-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.
- Thread starter Cowley
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
What has Sunak's wealth got to do with mental health issues? Do you imagine that it's impossible for someone wealthy or 'privileged' to have mental health issues?
Because the actual problem is the % of people not working. If you bring more people into the UK to work, that means more people working but also more people who need to be provided for, so it doesn't solve the problem of an increasing proportion of people not working.
The bottom line is, the higher the proportion of people not working, the harder it is to provide adequately for the population. The UK does have a real problem of more and more people choosing for whatever reason not to work - which is almost certainly one factor contributing to the cost of living crisis. Part of that problem does seem to be a growing culture where people presume that any health issues mean they can't work at all, and Sunak is right to raise that issue.
You have misunderstood my point; I wasn't trying to claim that. I may be wrong, but Sunak strikes me as a very confident person who hasn't struggled in that respect, who has just sailed through life and achieved success without any form of personal struggle. Note I said "in more ways than one"; his wealth is really by the by, and not the main point I was trying to make.
Plus, and this is the real key thing: I suspect he wouldn't be introducing this if he had a genuine understanding of mental health issues.
See above. The proposal to me shows a manifest lack of understanding of what it's like to struggle with mental health issues. It's the same old reactionary Tory "workshy / benefits scrounger" hymn-sheet that they've been singing from - on and off - since the days of Tebbit and Lilley.
Last edited:
There have been many studies over the years which demonstrate those of lower socio-economic class are more likely to have mental health issues, and by extension the treatment of mental health issues is worse in those of lower socio-economic class
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
It's very common that people who struggle with mental health on the inside put on an air of confidence on the outside. I don't think you can make any assumptions about any individual unless you know them personally extremely well (or unless their actions make it obvious that they do suffer from mental health issues). I certainly wouldn't make those kind of assumptions of someone that I don't know at all personally and only know of from having seen them make speeches on tv.
Or maybe he understands mental health issues but also understands the impact on the economy of loads of people leaving the workforce because of 'mental health' issues and recognises that you need to balance both issues? (To be fair though, given his background, I would expect what expertise he has to be more to do with business/economics than with health).
TheSmiths82
Member
I have not seen what he has said but I have seen the headlines. What people like Sunak don't seem to understand is some people are physically incapable of working. I don't consider myself disabled at all but I have health issues which restrict the type of jobs I do e.g not anything too physical. I also know people with mental health issues who just cannot hold down a job due to mental illness. In some cases it is the medication, in others it can be a lack of people skills which makes it hard to do certain type of jobs.
I don't know what the answer is, but as the population ages and living becomes more difficult there will be a much higher chance of people not being able to work.
I don't know what the answer is, but as the population ages and living becomes more difficult there will be a much higher chance of people not being able to work.
Where is the evidence for this 'growing culture' and who are these people - all people? People being out of work is, in part, linked to the availability of jobs that are suitable to individuals with certain types of health issues and the willingness of employers to flex a little where it might be feasible to do so. And with no official retirement age, there will naturally be large numbers of people choosing not to work because financially they no longer have to.
The reasons behind the percentage of people not working are much more nuanced than an unsubstantiated assertion of work-shy people hiding behind a health issue, but recognising the complexity of it isn't going to translate easily to headlines in the Mail and Express, which is the increasingly desperate Mr Sunak's real aim in raising the point.
Bening in an unfit state to work due to a medically diagnosed health condition is not a choice.
STINT47
Member
Reading with the PM said this plan to stop doctors issuing fit notes will be implemented if the Conservatives win the next general election.
Based on the current opinion pools it's probably not going to happen. Unfortunately Fortrose who do suffer from anxiety and depression today's speech could well make their condition worse especially anxieties about the future.
Based on the current opinion pools it's probably not going to happen. Unfortunately Fortrose who do suffer from anxiety and depression today's speech could well make their condition worse especially anxieties about the future.
Indeed, and all it's doing is making the Conservatives look more and more like callous, nasty and authoritarian reactionaries.
As I said, he only seems to be interested in poaching Reform votes. But even that might be misguided on second thoughts: Reform are perhaps a bit anti-establishment and don't like excessive state control (except when it comes to immigration, of course), so this might actually push libertarian-minded right-wing voters towards Reform if anything.
