to month, pay cheque to pay cheque. Every day we see the proof that just one piece of bad luck, like a sudden job loss or illness, could tip any of us into a spiral that puts the family home at risk. “Sky-high housing costs and stagnating wages mean that saving is becoming a thing of the past for many people. Most of us simply don’t have enough money in the bank that we can rely on for long enough to get back on our feet. We need better government support to give families the short-term help they need to keep their homes if they fall on hard times. Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said: “Finding another job is hard enough, but without a stable place to live it’s almost impossible. No matter how hard ordinary families work, in today’s ‘knife-edge nation’ any drop in income can all too quickly put their home at serious risk. The government must make sure the safety net is strong enough to stop families falling through the gaps, and going through the tragedy of losing their homes.” Anyone who is worried about losing their home can contact Shelter for free, independent advice. Visit www.shelter.org.uk/advice or call the helpline on 0808 800 4444. Written bySINEAD HOLLAND http://www.hertsandessexobserver.co.uk/News/Bishops-Stortford/Families-in-the-East-of-England-one-pay-cheque-away-from-losing-homes-20140414055855.htm?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

Opposing tory David Lloyd PCC pay for your crime idea

Our undemocratically elected Police and Crime Commissioner in Hertfordshire who received a embarrassing turnout to grant him a lovely annual salary of 80 k plus has come out with a reactionary right wing idea today. Yes this may come as a surprise but I thought it needed a response. If David is willing to debate with a local socialist I’m more than happy to oblige, I very much doubt he will have time though to speak to one of us plebs. Suspects should be charged for being kept overnight in police cells, a police and crime commissioner (PCC) has said. David Lloyd, PCC in Hertfordshire, said the "honest taxpayer" should not be forced to meet the cost. Instead criminals "should be punished in the pocket", Conservative Mr Lloyd said in an open letter laying out policing proposals. Hertfordshire Police said it was "working closely" with Mr Lloyd. Mr Lloyd said he thought "most people" would agree with his plan. Chase payment "Putting people up in cells overnight really is a very expensive part of policing and is almost always the fault of the individual," he said. "I think most people in this country would say [offenders] should pay for it, not the honest taxpayer." What an utterly ridiculous thing to come out with. It’s always the fault of the individual is it David? What about the social factors which can lead to a individual turning to crime be that through desperation addiction to drugs due to pressures of capitalist society or being driven to mental illness through work including depression and can lead to all sorts of difficulties in the community should these also be made to pay for their crimes they commit ? David Lloyd the conservative PCC in Hertfordshire who also wish’s to bring in G4S in Hertfordshire to run our police service seems to have spoken his mind in a hugely right wing reactionary fashion. He claims many people would agree with him I wouldn’t be so sure. He also claims not everyone will pay it will be something we’ll have to look at closely dam right you will it’s a ridiculous idea and something that is unworkable in so many ways. Crime for me is often a class issue like many things in society it is bound up in the class relations in society where many are left on the scrap heap with no future from a system which does not care for them. Much like with the riots in 2011 much of the sentences handed out were political trying to make a statement giving out 4 year sentences to someone who had stolen a bottle of water I ask you, seriously? I do wonder where the labour party is on this issue nationally and locally so far we’ve heard nothing from them. Given how tough they were on crime and civil liberties I wouldn’t be surprised to see them keeping quiet n this one too. Or is that the scent of hypocrisy rising again I can smell. Socialists are not against tackling crime and more often than not it’s the working class affected more so by crime but punishing criminals in the pocket further isn’t going to solve anything. How about properly funding a decent rehabilitation policy with funds for creating a future for people who fall into crime for whatever reason that may be.

