How Lansley duped the professions into “supporting” his reforms.

This post has been copied from a site called Bevan's Run 

"My name is Clive Peedell and I am Consultant Clinical Oncologist working for the NHS in the North East of England.I am co-chair of the NHS Consultants' Association and a member of BMA Council and BMA political board. I have been an active campaigner against NHS privatisation and market based reforms.I believe that a publicly funded, publicly provided and publicly accountable NHS is the most cost effective and equitable way to deliver healthcare to our nation's population."

Clive's FaceBook page Here.

The Health and Social Care Bill has been hugely controversial and has 

faced significant criticism from across the health sector. There was even an unprecedented “pause” of the reforms. Despite this, the bill continues on its course through the Parliamentary process largely unchanged (in terms of it’s key purpose to increasingly privatise and marketise the NHS), and its architect, Andrew Lansley remains in post. A key reason that the bill has got this far is that although there has been a lot of criticism, there has not been a united front from the health professions calling for the bill to be withdrawn. The British Medical Association is the only major organisation that has called for withdrawal of the bill, and now opposes the bill in its entirety. So how has Lansley managed to avoid total opposition from other NHS stakeholders?

A key reason is that Mr Lansley was very careful to make sure that theWhite Paper, Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, (which preceded publication of the Health and Social Care Bill) contained key Motherhood and Apple Pie principles to gain and claim support, and deflect criticism from the main NHS stakeholders.

These crucial Motherhood and Apple Pie principles of the reforms can be found in the Foreword of the White Paper, which was co-signed Lansley, David Cameron and Nick Clegg.

There are 3 main principles of the reforms:

“First, patients will be at the heart of everything we do. So they will have more choice and control, helped by easy access to the information they need about the best GPs and hospitals. Patients will be in charge of making decisions about their care.”

“Second, there will be a relentless focus on clinical outcomes. Success will be measured, not through bureaucratic process targets, but against results that really matter to patients – such as improving cancer and stroke survival rates.”

“Third, we will empower health professionals. Doctors and nurses must to be able to use their professional judgement about what is right for patients. We will support this by giving front-line staff more control. Healthcare will be run from the bottom up, with ownership and decision-making in the hands of professionals and patients.”

Who could possibly disagree with “putting patients first”, a “focus on clinical outcomes” and “empowering health professionals”. And that is thekey point. These principles are designed to be very powerful rhetorical devices that state one thing (which is hard to argue against) but can actually mean something completely different. In the case of “putting patients first” and having “more choice”, this is a mechanism designed to increase competition in the new healthcare market. A market cannot work without choice and competition. In the case of measuring “clinical outcomes”, this is also key to the functioning of the market, because in order to choose services between different providers of services, patients need the information to do so. It’s a way of countering the problem of information asymmetry in healthcare markets. Finally, the idea of “empowering health professionals” is just as much about devolving power and responsibilities away from the Secretary of State. The reforms will lead to healthcare rationing and eventually a mixed funding system, so it will be clinicians (GPs) that will be held accountable, not the Secretary of State. This is why Clause 1 of the bill (and its associated clauses) on the duties and powers of the Secretary of State for health are so crucial.

The powerful political rhetoric of these 3 principles certainly registered with the Medical Royal Colleges and the Royal College of Nursing, who made the following press statements following publication of the White Paper to support these key principles:

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges stated:

“The Academy shares the Government’s vision for the NHS, as set out in the White Paper. In particular we welcome:  

The clear commitment to putting the needs of patients and the public first

The use of improved health outcomes as the driver and measure of success

The empowerment and engagement of clinical healthcare professionals.”

The RCN stated :

“The principles on which the proposed reforms are based – placing patients at the heart of the NHS, focusing on clinical outcomes and empowering health professionals – are both welcome and supported by the RCN.”