Last edited:
SteveP29
Member
I see Sunak is attacking what he calls "sick note culture" now, including removing the right to get a sick note from a GP:
Sunak to tackle 'sick note culture' in speech on welfare reform
The PM will say the focus should be on "what work you can do", but Labour says he has run out of ideas.www.bbc.co.uk
Attracting quite a bit of criticism from mental health professionals. To me, it does seem to denigrate people who may well have genuine long-term health, including mental health, problems.
He seems to tick every right-wing-cliche box. Anti-immigration? Check. Anti-woke? Check. Environmentalist sceptic? Check. Pro-austerity? Check. Pro-Brexit? Check. Anti pro-Palestine demonstrations? Check. And now he's using the tired old Tory "workshy" cliche. Such is the predictability of his position on just about everything, you could probably replace him with a computer program.
It seems patently obvious that he is only interested in attracting potential Reform voters and not interested in the centre - and as a result is second only to Truss as most right-wing post-war British PM. And I do get the impression that he has a distinct lack of empathy for certain people in society, perhaps due to his extremely privileged background, both financially and socially.
'including removing the right to get a sick note from a GP'
How in the world will that ever work, never mind be accepted by employers.
Are they supposed to make everyone come to work, regardless of their condition and physical state?
Are firemen who have been exposed to smoke for extended periods, just supposed to get on with it, despite a reduced lung capacity due to long term exposure to smoke?
Are train drivers expected to continue as if nothing happened when they've been through the trauma of being the driver that takes somebody's life?
Are office workers expected to turn up regardless of their condition, spread infectious disease, potentially through the whole workforce, reducing output and presumably, profits and profitability?
You can tell these are the words of a man who has no concept of the real world, of life in a working situation and waited longer than a week for routine healthcare.
I wish he would just hurry up and f**k off to California for good.
'you could probably replace him with a computer program'
The computer program would also have infinitely more charisma and character
Then concentrate on finding and doing something about the long term milkers, as opposed to punishing everyone and then having to pay out not only the benefits entitled to the people, but the cost of keeping it from them in the first place.
How much money do you think the Government saved by denying 90% of PIP claimants, when, after appeal or tribunal, over 85% of those claimants are awarded it.
Then the award doesn't just start from the day of the award, it is backdated to the date of application.
How much does it cost to hire a room to hear the cases at tribunal?
How much does it cost to appoint a medical specialist and the rest of the panel hearing the tribunal?
How much does it cost to send a DWP representative away from his job for a day to be at tribunals?
I'll tell you now, it costs more to withhold benefits than jut give them in the first instance.
Employing Civil Servants to recover benefits awarded fraudulently or in a manner that suggest the system is being played would be far more cost effective
Well, if they can say a whole country is 'safe' (Rwanda) then they can certainly declare every working age person fitI don't understand why they don't just try and pass a law declaring that everyone in the country is fit for work
California probably won't have him. Remember we're talking about one of the most liberal states in the US.
Perhaps he might want to try his luck in Alabama or Arkansas.
Exactly that
Perhaps we should throw out every Tory MP because a minority (admittedly an ever growing minority) has been up to no good?
But this seems to be their MO. An example....
Historically there's been an issue with a black market in tobacco and cigarettes. Not a big proportion of the overall market, but the treasury lost some revenue. What did they do? Invented a track and trace system and then required the entire market to spend millions (and it was millions - I was part of the implementation when I worked in retail logistics) to effectively prove their innocence.
Its a ludicrous approach
Pressures in life are far more than they were even 10 years ago; war, inflation, low income, coupled with the trauma some felt during and after COVID. Massive increases in mental health - anxiety, depression - but no subsequent increase in access to mental health support due to funding. Bosses unable/unwilling to compromise on roles because they have to demand higher output from fewer workers because they’re unable to afford to employ additional staff. 14 years of Tory rule and a **** storm as thanks.
But I’ll hang off the mental health support as I’ve been flamed by some on here in the past for suggesting that this should have been seen and higher numbers of mental health practitioners trained in due response.
But I’ll hang off the mental health support as I’ve been flamed by some on here in the past for suggesting that this should have been seen and higher numbers of mental health practitioners trained in due response.
I suspect that a lot of people (and I include myself in this) have elements which are associated with Autistic behaviour - however a lot function in society, and if it's not causing them issues why do they need to have a label?
Sometimes some people need to learn to pipe down a little when it's of no great importance.