The crisis at the BBC- toxic level of cuts

Over the weekend and the last few days there has been a huge campaign by the government and others in the media to smear the BBC and its record. The corporation which is apparently is in deep crisis with several high ranking resignations and several more stepping aside has lead to all sorts of speculation of its future as a journalistic establishment. Now I have my criticisms of the BBC like everyone but for the most part it is a solid organisation. It doesn’t cover workers movements or strikes very fairly but I don’t expect it too it represents the interests of big business and always supports the government of the day notably a capitalist agenda. But we are in danger of missing the bigger picture here which may well be the intention to deflect the attention from child sex abuse allegations in north Wales. All the frenzy of the BBC we have rather forgotten that there have been some serious allegations made here which must be looked into. The whole fury over the Newsnight report on Lord Mcalpine and was he or wasn’t he involved in child sex abuse is really not the point in my e yes. Someone or many people were involved and Phillip Schofield and his list on this morning along with Tom Watson in the commons have something which surely they wouldn’t risk their reputations on airing in public. The police cannot be trusted in all this either and have come off quite well so far but they to need to take some blame for covering up this awful incident/s and a reopening of the original investigation is a matter of urgency. The NUJ the journalist union have released a statement which I publish below setting out where they feel things have got to and the toxic mixture of big cuts, bad management and gross incompetency. The NUJ has called for an end to cuts at the BBC, saying the Newsnight crisis is a wake-up call to an assault on frontline journalism that has cost 9,000 jobs since 2004. General secretary Michelle Stanistreet says cuts are threatening the quality of journalism not only at flagship programmes such as Newsnight, which has had its budget slashed by 50% in real terms over the past five years, but in local radio and television as well as the World Service. She said: “With fewer journalists, many employed on a casual basis, it means there is no time for that extra telephone all, no time to double-check the facts, no time to reflect properly before a programme goes out. “The current re-grading proposals could see a situation where someone can be paid the minimum of £15,000 and end up in charge of a sensitive political report, or even output a whole programme and then get blamed when it goes wrong. “It’s testament to the great journalists working at the BBC that they manage, often through sheer goodwill and professional commitment, to get the job done despite staff shortages and dwindling resources. But the pressure this puts on journalists and journalism is undeniable.” Calling on BBC chair Lord Patten to take a long hard look at what has happened, Michelle Stanistreet urged him to take on a director general who would fight for quality journalism and stop the cuts. She said: “There must be a moratorium on these cuts. This should be a wake-up call to the BBC – they need to take the opportunity to halt the assault on frontline journalism and put in place measures to shore up news and current affairs before it is too late.” The NUJ believes the backdrop to the Newsnight crisis is the remorseless cost-cutting across the BBC that started in 2004. Since then 9,000 jobs have gone, including 140 in BBC news this year alone – the eighth consecutive year of cuts. Michelle Stanistreet said: “Mark Thompson’s decision, behind closed doors, to agree to a licence fee freeze until 2017 and to take on an extra £340 million in spending commitments, including the funding of the World Service, local TV and the rollout of fast broadband, was a disaster for the BBC. “This has been compounded by the way BBC senior executives have implemented the cuts. They have chosen to cut staffing and budgets in frontline journalism; news has been particularly badly hit. Rather than hack away at the fleshy layers of management, they have chosen to cut at the sharp end and inevitably that will make it harder for quality, thorough journalism to flourish.” * NUJ members at Newsnight have asked the NUJ to make clear they are appalled at what happened, and that the overwhelming majority of those who work there had no involvement with the story, and were not consulted about it before broadcast. They are determined to go on doing their jobs and to support the BBC management in its effort to go on delivering the Corporation’s world class journalism.

Outsourcing police dogs, are there any limits to privatisation?

In Hertfordshire the latest plan to cut spending on police is this new idea to outsource police dogs and limit their use.

Whilst I’m not a huge fan of the police clearly this is significant if the police are feeling angry about cuts and are not being protected by the state. Police should have full trade union rights like other workers and have the ability to withdraw their labour like anyone else.

For a full democratic society police should be accountable to the wider public. Privatising parts of the police and outsourcing areas such as trained police dogs is just one part of this trying to undermine police officers doing their jobs.