Furthermore, as late as 6^th of September 2011, despite being critical of the reforms, even the BMA stated public support for these 3 principles in a joint letter to the Times with Peter Carter (RCN), Clare Gerada (RCGP), Professor Cathy Warwick (Royal College of Midwives), Professor Sue Baliey (Royal College of Psychiatrists), Phil Gray (Chartered Society of Physiotherapy) and Peggy Frost (British Association of Occupational Therapists):  

"We support a vision of healthcare that is patient focused, clinically-led and based on outcomes."

The following day, in Prime Minister’s Questions, David Cameron took full advantage when he told the Commons:

"now you've got the Royal College of GPs, the physicians, the nurses, people working in the health service supporting the changes we're making"

This was disputed, but the damage was already done.

Furthermore, Andrew Lansley then used this in defence of his no confidence vote at the RCN conference.

So, these 3 core principles which were made clear in the foreword of the White Paper have served Mr Lansley and the coalition very well. It is imperative that leaders of the professional health organisations take more care in understanding political rhetoric. Once again the political class has run rings around a politically naive medical and nursing establishment. They need to wake up now and defend the NHS, before it’s too late.

The RCN, RCGP, Royal College of Midwives, and other professional organisations should sign a joint statement with the BMA as soon as possible to get this bill withdrawn. 

Written By Clive Peedell

Let's all back Clive in his endeavours and keep the NHS a national service free at the point of use and NOT allow the Tories to privatise it.

Sign the official petition here: Drop the Bill

Source: Bevan's Run

Cameron - Hedge Fund Donations and His Pyrrhic EU Victory

What Cameron did last Friday was nothing more that crass self-defeating arrogant stupidity. Every time the man is allowed out on his own he manages to to land himself in hot water, but this time he has excelled himself and landed the whole country in not just hot water, but scalding hot water.

Walking out of the talks designed to thrash out agreement to halt the crisis in the euro was and act of foolishness beyond comprehension, but walking out and rendering the country impotent and isolated too is unforgivable and complete insanity. Cameron said he did it to protect the City, but even if parts of the City were put at risk all it would have amounted to was a few foreign investment banks and about two dozen hedge funds plus their big bonuses, this is why the Prime Minister, David Cameron put at risk millions of jobs and British exports, commerce and British industry, unbelievable but it is true,, the question is why?  So let's examine who these "so important" hedge funds could be and what relationship they have with the British Prime Minister, David Cameron and the Conservative party.

David Cameron -  has taken millions of pounds in donations from hedge-fund managers whose firms made fortunes taking bets that the share price in British banks would fall. 


John Nash - sold the majority of his shares in Care UK to a private equity company. Mr Nash runs several other companies and is also the boss of a hedge fund called "The Hedgie" and owns venture company Sovereign Capital. Hedge funds are speculative funds which make large bets on market movements. They utilise borrowed money to substantially leverage their returns (and losses). During the the global financial crash, hedge "funders" made billions out failing banks and short selling in the UK. People were suffering losing their jobs, livelihoods, having their homes repossessed and their loans called in by banks, and men like John Nash and many other Conservative donors were making millions out of their suffering. People like the  New York billionaire John Paulson , have come under fire for short-selling UK bank shares, like HBOS. John Nash gave £21,000 to Health Secretary, Andrew Lansley's office, while he [Nash] was still bos of Care UK a health care company. Nash has also donated around £500,000 to the Tories over the past years,

Michael Hintz - (Goldman Sachs) Australian millionaire hedge fund baron who bankrolled the former Defence secretary Liam Fox, his friend Adam Werritty and Atlantic Bridge and who's organisation shorted shares in Bradford and Bingly during the crash. Hintz also made a series of donations and gifts to a string of senior Conservative Cabinet Ministers including the Prime Minister, David Cameron and Chancellor, George Osborne. Banker Hintz was caught up in the "cash for honours" scandal when he revealed he had given at least £1.2 million to the Conservative party and provided a further £2.5 million in loans since 2005.