I don't understand why they don't just try and pass a law declaring that everyone in the country is fit for work
I just hope no Tory MP's are on here, as such ideas may make it into their manifesto for the next election!!!
If the number of people not working is the actual problem then we need to have more of the work shy people who haven't worked for years and are living of government handouts working more - do you want to guess by far the largest group doing so (no it's not those under 18).
The problem is that you're going to struggle to get many over 75's (5.4 million) back into the workforce.
A lot of those aged 16-65 who are economical inactive (9.4 million) are either in full time education (2.5 million), have retired early (1.1 million) or are caring for others (1.7 million - be that small children or elderly relatives). Whilst there's been a rise in the number with long term health issues (risen from 2 million in 2018 to 2.8 million now) the overall numbers are still fairly limited.
If you look at short term sickness, it doesn't even reach 1/4 million people.
And how many of those are awaiting additional specialist assessments/awaiting surgery/targeted mental health support before they can even consider returning to the work place?
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 15,343
A 40% increase in five years is significant.
It's a difficult one as an anxiety and/or depression diagnosis can get you full UC. It's crazy because you can have someone with some very serious physical ailments but when they have their assessment and answer no to anxiety/depression then they are not eligible. As it's unseen, it's obviously easy for the ones' who want to game the system to do so. The new 'back pain'
I don't really see how you can fix it tbh without potentially negatively affecting the many genuine cases
I don't really see how you can fix it tbh without potentially negatively affecting the many genuine cases
class ep-09
Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 526
Sunak rejects offer of mobility scheme for young people between EU and UK
Labour has also rejected European Commission’s proposal which would have allowed young people to live, work or study in the bloc
That will make Sunak even more “popular” …
uglymonkey
Member
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 480
Is he on a career death spiral or something?
Perhaps I might offer an illustrative example of how it works in reality should someone which to "choose" not to work due to ill-health?
Let's keep it simple for sake of argument. A single person, living alone, in a private rented house for instance. Lets say they were working but due to some sort of illness, could be a physical health condition or maybe a mental health condition (or a mixture) they've not been able to cope with carrying on at their current employer (who was very sympathetic and tried to help keep them in work) and after a spell of being on sick pay have resigned as it just doesn't look like they're going back to work anytime soon.
They've been to their GP who has been issuing them regular fit notes every month so the GP is aware and treatment is being explored but it will be some time until they're able to access effective treatments. In the meantime all that can be done is attempting to manage whatever the issue is with medication which has helped take the edge of but they're still not well.
They apply for Universal Credit (UC) as they're now unemployed. The online application is fairly straightforward (for those who have a modicum of IT literacy) and they have their appointment with a work coach at the Jobcentre a few days later. They tell the work coach about their health difficulties and the work coach will give them a "to do" to upload their fit note onto their UC claim to begin their referral for a Work Capability Assessment (WCA).
At this point, whilst waiting for the WCA process to grind forward, it can go one of two ways. If they get an understanding work coach an honest conversation will follow and the work coach will ask them to agree to a claimant commitment which is properly tailored around their current inability to work, perhaps they'll need to update their CV, do a few courses, and have regular contact with their work coach. If they get a less understanding work coach then their claimant commitment will be far more intense up to and including actively seeking work (though most appear to accept a fit note as a reason to tone down the work search requirements).
After all that's sorted you'll start getting payments from Universal Credit. The first payment will be about five weeks after you applies and for a single adult aged 25 or over is currently £393.45 per month (if you're under-25 it's £311.68) and you'll also get help with your rent. Assuming your aged 35 or over you'll get the one bedroom rate of Local Housing Allowance (as you're in private rented accommodation). This varies nationally but lets pick a reasonably sized city like Nottingham. If you live in Nottingham in which case you'll get up to £548.51 per month towards your rent. If you're under-35 you'll only get the Shared Accommodation Rate (as single people aged under-35 are expected to live together presumably) which for Nottingham is £378.85 per month. You'll also get some help with your Council Tax by applying for a reduction from the relevant local council.
So you've gone from working down to £393.45 per month to live on (food, gas, electric, water, clothes, etc etc) and £548.51 per month to pay your rent. Not sure I'd give up work lightly for just that.