SPECIALIST police dogs will be outsourced and handler numbers in Hertfordshire slashed under plans to cut the budget by £1.1m.
Slicing the budget by almost a third would mean police dogs for Herts, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire would be based 48 miles (77km) away from Hertford, and only be available 18 hours per day, according to a report to a police authority meeting on Friday (July 20).
The report read: "To achieve the most operationally effective unit, it is proposed that a model based upon 24 dog handlers will provide resilience, a level of flexibility and peak demand overlap. It will provide savings of approximately £1.1m (32 per cent of current budget).
"A model of 24 constables is considered the optimal number and will provide resilience both within the unit and to LPC [Local Policing Command] areas.
"Based on substantive levels of research and consultation, it is evident that the dogs unit could be reduced effectively by introducing a defined remit based upon four core areas of activity."
One Herts dog handler, who asked not to be identified, told the Mercury: "The resources are already stretched. We can’t provide any decent level of service because of the cuts that have been made. To think that we could cover three counties with 24 constables is stupid because we can’t cover two counties with 24 now.
"We’ve been kept completely in the dark and I don’t feel at all valued. This process absolutely stinks. The figures that have been looked at have been manipulated to suit.
"It’s an absolute nonsense. I hope that the police authority sees through it and sees sense."
East Herts chief inspector Gerry McDonald added: "Police dogs offer me reassurance, an ability to run faster than my officers and track people. They’re often used for drug detection and firearms recovery. It’s daily business for us.
"I’ve got a whole menu of options and police dogs are another opportunity. I don’t know what the impact will be yet but the constabulary’s not going to let me down."


with extracts from the Hertfordshire Mercury

Police dragging disabled man from wheelchair during student protests

From this interview with Ben brown from the BBC news http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXNJ3MZ-AUo&feature=youtu.be

this had outraged me this morning. I feel the bbc was hugely unsensitive to this poor disabled man who repeatably told the intervewer that he posed no threat to police at all yet was dragged from his wheelchair twice and his over the head by a batton. I'm frankly disgusted with our police force this morning and the bbc for reporting this badly. Shame on them. I hope poor Jody Mcintyre makes a full recovery along with ALfie Meadows who ended up in hospital within a inch of his life with bleeding on the brain due to being struck over the head with a trunchen.

There has been many blogs and articles written on this news story but i'd like to add my thoughts and feelings to this dispicable act by our nations police force of which we are supposed to have such trust and faith in to protect us. What kind of protection is this if they are going after a poor innocent disabled man who has a long term permenant disability. It is just frankly a sad state of affairs that this country has turned this way. What makes matter worse is the sheer short sightedness of the BBC interviewer- Ben brown who asks the most ridiculous questions of a man who can hardly move. Totally disregarded his disability and treated him like he was a criminal and had started the violence. Really disapointing to see the BBC turn this way as almost a extension of the governments media department now.

I used to like the BBC but any more reporting like this i am afraid i will have to find my news somewhere else.

I hope a complete inestigation is carried out into this incident and the Alfie Meadows incident and official complaints are launched and the police who did this are brought to task for this.

Myself and this blog do not condone violence and would be condeming this just as much if a police officer got hurt dont get me wrong but i se no evidence of this so will stand on the side of the poor innocent students who could not defend themselves like the police could.

Ian huntley

Huntley, 36, killed 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in 2002.



Would just like a good rant really. This guy who was convicted of killing two young girls a number of years ago has today lodged a compensation appeal against being attaked while in prison. I am goin to have to take a little bitof a right wing view on this really. In my opinion Ian huntley commited his offence and is serving time in jail. To me the prisons in this country are far too soft on offenders. People who commit serious crimes including murders and rapes and all sorts of things like that should not have their human rights once they have been found to have been guilty. I'm sorry but the best way we can reform our prisons is make them tougher. there is no deterent at the moment and i'm afraid that is one of the big reasons for our prisons being too full. If there was a real deterant and there was a real disadvantage to going in jail i am sure 80% + will not keep reoffending. The fact is our prison service in this country is far too soft. People get a easy ride in there and when i hear of news stories like this where the offender is complaining at how they are being treated i cant help but think this is all wrong. i just hope i never see the day where prisoners and offenders criminals etc have more rights than the actual victim, that will be the day this country goes to teh dogs. We need to stop listening to these wet liberal figures and do gooders and sort these criminals out, maybe then we wont have such high numbers in prisons if there was a real fear of going in there. If Ian huntley was attaked in prison firstly how did we even hear of this, surely all this should not become public knowledge, it creates a possible sympathy for him and he does not deserve that at all after waht he done. in my links section of this post i will post the news story this blog post is replying to. feel free to take a read, If you dont know the case or have forgotton take a read of what happened.