Simon Dingemans - Goldman Sachs

A mergers and acquisitions banker, Mr Dingemans has handled deals worth £250bn and is one of the most highly paid in the City. Called in by BAA to plot a defence against Ferrovial’s takeover bid but was beaten by Citigroup, adviser to the Spanish conglomerate.

The extensive links between Goldman Sachs and the Conservative Party.

• Political donations totalling £8.5 million to British politicians in the past decade from Goldman and ex-Goldman people;
• Goldman Sachs has an immense lobbying machine in Brussels, including active membership of over a dozen financial sector lobby groups;
• Extensive meetings between Goldman Sachs and Conservative MEPs including: 9 meetings in six months with a key MEP on the Parliament's Economic and Monetary Committee; and a total of 36 meetings between just four MEPs and Goldman Sachs, its lobby groups or PR companies acting on their behalf;
• The Bank's lobbying campaign to undermine political reform on derivatives and alternate investment funds including: private dinners and unminuted "after office hours" meetings, high level conferences and targeted campaigns to Commission officials, MEPs and their assistants. [just like the ones cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell conveniently "forgot" to mention between Fox, Werritty and Gould].
• How Goldman Sach's lobbyists tried to undermine amendments in a key report on derivatives, seen as "financial weapons of mass destruction";
• The bank's lobbying enabled them to gamble on food futures and drive up prices.
• Goldman Sachs also bet against its own clients in hedge betting when Lehman Brothers crashed and  made millions.

Hugh Sloane; Hedge Fund Manager - Founded Sloane Robinson. Donated £50,000 to the Tories. Channel 4 once highlighted a Conservative Government policy U-Turn over the Cayman Islands, which, the producers note, is the base for companies run by Hugh Sloane, worth £185 million, also ran by Michael Hintz worth £250 million. The then Labour Foreign Minister, Chris Bryant tried to force the islands to introduce direct taxation by restricting their access to loans to plug a budget deficit. However, Channel 4  points out that within weeks of the new Conservative government coming to power in 2010, the demand was inexplicably dropped and the British Foreign Office had granted permission for the islands to borrow an extra £100 million.

Michael Farmer - a City financier who has donated £2.3 million to the Tories, making him a regular fixture on the list of Britain's biggest political donors.

Michael-Alen Buckley - Chairman, RAB Capital

Founded the hedge fund with Phillip Richards on 1 April 1999. The company was floated in 2004. Has donated to the Tory party

Henry Angest - Flowidea Ltd  Arbuthnot Banking Group Plc donated  £1,347, 600

Zac and Ben Goldsmith - The world's most famous banking dynasty. The Conservative party hid donations of £40,000 from from Zac Goldsmith, his brother Ben and two billionaire brothers in an apparent breach of the law. 
The donations were recorded on official records as coming from Unicorn Administration, an intermediary company that helps run the finances of the super-rich. Zac Goldsmith is now a Tory MP.

Stanly Fink...  (now Baron Fink) British Hedge Fund manager Co-treasurer, Conservative Party, is apparently "the Godfather" of the hedge fund industry and runs hedge fund International Standard Asset Management. Donated over £1 million to the Tories in the run-up to the may 2010 general election.Fink also a key donor to the Boris Johnson mayoral campaign. 

Jeremy Isaacs - Heads his own investment firm

Stepped down from running Lehman Brothers’ European operations just before the crash. Now runs his own investment firm with ex-colleague Roger Nagioff, who was head of Lehmans’ fixed income division. Has been a big Conservative party donor.

Paul Ruddock... Chief Executive Landsdowne Hedge Fund said to have made £100m short-selling Northern Rock, has given the Conservatives almost £210,000.

 David Craigen.. Paul Ruddock and David Craigen own investment firm, Lansdowne, and short sold shares in HBOS. Donated £50.000 to the Conservative party.

