Linda

Mar 162013
 

Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit

Urgent Bulletin

Department for Work and Pensions, Caxton House, Tothill Street, London, SW1H 9NA

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/local-authority-staff/housing-benefit/

HB/CTB U2/2013                                                  12 March 2013

Contact Queries about the

  • bulletin in general, contact

housing.benefitenquiries@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

 

distribution of this bulletin, contact

housing.corredspondenceandPQs@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

 

Who should read All Housing Benefit (HB) and Council Tax Benefit (CTB) staff
Action For information

Court of Appeal judgement: Burnip, Trengove and Gorry

1        We advised you in HB/CTB circular A6/2012 on 1 August 2012 (http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a6-2012.pdf) that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has applied for permission to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court.

2        The Court of Appeal judgment on 15 May 2012 unanimously held that in the cases of Burnip, Trengove and Gorry the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) size criteria discriminated unlawfully against the three appellants on grounds of disability, by not including provision to meet their need for an additional room.

3        The Housing Benefit Regulations were amended independently of the court case (Burnip and Trengove) and the changes came into effect in April 2011. This change allowed an extra bedroom where the claimant, the claimant’s partner or both, need and receive overnight care and require a bedroom for the carer’s use.

4        For children with severe disabilities where they are unable to share a bedroom (Gorry), the department chose to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court on the grounds that the use of the size criteria was not discriminatory or in any case could be justified.

5        The Secretary of State has today clarified the position regarding disabled children and has decided not to pursue the appeal further.

6        This means that from the date of the Court of Appeal judgment on 15 May 2012, local authorities (LAs) should allow an extra bedroom for children who are unable to share because of their severe disabilities following the guidelines as set out in paragraphs 7 to 10 below.

7        When a claimant says that their children are unable to share a bedroom, it will be for LAs to satisfy themselves that this is the case, for example, a claim is likely to be supported by medical evidence and many children are likely to be in receipt of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) for their medical condition. In addition LAs must consider not only the nature and severity of the disability, but also the nature and frequency of care required during the night, and the extent and regularity of the disturbance to the sleep of the child who would normally be required to share the bedroom. In all cases this will come down to a matter of judgement on facts of each individual case. 

8        It should be noted that the judgment does not provide for an extra bedroom in other circumstances, for example, where the claimant is one of a couple who is unable to share a bedroom or where an extra room is required for equipment connected with their disability.

9        LAs were previously advised that as a result of the Court of Appeal judgment they could suspend part of the award which allowed for the extra room. For any cases where the LA has suspended for this reason, the suspension can now be lifted and the claimant notified of the revised decision. Arrears must also be paid as appropriate.

10   The Court of Appeal judgment is now considered to be case law and as such LAs are legally bound to apply the judgment.

11   The judgment applies to both the LHA size criteria and the reduction of the spare room subsidy which applies from 1 April 2013.

Crown Copyright 2013

Recipients may freely reproduce this bulletin.

 Posted by at 21:03
Mar 152013
 

You tell us! Add your voice to the online discussions… TODAY!

http://www.worldwewant2015.org/enable

Log-in or register: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/register

Languages:

English: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/315485
French: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/318849
Spanish: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/319255
Russian: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/319372
Chinese: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/319398
Arabic: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/315334
Portuguese: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/319249

On 23 September 2013, the United Nations General Assembly will hold a High-level Meeting on disability and development, under theme “The way forward: a disability-inclusive development agenda towards 2015 and beyond”, at UN Headquarters in New York.

To ensure that the post-2015 agenda is inclusive of disability, an online consultation has begun on 8 March and will continue until 28 March.

Tell us what you think and share your perspectives on:

CHALLENGES to including persons with disabilities?
What WORKS?
Good IDEAS?
ROLE of Governments, UN, NGOs, academics, private sector?

Your concerns and ideas will be help in preparing for the outcome document for the UN High-level Meeting on 23 September 2013.

Also, invite your friends, colleagues and networks to join in this discussion!

Warm regards,

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) and UNICEF in collaboration with the United Nations Partnership to promote the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNPRPD)

Contact: enable@worldwewant2015.org

 Posted by at 16:55
Mar 082013
 
Richard

Richard

Richard’s Story

I lived at home until I was 20 years old. Keen to go to university, leave home, do all the things every young person wants to do, I applied to the then relatively new ILF. To my joy, I received a top-rate award. This enabled me to leave my home in Sunderland and go to university with the confidence that I had the support I needed to live. At first, I used an agency to support me, then hired my own Personal Assistants. I never looked back. With the support of my Personal Assistants, I lived a very normal student life. Clubs, parties, late nights, festivals, you name it. I was able to live alongside my fellow students, away from institutionalised housing. After graduating in Economics, I qualified as a teacher and, slowly, improved my career by taking every bit of part-time work I could. I was able to do that because having my own Personal Assistants who were with me, not for bits and pieces of time, but long periods, meant I could accept work at short-notice.

Eventually, I made a breakthrough and landed a permanent job at a very good school. I moved again to be near it. Again, the support of my Personal Assistants was invaluable. I didn’t have to rely on colleagues for anything, I was competitive in the workplace. After a few years, like many working people, I needed a break. I moved again, to Coventry, to do an MA in Education. Again, my Personal Assistants supported me and were invaluable. I met people who could help me with my career, I was able to “network”, but none of this happens without a proper level of support that means you can genuinely live independently, on the hoof sometimes.

Following my MA course I landed a job as a Head of Department. Again, I moved. I’m still there now, hoping, at some point, to progress to a Deputy Headship either there, or somewhere else. I’m flexible, and adaptable as to where I can live, and my travel, because I have a proper level of support. I have my own friends, I see them when I like, because having my Personal Assistants enables me to do so. I can live in my own house, purchased in 2010, with full independence and dignity. I can travel when I want, I can live. I am a success story, I think, of the ILF. It has enabled me to live way beyond a structured, clean and feed existence. As a result, I’ve got my own career, life, and I contribute to society. I am a higher rate taxpayer.

Effect of ILF closure, on me

If the ILF is closed, well, this fills me with dread. The risk is that a cash-strapped local authority will look, ever so slightly, to cut the hours of funded support I’d get. Hours here and there, not the near constant support I enjoy at present. I’d live, barely, but my freedom would be lost. My competitiveness would be lost. My ability to implement my own life decisions would be lost, at the whim of whichever local authority I end up living in. Retention of my Personal Assistants if my funding is cut? No chance, as the hours wouldn’t be worth it. There’s then a risk of being at the mercy of an agency and I know those risks, I suffered them back in 1991 – but then I had the option, financially realistic, of hiring my own staff. Unlikely to be the case in the way I need it to work under a reduced local authority package. My independence would be lost and life, as worth living, would be over.

 

 Posted by at 19:47
Mar 032013
 
We urgently need people to email Scope over the next 2 or 3 days to let them know in no uncertain terms what a disaster the closing of the ILF (Independent Living Fund) will be and that their attitude not to oppose this as they don’t have enough money to campaign on everything is unacceptable.
 
