´óÏó´«Ã½

The Government's response -a barely literate unintelligible series of lies and distortions-cherry picking statements to prove evidence for already decided intentions,disrespectful and proof of shambolic nature of the so-called consultation to finsh two days after publication in the Welfare Reform Bill-all opposing views are either ignored or hidden away as "up for review"-there is no overlap concerning DLA mobility for people in residential homes-the revised envisaged savings mysteriously increased after they announced the supposed "listening to concerns"-no coincidence that stories appeared in the media (also no coincidence rollout of IB/ESA testing on the same day)
deliberately conflating/confusing DLA and IB/ESA- designed to hide intentions and befuddle in the peoples'minds-a cynical,misanthropic act the Government relies on the population to have the same attributes-shameful.

I've emailed my MP about this, with a wide range of points of problems and questions about the response. I asked him to pass it on to the committee considering the Welfare Reform Bill, and also asked, if he passes it on to Maria Miller for reponse again, that I don't need the content of her previous statements or the consultation response regurgitated, because I've already read them.

There are other problems I didn't mention, as they seem churlish to mention to one's constituency MP, but the consultation response itself mostly seems to consist of regurgitation of previous statements as well. I also agree with the apparent cherry-picking of responses and ignoring of arguments. They even seem to fail to respond to some arguments and concerns that they do acknowledge in the summary of responses.

I can't understand why nothing has been said publically about the wide discrepancy between the numbers of DLA claimants given at the beginning of this Parliament and the statement in Hansard from more than a decade ago that was quoted by Meridi. There's clearly something wrong because the figures don't add up. If they can't even get the numbers right how on earth can they come to the right conclusion, except by accident? Fundamentally there has not been the huge increase in the numbers that the current Government claims.

Cornishandy-the Government relies on the fact that most people do not know that a large number of DLA recipients are pensioners whom remain entitled on reaching pensionable age-a major reason why the numbers have unsurprisingly increased-it also quotes numbers selectively sometimes including non-working age receivers sometimes not dependent on their intentions .

Oh it's rubbish all right. I read through the whole thing and it's spin worthy of Alastair Campbell quoting only those who agree with the government's pre-chosen position and only grudgingly mentioning even substantial dissent.

Find out what we think about the government's plans for welfare reform and changes to DLA here