Howard Shore - A multi-millionaire banker and Tory donor  Raising £2 million for the Tory party sponsored David Cameron’s lavish £1,000-a-head Tory ball  in Feb 2011. Mr Shore will be one of dozens of super-rich bankers toasting the Government’s failure to make a major dent in their ­£7billion ­bonuses. 

RF Trustee Co - Several donors, but five of these belonged to the Fleming Banking Family.  Donated £1, 689, 500

Pierre Rolin - Credit Suisse  Mr Rolin gave £12,000 to the Tory Party in February last year, taking his total donations to £88,000. He also moved in the same circles as Boris Johnson, the London Mayor, giving Johnson's office the initial £80,000 capital for a study into the Olympic Park's new visitor attraction . Mr Rolin is currently being pursued through the courts by creditors for £43 million.

Prominent figures from the financial services industry - gave £500,000 (€574,838) to the UK's Conservative Party in the second week of the 2010 General Election campaign.

The coalition agreement that David Cameron and Nick Clegg brandished at us in the Rose Garden in downing Street included clear undertakings to take big money out of politics but there appears to be no sign of this happening. 

What my research reveals is the scale of the Conservative party’s reliance on a variety of City interests at a time when David Cameron has walked away from vital talks in the EU citing that he did this to protect the City.

Using analysis from the Electoral Commission and Companies House database, researchers found City donations to the 12 months to July 2011 accounted for 51.4 per cent of the £12.2million of funds received by Conservative Central Office.

Hedge funds, financiers and private equity firms contributed £3.3m - some 27 per cent - while 50 City donors paid over £50,000.

All contributors donating over £3million become members of the Leader's Group and qualify for face-to-face meetings with the prime minister.

The largest contributors acorss the business sector studied by the bureau was hedge funds which donated £1.38m (11.4 per cent). Three of the City's biggest name hedge fund bosses - Michael Farmer, Lord Stanley Fink and Andrew Law.

Since the coalition was formed in April 2010 the Tory party has received 292 separate donations of more than £10,000 each.

The Top 10 City Financiers Who Donate to the Tory Party.

	Name	Sector	Total Donated
1	David Rowland	Financier	£4,031,016
2	Michael Farmer	Hedge Fund	£2,973,850
3	Stanley Fink	Hedge Fund	£1,945,141
4	Michael Hintze	Hedge Fund	£1,235,000
5	Paul Adrian Beecroft	Private Equity	£537,076
6	James Lyle	Hedge Fund	£500,000
7	Jonathan Wood	Hedge Fund	£500,000
8	Peter J Hall	Investment Fund	£493,540
9	George M Magan	Banker & Investment Fund	£485,000
10	Paul Ruddock	Hedge Fund	£465,000
		TOTAL	£13,165,623

In Europe, hedge funds are threatened by EU proposals this week to introduce a micro-tax on financial trades to raise cash for teetering economies. Campaigners fear as hedge fund tycoons are big donors to the Conservatives, they will use their influence on David Cameron and George Osborne to ensure that the issue of higher taxes is kicked into the long grass.

Central Office could yet be receiving more cheques from the Mayfair set.

This makes it easier to understand why David Cameron behaved as he did. He and the Conservative government are heavily compromised and have far too many people to pay back for their  very mediocre "victory" at the 2010 general election.

David Cameron's supposed victory that had the jingoistic right of his party clapping and cheering and plotting their next move to have the UK exit from the EU at the cost of over 3 million British jobs suddenly feels like  pyrrhic. victory

Storm Clouds Gather Over The White Cliffs of Dover

Friday 8^th December 2011 
will in time come to be known as 
“Black Friday”

David Cameron had travelled to Brussels to hold meetings with other EU countries to try and thrash out a deal to help stave off the crisis which threatens the euro currency with collapse.  Cameron returned home jubilant, so jubilant, one would think he had help stop the threat to millions of British jobs which are at risk if the euro collapses, however, this wasn’t the case, what he had done was to attend that meeting and make a set of demands he knew could not be met, misused the UK’s veto and walked away from the talks not helping to settle anything and thus effectively rendering the UK completely isolated and totally impotent.