Also we need Scope to be made aware their own inaction in not campaigning with regards to the ILF closure is totally unacceptable from a major Charity who claim to be at all interested in the rights of disabled people. (apologies if this makes you all fall around laughing).
A representative from Scope is meeting with Government this week to speak for you – so can you email Scope on the contact below to let them know exactly what you think of them and what you expect them to say for you. Be as brief or detailed as you want, but don’t allow SCOPE to sell disabled people out yet again.
 
Email address is campaigns@scope.org.uk and copy to their overpaid CEO richard.hawkes@scope.org.uk
 
Alternatively leave messages for them on their facebook pages
 
 

Mar 022013
 

Justine’s story

Justine

Justine

My name is Justine Jones; I am 26 years old and I have Rheumatoid Arthritis. I used to be a confident art student at a top art school in London with great expectations of becoming a successful artist. I was looking forward to my life and all the possibilities and opportunities that lay ahead. Then my life changed when my disease took hold. For that year the disease rampaged through my body destroying my joints. My health deteriorated drastically. I lost all my mobility, I couldn’t walk or get out of bed because of pain or discomfort of my swollen joints, and I couldn’t even do the simplest of tasks anymore.

My family weren’t able to cope and I was given basic care from social services which consisted of 1 hour for the morning call to get me up, bath me, take me to the toilet, dress me and feed me. The lunch time call was 30 minutes; to make me lunch, help me to eat and take me to the toilet.

Even though I had this care in place my problems got worse; I lost so much weight combined with spending every day in bed put me at higher risk of developing bed sores. I spent all day everyday in my room, each day blurring into the next making me feel depressed, isolated and alone. I was just wasting away in my bed. This caused mussel wastage; I slowly lost all the mussels used to maintain balance and to walk making me more prone to falls. I didn’t recognise myself; I felt like I was cocooned in the shell of my body feeling helpless, this caused panic attacks.
All of this put a strain on my home and social life. Before I had ILF my parents who both work full time had to help me with the most basic of tasks (getting undressed, eating dinner, assistance getting to bathroom during the night) making me feel like a burden to my own family. My social life hit a stand still as I was unable to go out and meet friends as I was to unwell to really leave the house.
I felt like a prisoner stuck in a body that wouldn’t work, my life was restricted to my bedroom unable to eat, walk, use the toilet, even breathing and sleeping was agonizing.

Once I got ILF, I used the extra hours of support to go to Hydrotherapy and physiotherapy to build up my muscle strength. I slowly got my balance back lowering my risk of falls and gradually improved my walking meaning I wasn’t as reliant on my wheelchair and no longer at risk of bed sores as well as no longer had panic attacks about falling. I also used the extra support to get out of the house and see friends, go shopping and go to the cinema, which improved my relationships with my friends and family. I was part of the world again. I also used the extra support to help me give back to my family by making them a meal every now and then and no longer relied on my family for so much which meant I didn’t feel like a burden anymore, this improved my home life a great deal.

 

As my confidence grew I used my extra support to help me attend a local committee for disabled people where I volunteered. This gave me purpose in life, opportunity to meet new people, make friends and the experience I needed to get the job I have today.

 

I wouldn’t have been able to do all of this without the extra hours of support that I received from ILF. The basic care given by the local authority is to maintain your primary needs to survive (washing, dressing and eating).

 

But life is so much more than that.

 

With ILF I have quality of life and support to be a pro-active, positive person who is part of the community. I have a paid job, a social life, I am driving and I have just moved into a flat with my fiancé. I would not change being disabled and I think my condition has brought more to my life than it has taken away but it has only been possible for me to feel this way because I have the support I need. In Bromley that support to live rather than to just exist is not there through Direct Payments and not without the ILF.

 

The ILF gives disabled people options by giving us extra support that isn’t solely for basic care needs. Without the ILF we are stripped of everything; our quality of life, our health, our independence, our dignity, our pride, our relationships, our purpose and our hope for a future.

 

 

 

 Posted by at 11:46
Feb 282013
 

one of our supporters has been having an ongoing conversation with SCOPE to see why they aren’t campaigning to save the Independent Living Fund. We’ve now edited those emails and added a few comments in brackets but hopefully left their general thrust apparent for you all to read.

Finacial income for 2010

Scope– 101 million pounds

Mencap – 194 million pounds

RNID – 41 million pounds

RNIB – 135 million pounds

Leonard Cheshire – 155 million pounds

Guide Dogs – 57 million pounds

MS Society – 29 million pounds

MND Association – 13 million pounds

Spinal Injuries Association – 20 million pounds

TOTAL = 745 million. (Where are the so-called charities with this amount of money to spend? Forgive me but what exactly are they doing for us all?)

From: Sarah Daly <Sarah.Daly@scope.org.uk>
Sent: Thursday, 28 February 2013, 12:52
Subject: Re: ILF

I’m just checking with my colleagues in our media and parliamentary teams to provide more detail about what is planned around the March court case.

Are you already involved with the DPAC campaigning around ILF? http://www.dpac.uk.net/2013/02/vigil-to-save-ilf/

Scope have challenged the Government on their decision to close ILF, much earlier in the process. (DPAC has responded to the consultation too and have arranged public lobbies of MPs already – SCOPE haven’t)

We now feel that the way we can have the most impact to protect care and support for disabled people is to focus on public campaigning around the Care and Support Bill. (SCOPE are writing off the ILF completely)

I’m sure you can understand that we have limited campaigning capacity (only  101 million income in 2010)and therefore, as much as we would like to, cannot pursue all the issues we challenge the Government on into full public campaigns. I know this is frustrating.

As with many of our campaigns, I understand it’s frustrating that the change we want to see is long term – and yet the difficulties are happening right now.  We will continue to speak up to ensure that society in the future is a better place for all disabled people.(but too bad for anyone now)

I hope this answers your questions.

Best regards,

 

 Posted by at 20:37
Feb 272013
 

Contact Councillor Brewer at cbrewer@cornwall.gov.uk

We’ll be asking him for any comments he’d like to provide for our website
article from This is Cornwall. http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/Cornwall-councillor-refuses-resign-saying/story-18257973-detail/story.html#axzz2M1xFzc8Y plus poll to vote whether you think he should resign.

A CORNWALL councillor has apologised but refused to resign after telling a disability charity that all disabled children “should be put down”.

Collin Brewer, independent councillor Wadebridge East, made the comments to Disability Cornwall at County Hall when the group had an information stand at an event to allow councillors to meet equalities organisations and understand some of the issues they face.

Councillor Colin Brewer

At the event, which took place in October 2011, Mr Brewer approached the stand and was told how the group helps parents of children with special educational needs.

He responded by saying: “Disabled children cost the council too much money and should be put down.”

Disability Cornwall advice services manager Theresa Court said: “I was absolutely horrified anyone would make such a depraved comment, let alone a Cornwall councillor and at a public event.

“As far as I was concerned I had a duty to make a formal complaint against Councillor Brewer to seek appropriate justice.”

An investigation was launched and the independent standards committee ruled that Mr Brewer should write a letter of apology to the organisation.

His letter read: “I am writing to offer my whole hearted apology for the offence these remarks have clearly caused. While I meant no offence by my remarks to you I can see, in retrospect, that they were ill judged and insensitive and should not have been made at all.”