Anyway, so you've started your WCA process so around a month after the fit note goes in you'll then be a sent a UC50 form to fill in which is your opportunity to tell the Department for Work and Pensions all about your health conditions and how them effect you day to day. It's 24 pages long and starts with basic information about you (who you are, who your GP is, any other medical professional involved in your care, information about your health conditions, etc) before asking you specific questions about various activities related to work such as your ability to mobilise, to pick up and move things, controlling your bladder and bowels, starting and finishing tasks, coping with social situations, etc. You can see the form here for interest.
Once you've managed to fill all that in providing as much information as possible you'll then, almost certainly, be referred for an assessment with a health care professional (often a nurse, rarely a doctor, sometimes a physiotherapist or even a paramedic) provided by a DWP contractor. This may be face to face, via telephone or video link. You'll be asked more questions about your health conditions, how they effect you, any treatments, medications and their effects, your typical day, how you can manage the activities considered by the WCA, problems you have doing them and how you manage now, as well as being given some simple tasks to do like bending, reaching and gripping. The assessment will probably take around an hour. Maybe a little less, maybe a little more.
The assessor will then prepare a report as to whether or not you are fit for work, have limited capability for work, or have limited capability for work and work-related activity. That report is forwarded onto the DWP for a final decision to be made (though usually they rubber stamp the assessors opinion) as to your capability for work.
If you're fit for work in the view of the DWP then your GPs fit notes are irrelevant you're fit for work and will be expected to actively seek work by applying for jobs, being available for interview, and so on. If you have limited capability for work you won't need to apply for jobs but you will still be expected to undertake steps towards being ready to get work. Preparing CVs, doing courses, regular contact with your work coach, etc. If you have limited capability for work and work related activity then you can opt into engaging with the Jobcentre and will have an assigned work coach but in general terms will simply be left alone with perhaps the odd phone call once or twice a year to check-in and see how you are. You will also, if you're in this latter group, get an extra £416.19 per month in your award.
And that's, in a nutshell, the whole process. It isn't as easy as just getting a fit note and that's the end of the story. It's an already very involved process which requires the completion of a pretty lengthy, detailed and to be honest quite invasive form. This is followed by a detailed assessment with a health care professional taking around an hour (along with consideration time after you've left) and finally a DWP decision makers reviews everything and makes a decision on your capability for work.
Of course whilst all this is going on you're still unwell and waiting for treatment on the NHS which continues to be delayed due to the existing issues with the health service. No doubt feeling worse and worse as bills continue to mount, as limited savings (because if they weren't limited you wouldn't get UC anyway or would get a reduced rate) are eaten away and now the DWP are asking you to fill in forms in which you have to talk about all the things you cannot do anymore and then go to an assessment with a stranger to tell them about all the problems you have. This doesn't feel conducive to the main thing you want to do which is get better so you can get back to work but this is what you need to do right now to make sure you keep the money you need to live on.
I hope that might be helpful for some to put into context what the system already requires someone to do before they can be "signed off" as a disabled and not required to actively seek work whilst claiming Universal Credit.
Sunak rejects offer of mobility scheme for young people between EU and UK
Labour has also rejected European Commission’s proposal which would have allowed young people to live, work or study in the blocwww.theguardian.com
That will make Sunak even more “popular” …
No surprises from arch-Brexiter, arch-anti-immigrationist Sunak - but worrying Labour has rejected it as well.
By offering FoM to a subset of the population this could have been the first step on a road to better relations and restored rights.
I just hope Labour are more friendly to the EU, and accept any reasonable deals offered by the EU, when/if they actually get into power.
Last edited:
I didn't say that the growth wasn't significant, rather that the overall numbers (when compared to who else isn't working) isn't that large.
Anyway, as others have pointed out; the fact that services have been cut may well be a sufficient factor to that growth, as will the fact that there's been a major pandemic in that timeframe impacting further the ability to get help if your are unwell.
Tezza1978
Member
Labour would be barking mad to come out in support of any scheme like this before an election. Would be like a goalkeeper offering the opposing teams 11 players a free penalty kick each.
brad465
Established Member
Mark Menzies' scandal just keeps getting worse:
birchesgreen
Established Member
Yes when i heard about the EU proposal i thought, "Not now!" but luckily Labour didn't slip on the banana skin...
I hope that @ainsworth74's post (#8003) has gone some way to dispel the myth that people choose a life on benefits.