It cannot and should not be denied that Cameron was in a difficult situation, but I do not feel empathy for him, he wanted to be Prime Minister and being PM means a lot more than swanning around lapping up plaudits for other people’s efforts, it means being able to make and take tough decisions and calls when they arise and the hardest thing and the right thing for Cameron to have done  last Friday would have been to face down his right wing Eurosceptics and stayed with the other EU leaders and try to thrash out a deal to save the euro and reach a decent compromise for Britain, instead of doing this he placed his own narrow party interests and the interests of his hedge bet funding mates, venture capitalists and Tory fat-cat donors before the good of the country, this will turn out to be a catastrophic decision for the country and the beginning of the end for David Cameron’s premiership.  What Cameron did last Friday made him the toast of the rabid right wing Eurosceptics of his party and no doubt he was also heralded by his bonus loving banker chums and private equity sharks. However, for the leaders of British industry, exporters, manufacturers and commerce and long-term investors of pension funds etc., what Cameron did was absolutely shocking and appalling. This was proved by the reaction of the markets last Friday and will probably be seen again when they open on Monday morning. The irony of this is that at the last election all these groups heralded David Cameron and George Osborne as their men – how quickly they are now discovering otherwise.

By walking out of those talks David Cameron is playing with fire, by walking out and leaving the decisions to France and Germany is akin to committing economic suicide on behalf of the 99% back home in the UK. The decisions that affect our job security, our quality of life, our trade and British industry and the decision on the future of European economies will now be taken without our influence.  Be under no illusions, the decisions that will now be taken without us will have a massive impact on our economy.

France and Germany will now use QMV (qualified majority voting) to push through decisions that will affect us and our lives and we will not be at that table to stop them. So Cameron saying he done this to protect the City is nonsense, they will be affected anyway. Cameron has cut the UK adrift from our trading partners, our allies and our friends and once again the whole of Europe is looking at us as if we have a screw loose. We will become known as the “madman of Europe”. What Cameron has done is profoundly damaging and deeply dangerous to our whole way of life; the very thing that Cameron pretends he wants to “protect” will end up being irreparably damaged and unless he goes back to the EU and tries to repair some of the damage he has caused, the people that will suffer for his ridiculous pompous blindly stupid arrogance is us ordinary people. 

The threat to jobs is not just in the City, but to millions all over the country, the risk is tremendous and it has been brought about by David Cameron’s fear of his party and his arrogant feckless, reckless behaviour last Friday, where he managed to undo 40 years work in just a few hours in one night.

Cameron went in there demanding concessions which he could not have accepted anyway as he had no authority to accept them they would have had to be voted on in parliament before that could happen, so in effect Cameron has placed us all in this situation for precisely nothing but his own over inflated ego and his own selfish party political interests. He did what he did to appease the right wing of his party because he was scared if he did not then they would dispose of him. Some sobering news for Cameron, Margaret Thatcher once famously said after negotiations with the EU “No – No – No”.  Margaret Thatcher was gone just five weeks later, ousted out by her own party!

I predict this is the start of the end for Cameron. The rabid right of the Conservative party are not going to allow him to go back to the EU and re-negotiate properly; very shortly they will be calling for a referendum.

Make no mistake, now the rabid right wing Tories have tasted blood, they will be satisfied with nothing else but our exit from the EU, and that's an exit at any price! The cost however, will not be paid by them, they are nearly all millionaires, no the cost will be borne by the already hard hit and squeezed ordinary folk of this country, the same people who are already buckling under the strain of Osborne and Cameron’s insane austerity measures who are forcing us to pay for the their greedy banker friends, the very people who got this country and the world into this mess in the first place and unbelievably those are the very same people who donate millions of pounds to the Tory party.