Chair of Disability Cornwall Steve Paget, MBE added: “It is of great concern to us that anyone with such beliefs, let alone to vocalise them, could be a representative and elected member of our local authority. For such a serious issue and multiple breach of code of conduct, bringing the council into disrepute, we did expect no less than this councillor’s resignation.”

When the West Briton contacted Mr Brewer about whether he would resign he initially claimed that he could not recall the incident.

However when prompted he said that he was not aware that there had been calls for his resignation and indicated that he would not stand down.

He said: “I had come to their stall after a long council meeting and I was probably a little bit het up as we had had some difficult debates.

“I could see that they were trying to sell me something so I said something to them which I thought would provoke a reaction. But they turned their backs on me and I walked away – I thought that was the end of the matter until the complaint.

“I used to be a salesman and I said it to provoke them into a discussion – I expected them to parry it and talk to me.

“I didn’t mean any offence and didn’t want to upset anyone.”

Should Councillor Collin Brewer resign? Vote in our poll now.

96 % say yes so far

Read more: http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/Cornwall-councillor-refuses-resign-saying/story-18257973-detail/story.html#ixzz2M7iOp1QN
Follow us: @thisiscornwall on Twitter | thisiscornwall on Facebook

 Posted by at 18:03
Feb 182013
 

 

Reclaim It!
Take Direct Action on International Women’s Day
Sick of the Con Dem’s regime of cuts and austerity?
Tired of watching helpless while the government destroys people’s lives and create a world we don’t want to live in?
Then join us on International Women’s Day to take direct action to stop the cuts.
 
We are an independent coalition of feminist and anti-cuts activists who think its time to take matters into our own hands. We are particularly concerned about the gendered impact of the cuts which will jeopardise safe and free access to abortion, force single mothers back to work when their children are still young, close down rape crisis centres and women’s refuges as well as many more services for women and LGBT people.
We will be taking direct action in a ‘yet-to-be-revealed’ location, to reclaim feminist space. Assemble at 12pm on Friday 8th March at either Goldsmiths University of London (main entrance Lewisham Way ) or Queen Mary University of London (main entrance Mile End road) where you will be met and taken to a convergence point. This action is open to people of all genders and none.
Join us to fight austerity together!
If anyone is interested in joining this action and has specific access needs please email us at mail@dpac.uk.net
Support can be provided to people to  take part

 Posted by at 14:06
Feb 162013
 

Not all local authorities bothered to respond to the consultation over the future of the Independent Living Fund but here are links to the responses of most of those who did reply

 

Local authority responses to ILF consultation

 

Aberdeenshire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134705/response/332139/attach/html/2/Aberdeenshire%20Council%20Response%20to%20ILF%20Consultation%20October%202012.doc.html

 

Anglesey, Conwy,Flintshire & Wrexham Joint response http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134567/response/326222/attach/html/2/ILF%20Response%20North%20Wales%20LA%20s%20Oct%202012.doc.html

 

Argyll & Bute  http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134707/response/324073/attach/html/3/Argyll%20and%20Bute%20Council%20Response%20ILF%20Final%202012.doc.html

 

Barking & Dagenham http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133081/response/330461/attach/html/3/ILF%20Consultation%20Response.docx.html

 

Barnsley http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134244/response/327015/attach/3/img%20X31113918%200001.pdf

 

Birmingham http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133990/response/331269/attach/html/3/FOI%207763%20reply.pdf.html

 

Blaenau Gwent http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_149#incoming-325185

 

Brighton & Hove http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133594/response/331709/attach/html/3/RESPONSE%20TO%20ILF%20REVIEW.DOC.doc.html

 

Bournemouth http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133767/response/329417/attach/html/3/ILF%20response.docx.html

 

Buckinghamshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/137363/response/331429/attach/html/3/FINAL%20Clarification%20letter%2013.11.12.pdf.html

 

Bury http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_68#incoming-321716

 

Caerphilly http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134557/response/328904/attach/html/4/03.CCBC%20response%20to%20consultation.doc.html

 

Carmarthenshire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134564/response/332233/attach/html/2/Consultation%20on%20the%20Closure%20of%20the%20ILF%20in%202015.doc.html

 

Cheshire East http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133425/response/330439/attach/html/2/20121022ResToBrady.doc.html

 

Cheshire West & Chester http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133426/response/329618/attach/html/2/ILFCONSULTATION.docx.html

 

Croydon http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133178/response/331452/attach/html/4/Response%20F%20CRT%202012%202205.doc.html

 

Coventry http://moderngov.coventry.gov.uk/documents/s4779/Responses%20to%20Government%20Consultations.pdf

 

Cornwall http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133772/response/328476/attach/html/3/IAR%20245927%20FOI%20EIR%20Response%20Template%20NO%20Exemptions%20Applied.doc.html

 

Cumbria http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133561/response/326948/attach/html/3/2012%2010%2031%20Disclosure.doc.html

 

Denbighshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134568/response/324469/attach/html/2/Response.pdf.html

 

Devon http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133959/response/324802/attach/html/3/Information%20Request%2003195.pdf.html

 

Doncaster

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134249/response/333090/attach/html/2/FOI%20Response%20Data%20Taylforth%2050159.doc.html

 

Dorset http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133961/response/323544/attach/html/2/ILF%20draft%20consultation.pdf.html

 

Dudley

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133994/response/323677/attach/html/4/ILF%20Consultation%2010.10.12.doc.html

 

Dumfries & Galloway

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134709/response/332905/attach/3/ResponseConsutationProposedClosureOfILF.pdf

 

Durham http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133401/response/322132/attach/html/4/ILF%20consultation.pdf.html

 

Ealing http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133179/response/329882/attach/html/4/17102012%20ADASS%20Agenda%20Item%203%20ILF.Appx%201.pdf.html

 

East Dunbartonshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134712/response/324687/attach/html/2/ILF%20FINAL%20RESPONSE%20SEP%2024TH%202012.doc.html

 

 

East Riding of Yorkshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134251/response/333084/attach/html/3/EEF90461233811E2A672B51576002175.doc.html

 

East Renfrewshire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134714/response/332040/attach/html/3/East%20Renfrewshire%20CHCP%20Response%20to%20ILF%20Consultation%20September%202012.doc.html

 

East Sussex http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133597/response/333253/attach/html/3/1751%20ILF%20letter%20final%201.pdf.html

 

Edinburgh http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134721/response/332950/attach/html/3/CEC%20response%20on%20Future%20of%20ILF%2010%2010%2012.pdf.html

 

Essex http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133065/response/329347/attach/html/3/ASC%20IG%20025700%20Final%20Response%20Appendix%201.pdf.html

 

Falkirk http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134723/response/332393/attach/html/5/FC%20Response%20to%20ILF%20Consultation%20October%202012.doc.html

 

Flintshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134569/response/325743/attach/html/3/FCC%20ILF%20Consultation%20Oct%202012.doc.html

 

Gateshead http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_55#incoming-324658

 