While it may have been the case that benefits were once paid out with the minimum of scrutiny, it's certainly no longer the case and it hasn't been since the last Labour government was in power. When the system works as it should - ie tailored help to an individual's circumstances, it can be beneficial to getting people back to work.
I went through Tony Blair's "New Deal" scheme at the tail end of the 1990s and, while it wasn't completely ideal, I came out of it with rather more confidence than I did when I went into it. I was paid a little bit more each week than I would have been on JobSeekers' Allowance, but that little bit extra made all the difference. If you needed a smart shirt and tie to go to an interview and you didn't have them, vouchers were provided so that you could turn up at the interview looking the best you could. If you had a specific job in mind but needed a particular qualification - no problem - they they paid for the course at your local college. If the New Deal providers identified that more than one person required particular skills, the college would send a tutor out. I ended up being employed on a temporary contract with that service provider (although I now know that there was a fat "job outcome fee" for them); nevertheless it got me back on my feet and after that contract ended it didn't take me long to find a full-time job elsewhere.
More carrot, less stick; if you wield the stick too often and too hard you end up with people who have no confidence in their own abilities, regardless of the skills they actually have, and end up providing the NHS with a bigger burden. Poor mental health and poor physical health go hand in hand and if there aren't enough resources to tackle either issue it ends up with a far bigger welfare bill. How the hell is anyone supposed to turn their life around when they're afraid that making a simple mistake will result in petty, punitive sanctions that can literally throw them into destitution?
The DWP has some really great staff, but the department has been stripped to the bone so much in recent years that those who've had the stomach to stick around are finding themselves under increasing pressure to get through their workload. The department also has some really awful staff who have zero empathy towards the people they have to deal with on a daily basis and, quite frankly, should not be employed in a role that involves dealing with the public; there are one or two who I'd quite happily have suspended on the spot if I'd been in charge.
Those who haven't been through the system will never understand and I honestly hope you never have to.
While it may have been the case that benefits were once paid out with the minimum of scrutiny, it's certainly no longer the case and it hasn't been since the last Labour government was in power. When the system works as it should - ie tailored help to an individual's circumstances, it can be beneficial to getting people back to work.
I went through Tony Blair's "New Deal" scheme at the tail end of the 1990s and, while it wasn't completely ideal, I came out of it with rather more confidence than I did when I went into it. I was paid a little bit more each week than I would have been on JobSeekers' Allowance, but that little bit extra made all the difference. If you needed a smart shirt and tie to go to an interview and you didn't have them, vouchers were provided so that you could turn up at the interview looking the best you could. If you had a specific job in mind but needed a particular qualification - no problem - they they paid for the course at your local college. If the New Deal providers identified that more than one person required particular skills, the college would send a tutor out. I ended up being employed on a temporary contract with that service provider (although I now know that there was a fat "job outcome fee" for them); nevertheless it got me back on my feet and after that contract ended it didn't take me long to find a full-time job elsewhere.
More carrot, less stick; if you wield the stick too often and too hard you end up with people who have no confidence in their own abilities, regardless of the skills they actually have, and end up providing the NHS with a bigger burden. Poor mental health and poor physical health go hand in hand and if there aren't enough resources to tackle either issue it ends up with a far bigger welfare bill. How the hell is anyone supposed to turn their life around when they're afraid that making a simple mistake will result in petty, punitive sanctions that can literally throw them into destitution?
The DWP has some really great staff, but the department has been stripped to the bone so much in recent years that those who've had the stomach to stick around are finding themselves under increasing pressure to get through their workload. The department also has some really awful staff who have zero empathy towards the people they have to deal with on a daily basis and, quite frankly, should not be employed in a role that involves dealing with the public; there are one or two who I'd quite happily have suspended on the spot if I'd been in charge.
Those who haven't been through the system will never understand and I honestly hope you never have to.
And that perhaps is where everyone's pinning it back to Sunak's wealth. As he keeps pointing out whenever he can, he is the son of a GP and a pharmacist. His top tier education helped him become obscenely wealthy in his own right and married into even greater wealth. There is zero chance he'll ever have to interact with the DWP or NHS as a service user (especially if he moves back to the US as is assumed). If he needed mental or indeed any sort of health care, he can literally have the best money can buy. He will never have to worry about the bills or making ends meet at the end of the month. He won't ever have to worry about losing his job - at least once he's turfed out of No10.
Like they say, money doesn't buy happiness, but it absolutely helps.