Glasgow http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134725/response/331701/attach/html/3/Brady%20D131112L%20FOI%205.doc.htmlhttp://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134725/response/331701/attach/html/3/Brady%20D131112L%20FOI%205.doc.html

 

Hammersmith & Fulham http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133211/response/326346/attach/html/3/Response%20to%20consultation.doc.html

 

Hampshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133743/response/333637/attach/3/FOI%205422%20Taylforth%20Formal%20Response%202012%2011%2020%20HF000003887806.pdf

 

Halton Borough Council http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_72#incoming-323442

 

Hartlepool http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_56#incoming-327676

 

Havering

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133215/response/326747/attach/html/3/Response%20from%20Social%20Care%20Learning.pdf.html

 

Hertfordshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133067/response/321758/attach/html/6/Herts%20ILF%20final%20response%201%2010%2012%202.pdf.html

 

 

Hounslow http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133217/response/322483/attach/html/4/Submitted%20LBH%20response%2010%2010%2012.pdf.html

 

Hull http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_139

 

Inverclyde http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134727/response/324516/attach/html/3/Consultation%20Response.doc.html

 

Islington http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133218/response/324586/attach/html/3/ILFConsultationResponse%20IslingtonOct2012.pdf.html

 

Kensington & Chelsea http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_39#incoming-330104

 

Kent http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133745/response/322389/attach/html/3/The%20future%20of%20the%20ILF%20consultation%20response%20Oct%202012.pdf.html

 

Kirkless http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_140#incoming-331317

 

Lancashire (

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/131103/response/320019/attach/html/3/ILF%20Public%20Consultation%20LCC%20Response.docx.html

 

Leeds

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134264/response/329797/attach/html/2/8782%20reply%202nd%20response.pdf.html

 

Leicestershire http://www.leicsfoi.org.uk/disclosureLogMonth.asp?year_value=2012&month_value=10#rn3803

 

Manchester http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133567/response/331151/attach/html/2/ASC8Z6BR5%20ILF%20respnse.doc.html

 

Medway http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_94#incoming-332110

 

Middlesbrough  http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133406/response/323469/attach/html/4/TAYLFORTH%20P%202923.3%20ATT.doc.html

 

Midlothian http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134728/response/333568/attach/html/3/F4276%20MID%20ILF%20response.doc.html

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_201

 

Milton Keynes http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_95#incoming-324054

 

Moray http://www.moray.gov.uk/downloads/file83404.pdf

 

Newcastle http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133408/response/325991/attach/html/4/Final%20ILF%20consultation%20response%20Oct%202012.pdf.html

 

 

North Ayrshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134730/response/334293/attach/html/2/10052%2012%20Consultation%20Response%20ILF.doc.html

 

North Tyneside Council http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133409/response/322730/attach/html/4/ILF%20response.docx.html

 

North Yorkshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_144#incoming-323851

 

Nottinghamshire  http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/132919/response/324055/attach/html/2/ILF%20consultation%20questions%20responses%20NottsCC.doc.html

 

Oldham http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_76#incoming-322916

 

Oxfordshire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_96#incoming-322427

 

Pembrokeshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134589/response/330598/attach/html/4/3286%20Brady%20Info.doc.html

 

Poole http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133974/response/329013/attach/html/6/FOI%20615%20reply.pdf.html

 

Portsmouth http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_97#incoming-327297

 

Powys http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_163#incoming-327163

 

 

Renfrewshire http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134984/response/334480/attach/html/3/Taylforth%20Paul%20ILF%20Response%20FOI%20Response.pdf.html

 

Rhondda http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134591/response/334118/attach/html/2/RCT%20ILF%20Consulatation%20Response.doc.html

 

Rochdale http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133572/response/332520/attach/html/3/TF%20Response.doc.html

 

Richmond upon Thames http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133263/response/326232/attach/html/3/13604%201.pdf.html

 

Rotherham http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_145#incoming-331784

 

Salford http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133573/response/333490/attach/html/2/Consultation%20document.docx.pdf.html

 

Sefton

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_79#incoming-328385

 

Solihull http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134005/response/323740/attach/html/3/ILF%20Consultation%20Response%20oct12.doc.html

 

Somerset

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/143759/response/355033/attach/html/3/Consultation%20July12%20Draft2.doc.html

 

 

Southend

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_17#incoming-326146

 

South Lanarkshire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134988/response/327150/attach/html/3/20121101111552374.pdf.html

 

Stockport

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133580/response/323988/attach/html/2/ILF%20consultation%20answers%20Oct%2012.docx.html

 

Stockton on Tees

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133415/response/327789/attach/html/4/SBC0066.pdf.html

 

Stoke on Trent

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134013/response/333078/attach/html/3/Consultation%20Response.pdf.html

 

St Helens

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133576/response/327425/attach/2/ILF%20Consultation%20Response.pdf

 

Swansea

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134592/response/332296/attach/html/4/SH1.749%20Consultation%20Response.doc.html

 

Vale of Glamorgan

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_167#incoming-323698

 

Wakefield

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134305/response/332276/attach/html/2/ILF%20Consultaion%20q%20s%20Sept%2012%20FOI%204603.docx.html

 

Warwickshire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134233/response/331342/attach/html/3/Independent%20Living%20Fund%20Responses.docx.html

 

Warrington

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133586/response/327113/attach/html/3/0059%20Brady.doc.html

 

West Lothian

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134992/response/325216/attach/html/3/WL%20Response%20to%20the%20ILF%20Consultation%209%2012.doc.html

 

West Sussex

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/133756/response/326953/attach/html/3/ILF%20consultation%20questions%20final.doc.html

 

Westminster

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/independent_living_fund_consulta_52#incoming-328288

 

 

Worcestershire

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/134239/response/332677/attach/5/ILF%20consultation%20response%20V2.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Posted by at 17:16
Feb 162013
 

Dear_______________________ MP,

I am writing to urge you to defend disabled people’s right to independent living which is under threat from the closure of the Independent Living Fund (ILF), a source of essential support enabling disabled people with the highest support needs to live in the community.

The closure of the ILF will mean for me….

 

On 18th December 2012 the government announced its decision to permanently close the ILF following its closure to new applicants since December 2010. The announcement followed a consultation that was flawed and which ignored the views of disabled people and disabled people’s organisations as well as a number of other organisations and Local Authorities.

Government plans to merge the ILF with mainstream care and support will result in a greatly reduced quality of life for disabled people and for some will mean being forced into residential care against their wishes. This will prevent disabled people from full inclusion and participation in the community, as anticipated by Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The Government’s decision not to put in place any ring-fencing for the support for current ILF recipients when responsibilities are transferred to local authorities and devolved administrations will inevitably lead to a loss of support as local authorities raised in their consultation responses and have a devastating impact on disabled adults who have been supported by the ILF to lead active and full lives.

I would ask you to sign Early Day Motion 651 and to call on the Government to review this regressive step and to look instead at ways of expanding the Independent Living Fund to provide needs-based support to all adults in the UK who require it.

In order to protect disabled people’s right to live with choice and control over their lives and with dignity we need the Independent Living Fund.

Yours sincerely,

 Download Template letter by clicking following link: ILF template letter

 Posted by at 17:12
Feb 142013
 

BEDROOM TAX. A summary by Frank

None of what follows is scaremongering.  

Nearly one in three tenants on benefit to lose at least £14 per week

The Draconian measures will affect an estimated 660,000 working-age social tenants – 31% of existing working-age housing benefit claimants in the social sector. The majority of these people have only one extra bedroom.

The legislation is deliberately complicated and comrades need to gen up or refer to other agencies. The legislation also worsens  between Housing Benefit and Universal Credit which will replace HB from October 2013

80% of those affected are expected to be unable or unwilling to move home, so the governments claim that it will free up homes for ‘overcrowded families’ is limited. The government is not interested in providing homes, it is interested in penalising the poorest.

Many tenants have invested a lot of money in their homes over the years – garden sheds, children’s play items, carpets, decorating etc., and the prospect of abandoning this will be hard to take.

Sources:

http://www.housing.org.uk/policy/welfare_reform/‘under-occupation’_penalty.aspx

(Based on England/Wales)

http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Scotland%20Policy%20Pdfs/Bedroom%20Tax/Bedroom%20Tax%20Final.pdf

(32pages, Chartered Institute of Housing, aimed at Scotland’s social landlords)

FACEBOOK: 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/antibedroomtax/

The “bedroom tax” is a change to Housing Benefit introduced by the Con-dem Government to take effect from April 2013.

The power to do this is contained in the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and is commonly referred to as the bedroom tax, size criteria or under-occupation penalty.

 

Children under 16 of same gender expected to share one room.

Children under 10 expected to share regardless of gender

Disabled tenant or partner who needs non resident overnight carer will be allowed an extra bedroom. However proving this will be very difficult, although it has been allowed in the private rented sector since 2010.

 

Who will be affected?

All claimants who are deemed to have at least one spare bedroom will be affected. This includes:

 

Separated parents who share the care of their children and who may have been allocated an extra bedroom to reflect this. Benefit rules mean that there must be a designated ‘main carer’ for children (who receives the extra benefit)

Couples who use their ‘spare’ bedroom when recovering from an illness or operation

Foster carers because foster children are not counted as part of the household for benefit purposes

Parents whose children visit but are not part of the household including those at university.

Families with disabled children who need an extra bedroom due to their disability. (a case about this in Private Rented sector is now going to Supreme Court)

Disabled people including people living in adapted or specially designed properties. (One person has been told that her adapted shower room which was a bedroom will count as an extra bedroom and she’ll have to pay for it.)

Pensioners when in mixed age couple

 

How much will people lose?

 

The cut will be a fixed percentage of the Housing Benefit eligible rent. The Government has said that this will be set at 14% for one extra bedroom and 25% for two or more extra bedrooms.

 

The Government’s impact assessment shows that those affected will lose an average of £14 a week. Housing association tenants are expected to lose £16 a week on average.

However as social housing rents in the Highlands are higher than the Scottish average, we can expect to lose marginally more.

 

A person on JSA can expect to be hit by at least £60 per month.

 

HB is different for claimants depending on whether they are with a private landlord or social landlord, ie., Council or Housing Association. Private tenants are already subject to a benefit reduction, as Their LOCAL HOUSING ALLOWANCE is set at a ” market rate” below the actual market rate, meaning large numbers of claimants get benefit at a lower rate than the actual rent, and have to make up the difference from their unemployment or other benefits, or from the meagre wages of those on pay low enough to qualify for LHA.

The new legislation is effectively a substantial cut in HB for all claimants in Social  housing who supposedly have a ‘spare’ room. 

The government do not care if a room is single or double, it is just a room, so two children will be expected to share a ‘single’ room.

A couple alone in a two-bedroom home will see their HB reduced by 14%per week, and by 25% if they have a three-bedroom house.

A couple in a three-bedroom home with two children will see their HB reduced by 14% per week – the Government says children must share a bedroom, so the other room is ‘spare’!

A couple in a three-bedroom home with one child will see a cut of 14%.

A couple in a four-bedroom house with three children will see their benefit cut by 14%, or by 25% if  two children are home.

A couple with one adult unemployed child aged 16+ and two other children in a 4-bed house will be cut, by more than 14% but subject to other terms.

(‘Couple’ also means a single parent)

All these reduction will apply even if there are no available ‘smaller’ homes to which the claimant may be moved by the landlord. As a large proportion of social (and private) housing built in the last 40 years has been of 2- and 3-bedroom size, being the most flexible, the number of 1-bed and Studio flats is very limited and will prevent any significant migration. The government know this of course, but don’t care.

Tenants in rural areas where there is no alternative accommodation, even if they wanted it, will be hit.

The cuts also apply even if you are disabled and use a spare room for keeping equipment such as a mobility scooter or for kidney dialysis. 

A couple who do not share the same bedroom will also be penalised, even if this is because of disability.

Also, separated parents who share custody and keep a spare room for their visiting children will see similar cuts.

Parents of children taken into foster care, even if temporarily.

Foster Carers will be penalised, because children in care are not counted.

If a partner/dependent dies, the surviving tenant gets one years grace before HB cuts apply. With the introduction of Universal Credit this will be reduced to 13 weeks.

Claimants will be expected to find the money from other benefits or move home at their own expense, possibly out of the area meaning a change of school and loss of friends and family support. Then when their oldest child reaches the age of 10 they may be eligible to apply to move back into a larger house again, but of course there may be none available, and certainly not their old house! Thus we see both a tragedy and a farce.

The government is also to stop direct payments to landlords, putting the responsibility on tenants,  many of whom will have to set up transactional bank accounts, perhaps for the first time, and many of whom lack the skills to budget. For example, if the landlord sets up a direct debit and there are insufficient funds in the account, even just by £1, the landlord will get NO rent and the tenant will get hit by default bank charges. (This applies to ALL tenants whether claiming HB or not). The landlord may also charge a default fee! The tenant may not even realize the situation until he examines a statement or gets a notice of arrears, and may be unable to catch up. This will inevitably lead to rent arrears, losses to landlords, evictions and increased rents for remaining tenants.

The new legislation will be accompanied by a ‘black propaganda’ campaign by the government and the usual obsequious media to demonise all HB claimants as feckless scroungers denying ‘genuine’ families the chance to move into a house, and that the ‘taxpayer’ is subsidising them. The reality is that it is a mean and hurtful policy aimed knowingly at those least able to move home and least able to pay the rent.

Under both Labour and Tories, the social rented housing stock has fallen (by 421,000 units from 1997 to 2010) as funds were cut, right-to-buy removed the best houses, and councils were denied the ability to build. This is the REAL cause of the huge waiting lists.

 

In most cases, the penalties will kick in after 13 weeks of ‘under-occupancy’ – this will affect the families of the armed forces who are on tours of duty.

STUDENTS: This will affect the families of students away for 6 months or more.

CHILDREN: under16′s of same sex must share. Over 10′s of different sex are entitled to own room. Under 10′s of either sex must share.

Social landlords are already planning to change the criteria for applicants. For example, if a WORKING couple with one child apply for a vacant local council house close to the workplace, and the only house available is a 3-bedroom (not uncommon especially in rural areas), the application may be refused because the Landlord is afraid of potential loss if the tenant/s become unemployed. This could further devastate rural communities already desperately short of social housing, although the Landlord may never admit that this kind of process is official. 

Of course what no-one is saying is that Labour introduced size criteria into the private rented sector in 2008 and had planned to extend this to the social rented sector in 2010 but Housing Associations made too much fuss about the potential rent losses they faced if that happened forcing them to drop the scheme.

 Posted by at 21:42
Feb 102013
 

New ‘Use Common Sense’ training module for ATOS HP and DWP Decision Makers

“Common Sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen”

(Albert Einstein)

ATOS HPs are well known for having assimilated all what needs to be learnt about any physical or mental impairments, illnesses and disabilities in a grand total of 22 days training.

They are now required to call upon one of their other greatest strengths, namely ‘common sense’ to decide whether a claimant undertaking a Work Capability Assessment would benefit from a mobility aid or appliance, and therefore is fit to work.

In the words of DWP [1]:

 

It must be recognised that specific skills, knowledge, experience and training are required to fully assess individuals for aids and appliances which may ultimately help their function. Additionally, clinicians who assess and prescribe aids and appliances for an individual will normally have access to significantly more information about the individual’s situation than HCPs offering advice as part of the WCA process.

 

Therefore, in situations where an aid or appliance has not been recommended or prescribed, HCPs are being asked to use their skills and experience as a disability analyst to offer ‘common-sense’ advice to the DM in situations where they feel an aid or appliance could improve a claimant’s function in terms of an individual WCA Activity’.

In other words, HPs can without specific skills, knowledge, experience, training and medical information, and simply using their ‘common sense’ decide if person is fit for work IF they were to use a mobility aid or other appliance

If a person in the street, chosen at random were asked “whether a person with mobility problems would benefit from a wheelchair”, the answer would be “yes”

This answer would have as much value as the HP’s advice and be about as accurate.

Using specialist information to make such a decision requires the wisdom of education and experience, not common sense.

But it gets worse:

The ATOS HP’s ‘common sense’ advice is then presented to the DWP Decision-maker, who, let us not forget, has no medical training whatsoever.

According to the new guidelines, the DM will have to:

Consider all the circumstances in order to determine whether it would be reasonable to assess the claimant as using an aid or appliance that has not been prescribed or that they have not been advised to use.’

Here are some of the factors in the DWP guidance, which include:

  • whether the claimant would be advised to use an aid or appliance if they raised it with the appropriate authority such as a GP or occupational therapist 
  • it is medically reasonable for them to use an aid or appliance

At this point, we are entering the world of La La Land:

The Fit for Work decision, which will have huge implications for a claimant, is purely resting on a series of assumptions:

  • The HP’s assumption based on ‘common sense’ that an aid/appliance would improve mobility, without appropriate medical training, skills, experience and without considering :
  •      Its suitability for the claimants condition,
  •      The medical reasons why it might not be appropriate for that person,
  •      The practicality of use in real life and in a real workplace
  • The DM’s assumption that the claimant could be advised to use an aid or appliance if he asked the question, and that it is medically reasonable for them to use an aid and an appliance, without any medical knowledge to back the decision.

In both cases, the new guidelines require HP’s and DM’s to use what is called ‘common sense assumptions’, which are very far away from the informed decisions expected in these kind of cases

In the reality that most of the human race inhabit, a decision whether to use a sophisticated aid such as a prosthetic limb to give a patient mobility would only be undertaken by trained medical professionals in consultation with the patient over the course of several sessions.

However on the planet inhabited by the masterminds at the DWP, it is possible for an untrained, inexperienced ATOS “Health Practitioner” to make this decision using only “common sense” within a matter of minutes (since ATOS allows a very short time for each HP to make a recommendation) and without any consultation with the benefit claimant as to the suitability of such a device.

Notes to Editors:

What the DWP has done, is to use an appeal judgement [1] that it said it has won (when actually the appeal was upheld for the claimant, and the tribunal recommended an oral hearing).

Here is an extract from the DWP Guidance document [2] which explains the judgement:

Here is the background to this change, which was based on the outcome of a single ESA claim, which passed through the Appeals process. It contains the essence of what Decision Makers – and therefore HCPs – will be required to consider as a result of the change.

The facts of the Upper Tribunal decision were as follows. The case was assessed under the ESA 2008 regulations.

The claimant suffered from problems with his knee. He had not been advised to use a walking stick, and did not do so. Following application of the WCA, the DM determined that the claimant did not score any points, and ESA was terminated.

On appeal, the First Tier Tribunal awarded 9 points for descriptor 3(b) (bending or kneeling). They considered that the claimant’s difficulties with walking, standing and sitting could be helped by the use of a walking stick. As the score was still less than 15 points, the DM’s decision was upheld.

On a further appeal, the Upper Tribunal Judge held that

A – Where a claimant normally uses an aid or appliance, they         must be assessed as if they were using it

B – If an aid or appliance has been prescribed or recommended by a person with appropriate expertise, the claimant must be assessed as using it, unless it would be unreasonable for them to use it

C – if a claimant does not use an aid or appliance, and it has not been prescribed or recommended, the claimant must be assessed as if using it if

a. it is normally used by people in the same circumstances acting reasonably and

b. It would be reasonable for the claimant to use it.

The Judge also held that where paragraph C applies, the DM must explain how an aid or appliance would help the claimant.

The Judge’s application of the test of ‘normal use of an aid or appliance’ applies to the assessment of all of the physical activities in the WCA. It is not restricted to those activities that make specific reference to aids or appliances.

Four of the physical activities within the WCA refer specifically to the use of aids. Activity 8 (navigation) and Activity 9 (continence), refer to aids that are normally used.

Activity 1 (mobilising) and Activity 7 (understanding communication) refer to the reasonableness of the use of an aid.

The DWP has extended the judgement from the use of a simple aid (a stick in the present case), to more sophisticated aids or appliances, such as wheelchairs and prosthetics.

Further reading:

[1]http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j3364/CE%201217%202011-00.doc

[2] http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/139330/response/358405/attach/3/Mobility%20Aids%20and%20Appliances%20doc.pdf

[3] Guidance for DWP Decision-makers: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/m-24-12.pdf

 by Annie and Bob.

 

 Posted by at 21:44
Feb 102013
 

DANIEL ROQUE HALL IS FREE AND GOING HOME!

At 10.30 this morning the Law Lords at the Royal Courts of Justice reduced Daniel Roque Hall`s original prison sentence to 18 months so he was released from custody this morning and will be going home today! The only restriction imposed is a two year ban on foreign travel.

The Court recognised that Daniel’s serious disabilities – which leave him unable to move his limbs, feed himself, hold a pen or a telephone, or read a book unaided – and complex health needs which require 24/7 care, meant that he should not be returned to prison.

 On hearing the verdict, Daniel said: “This is tremendous news.  I want to thank my mum, my carers, my legal team, WinVisible and all those who have supported me, and I’m looking forward to resting and recovering fully at home”.

In court, supporters clapped and embraced Anne Hall, Daniel’s mother. Visibly moved and relieved, she said:

This is a fantastic result for Daniel, who suffered a great deal while in prison. I think the judges recognised that and I am grateful for the mercy they have shown.  This result is not just because of the court’s judgement, but is thanks to our dedicated new legal team and ongoing support from a large number of people, many of whom have campaigned tirelessly.  I’d like to thank everyone, especially his carers and friends, and WinVisible and the Global Women’s Strike, whose support has been invaluable.  This is a very important ruling not just for Daniel but also for people with disabilities and complex health problems, because it confirms that prison is not an environment which can meet their needs.”

Daniel was unable to attend his appeal hearing because the High Court does not have adequate disability access.  Instead he had to follow the proceedings from hospital via video link – an unsatisfactory and expensive alternative.

WinVisible commented:

Many disabled people supported Daniel’s fight to be released from prison, and identified with the vulnerability of having to be dependent on people who don’t care about you.  Daniel should never have been put in prison and we’re sure there are many other prisoners, women and men, who are being tortured and even killed by inadequate or even complete lack of care.  The neglect Daniel suffered in prison is happening in many institutions including hospitals, from geriatric to psychiatric wards, as the recent report into Mid Staffordshire hospital shows.  That even the High Court does not have adequate disability access is evidence of the discrimination disabled people face at every stage of the criminal justice system.”

The Global Women’s Strike added:

This judgement would not have happened without the determination of Anne Hall, Daniel’s mother, who has been relentless in pursuing justice for her son.  There are serious questions about the treatment Daniel Hall has received in prison and about how the NHS deals with people who are serving sentences in prison but who need to be in hospital.  Those in high places who are responsible for neglect or grand theft from the public purse costing many lives, are mostly allowed to get away with this behaviour.  Prisons are overcrowded with women and men who pose no threat to the public.  We hope they will be able to use this judgement to get their sentences changed so they can get out.”

Although the judges showed mercy because of Daniel’s exceptional circumstances, they did not agree that his treatment at Wormwood Scrubs breached his human rights.  Yet, after only seven weeks he had become so ill that he was taken to UCLH where he spent over a week in Intensive Care. His mother was called to the hospital at 3am and told to kiss him and “say goodbye” – she thought he was expected to die.  It took a further five months of hospital care for Daniel to partially recover.  While the hospital was prepared to release Daniel back to prison, accepting the prison’s assurances that it could now meet his needs, his mother and other carers were convinced that he would not survive in prison.  On 2 January an emergency injunction was granted preventing his discharge back to prison.  His appeal against sentence was expedited with the help of his dedicated new legal team, which resulted in today’s judgement.

Andrew Sperling, Scott Moncrieff solicitors, who prepared the appeal with barrister Flo Krause, was delighted at the result but sorry that Daniel’s human rights case had been rejected.

Daniel’s case is exceptional but he is certainly not the only prisoner in England and Wales who has serious disabilities or health problems.  All are entitled to expect the equivalent level of care they would have access to if they were in the community, but there are very serious concerns about the ability of the prison service to care for them.  Where there is a conflict between the demands of security and the need to provide proper care for seriously ill and disabled prisoners, there is a danger that security is prioritised over health needs.  This is compounded by lack of resources. Someone with Daniel’s disabilities posed no risk to the public and he was assessed as a Category C prisoner.  Yet he was kept in a category B prison like Wormwood Scrubs because the prison service does not appear able to deliver sufficient levels of care in prisons with lower security.  As a result, his conditions were even harsher than they should have been, an additional discrimination.”

Barrister Flo Krause added:

“Daniel’s case is extreme, yet it took all that a lot of people had, to ensure that his life was preserved and he was not subjected to additional suffering. This highlights how wrong systemic approaches are. Daniel is going home. Not a minute too soon.”

For more information contact:

Justice for Daniel Roque Hall

WinVisible Facebook

Global Women’s Strike  www.globalwomenstrike.net               0207 482 2496

 

 Posted by at 14:47
Feb 092013
 
   
  Today I was having a blood transfusion after losing six pints of blood owing to Kidney failure. I am already a kidney transplant patient and an agency worker hence while my body is missing six pints of blood and I am on the brink of kidney failure I am unable walk let alone work. I claimed ESA and ATOS based on what my GP and Renal Consultants said passed me on my medical. However the DWP have harassed me constantly and today during treatment Shireen from North Kensington Job Centre phoned and demanded I go on a back to work assessment. I told her as I told her manager yesterday I was in hospital having treatment and I had a job when I get well again but I was too ill. She continued to harass me demanding I find the Consultant and ask him what time I would be finished having the six pints of blood put inside me. Eventually I became upset and drew the attention from the nurse and eventually the consultant. I offered to put the Consultant on to speak to Shireen at the job centre but she refused but told me to talk to him and find out what time I finished. I told her I wasn’t fit to work and if I was I HAVE A JOB but she ignored me and continued to get me upset. Is there any advice you can give me because I was in the middle of treatment when she did this and I am entitled to treatment.I have kidney failure but to ill for dialysis or a transplant and they need to work with me, I had to have six pints of blood and she refused to listen to me she even laughed.Should you find this disgusting like we do you may want to write to the manager at this job centre and complain. 

North Kensington Jobcentre Plus
Office
Unit 308-312
Quayside House

Kensal Road

London

W10 5BE

We’d also like anyone who has experienced anything similar to let us know please at mail@dpac.uk.net

 

 Posted by at 21:40
Feb 092013
 

0117 944 6882

info@roaring-girl.com

roaring-girl.com

@RGPLizCrow

 

A new film from ROARING GIRL PRODUCTIONS

Bedding In Bedding Out: Reflections from the Bed

Drawing on audio recordings and timelapse photography from artist-activist Liz Crow’s recent Bedding In performance at SPILL Festival of Performance, Roaring Girl Productions is pleased to announce the release of a new film, Bedding In Bedding Out: Reflections from the Bed.

In her performance, Liz took to her bed in a gallery for three days to highlight the contradictions in the new system of benefits currently being introduced by the UK government.

Says Liz, “I wear a public self that is energetic, dynamic and happening. I am also ill and spend much of life in bed. The private self is neither beautiful nor grownup, and I conceal it carefully. But the benefits system demands a reversal, my private self paraded to justify support.”

Bedding Out was a performance in which I took my private self and made it public.” Performing what she describes as the other side of her fractured self, her bed-life, Liz says, “Since the public me is so carefully constructed, this was a kind of un-performing of my self.”

“I want to make a twilight existence visible. But more, I want to show that what many people see as contradiction, what they call fraud, is only the complexity of real life.”

During the performance, members of the public were invited to Bedside Conversations, gathering round the bed to talk about the work, its backdrop, its politics. This new film combines audio recordings from the Bedside Conversations with timelapse photography from the performance. Also released are a dozen additional audio clips from the Conversations.

[ends]

Notes to Editors

To view the film: www.roaring-girl.com/productions/bedding-in/watch

To listen to the audio clips: www.roaring-girl.com/productions/bedding-in/listen

 Background on the performance at: www.roaring-girl.com/productions/bedding-in

To arrange an interview or request further information and images:

please contact Liz on 07702 757407 or email info@roaring-girl.com. 

Artist Biography

Liz Crow is an artist-activist working with performance, film, audio and text. She is drawn to drama, life stories and experimental work, and the potential of storytelling to trigger change. A former NESTA (National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts) fellow and founder of Roaring Girl Productions, Liz’s work has shown at London’s Tate Modern and the British Film Institute, as well as on television and at festivals internationally.

Prior works include an appearance on the Fourth Plinth in London’s Trafalgar Square as part of sculptor Antony Gormley’s One and Other project. Liz’s provocative and controversial performance was part of a larger film-based installation, Resistance: which way the future?, that tours the UK and internationally. 

Roaring Girl Productions is a creative media projects company based in Bristol, founded by writer-director and activist Liz Crow. It undertakes media productions, training and associated projects, combining high quality creativity with practical activism. www.roaring-girl.com.

Future performances: Liz will be performing a new version of the work, BeddingOut, which will be live streamed and will incorporate virtual participation via twitter, as part of the People Like You exhibition at Salisbury Arts Centre, 8 March – 12 April 2013.

 

 Posted by at 14:51
Feb 092013
 

 IMPORTANT: John McDonnell has secured  a vote in the House of Commons planned for next Wednesday on PIP regulations..

Please urge everyone to contact MPs & supportive press to help to secure the
vote against the abolition of DLA and this change to PIP.

 

As well as changes to entitlement to the mobility component please also remember that one in five disabled people are likely to lose their entitlement to any care component. 

Please email your MP and ask your MP to vote against these changes now.

 

 

 Posted by at 14:28
Feb 062013
 

VIGIL TO SAVE INDEPENDENT LIVING FUND

AND OUR RIGHT TO INDEPENDENT LIVING

 

March 13th 12.30 pm outside front entrance Royal Courts of Justice, the Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

 

 

SAVE ILF BECAUSE WE’RE WORTH IT. Please join us if you can.

 

Funding for care and support for disabled people and especially for those with the most complex needs to live independently can come from 3 separate funding streams, social services, health and from the Independent Living Fund

 

“The Independent Living Fund is a ring fenced resource, for a priority group of just over 19,000 disabled people with high support needs that can provide a better lifestyle and outcomes for service users whose full needs would not be met by local authority funding. “

 

Unlike local authority and health care funding which tends to focus simply on keeping disabled people alive and clean the funding available from ILF helps disabled people to take part in society on an equal basis to non-disabled people.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and in particular

Article 19: “Living independently and being included in the community”, states that “disabled people have a right to live in the community; with the support they need and can make choices like other people do”.

The closure of the ILF  has obvious implications for the UK’s chances of meeting all such obligations. Most importantly for those disabled people who will lose this financial support they will lose any independence and choice in their lives. You can listen to how this vicious attack will affect disabled people at these links.

 

http://www.dpac.uk.net/2013/02/a-nasty-cut-people-affected-by-the-closure-of-the-independent-l5142/

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMElPk0pq6I

 

 

 Posted by at 19:25
Feb 022013
 

WINVISIBLE [mailto:win@winvisible.org]
Sent: 02 February 2013 10:57
Subject: Tues 5 Feb: demo to support legal challenge to Haringey cutting
Council Tax Benefit

Dear Friends,

Demonstrate with us to support a  legal challenge to Haringey Council cutting
Council Tax Benefit
Royal Courts of Justice (High Court), Strand London WC2A 2LL
Tuesday 5 February 9.45am – 11am
10.30am: some people will go into court

Please come and support this important legal challenge to stop the Council
charging Council Tax to people on benefit – see email below from Rev Paul
Nicolson, Taxpayers Against Poverty.

Alex Rook, specialist lawyer at Irwin Mitchell Solicitors, who is
representing local residents in Haringey, said: “Our client is a single
mother and she is simply not going to be able to make these payments.”

Residents in other boroughs are also hoping to join the legal challenges.

Did you know:
- Nationally,  those who will be most disadvantaged by this change
are in waged work, including single parents (92% mothers)
who work part-time and those of us on minimum wage who depend on childcare.
We will face a hike of up to £577 a year in Council Tax.
- Some Councils, such as Tory-led Kensington and Chelsea, have
decided to keep the 100% Council Tax Benefit, and instead charge 2nd-home
owners to make up the gap in government funding, see
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21276091
- Families with young children, sick and disabled people, young
unemployed people, other vulnerable groups should rightly be protected –
but some Councils, such as Camden, have decided to charge Council Tax
contributions from everyone of working age regardless of their circumstances.
- More national info
http://www.channel4.com/news/council-tax-benefit-cuts-the-key-questions
- More about the Haringey challenge
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/21/council-tax-blow-people-benefits

Winning this challenge will set a precedent against all Councils planning to
cut Council Tax Benefit

See you there!

WINVISIBLE

PS: We have been working with the mother of Daniel Roque Hall – a severely
disabled man who was nearly killed by Wormwood Scrubs prison’s neglect. The
High Court is hearing his appeal on Tuesday so there will be a second
demonstration outside the court. A number of us will be involved in both.
See separate email.

_____

 Posted by at 19:52
Jan 292013
 

Discretionary Housing Payments are to offset extra costs of so called Bedroom Tax but many local authorities are NOT advertising that this DHP is actually available. Yet the government is giving an extra 30 million pounds to LA’s specifically for this purpose. So for any disabled person facing a reduction in housing benefit due to having spare rooms please do pass on this link to the DWP guide for this year; http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/discretionary-housing-payments-guide-draft.pdf
at
www.dwp.gov

There should be information and claim forms on your local council’s website.

DHPs pose some problems however

1. You normally have to reapply for them every 13 weeks

2. There is no guarantee how much you’ll get each time you apply.

3. There is no right of appeal if you are refused one BUT you can seek a Judicial Review against that decision if you qualify for legal aid or you can threaten it if you don’t.

 Posted by at 22:06
Jan 292013
 
Hi there,
My name is Lauren Layfield, I work on The One Show at the BBC.
I wonder if you can help me? We’re desperately after families, single mums or single people who are going to be affected by the bedroom tax.
I wondered if you knew of anyone who’d be willing to speak to us about their situation?
We’re tried a few options now, but we’ve had a lot of bad luck…namely case studies falling poorly! We’re worried, unless we find someone soon, we won’t be able to do the story. Which would be a terrible shame as we get around 5m viewers every night and we want to bring it to people’s attention – one massive concern from housing associations is that many people don’t know it’s happening, or even BELIEVE it’s going to take effect, which is worrying.
I very much hope you might be able to help!
Best wishes,
Lauren Layfield
Researcher
Description: Description: cid:image001.png@01CC98AF.693F0BE0
4th Floor | Quay House | BBC MediaCityUK
Salford Quays | M50 2BH
0161 335 7558
* lauren.layfield@bbc.co.uk

 Posted by at 19:47
http://dpac.uk.net/wp-content/plugins/wp-accessibility/toolbar/css/a11y-contrast.css 6 queries in 1.048 seconds.