All Cameron has done is bought himself some time but that time is fast turning into just the briefest of respites.  The call for a referendum will start in earnest this coming week it will emanate from the Tory right and this will without doubt reopen all the old divisions between Eurosceptics and pro Europeans within the party and place considerable strain on the coalition government.  In effect, in abject fear of his own party Cameron himself has reopened the running sore and tracking sinus that has lain dormant just under the surface for a few years which will now erupt like a pox on the lips for all to see. Open warfare between pro and anti-Europeans will once again be declared and the longer this continues the more harm it will do to the Tories and more importantly the more it will harm this country.

Conservative pro Europeans have been strangely quiet, almost like an uneasy hush has descended over them as if they cannot quite believe what Cameron has done and what it will now mean to the Conservative party as a whole. Up until now it has been the sceptics that have all been clapping, banging their drums and shouting and whooping with joy and positively salivating as they quickly turned the talk from this one act of Cameron using the veto to one of our complete exit from the EU. By now as reality starts to bite the simmering resentment will be brewing. Once again the Tory party is split asunder.

David Cameron may like to believe himself the all-encompassing statesman of Churchllian nature, the good old “British Bulldog spirit” and all that kind of talk usually favoured by right wing zealots and the BNP, but in reality he is a complete joke. Churchill would never have "growled" at our friends and allies; Churchill would never have put this country at serious and unnecessary risk. People should remember the people that Cameron upset are not our enemies, they are our key trading partners, they are our friends and allies.

Britain does not have a proper government that much has become increasingly obvious over the past 19 months but now it is obviously we are being led by farcical egotists and the rest of the world (not just Europe) now looked upon as a joke and a laughing stock. We are a country that thinks still thinks in terms of the British Raj and British Imperialism, we are a country that appears totally unable to accept the demise of the British Empire, a country that cannot accept that we do not “Rule the Waves” because actually we never did. Britain is an enigma to true Europeans; they must scratch their heads in complete bafflement at our ridiculous childish xenophobic anti-European behaviour. If there was ever a time to use the old adage of "cut off our noses to spite our face" it is right now.

The British Prime Minister is not leading his party or the country he is just following the right wing of his party up a very dark and dead end ally. The reason he is doing this is because he is desperately afraid of it.

We also have a deputy PM, who for the life of him cannot make a decision as to where he stands on this entire issue. One minute he is giving Cameron his backing, the next he is saying he is furious with Cameron, and then the next he has gone back to his original position. Clegg is going round and round in those proverbial circles when really the decision where to stand on this particular issue of the EU and the euro should have been a simple one for Clegg, after all everyone knows and accepts his pro-European credentials, they may not agree with him, or like them very much, but we all presumably knew where he stood and he could have been respected for that at least.  However, now we can only assume that just like tuition fees, human rights and the destruction and privatisation of the NHS before, when push comes to actual shove Nick Clegg has once again acted to protect his own narrow interests of staying in government and clinging on for dear life to any remaining vestige of any power he may have thought he had in this very right wing, very Conservative government. Quite where this will leave him should he lose his Sheffield Hallam seat at the next election is unclear; one suspects that he has now scuppered his own chances of ever being anything significant in the EU after the next election. He may think he has saved the Liberal Democrats from a beating at the ballot box by preventing the coalition breaking up now, but he should not hold his breath because the chances of this coalition breaking up early have just increased a 100 fold, regardless of what Nick Clegg has done, or not done. In fact he has probably increased the thrashing his party will receive at the next election as confused Liberal Democrats view with absolute horror how their indecisive, ineffectual leader is behaving.

Education and the EU were at the heart of virtually every Liberal Democrat policy and now astonishingly they are both discarded! The fundamental basics of what makes a Liberal Democrat be a Liberal Democrat, and vote Liberal Democrat, has just vanished completely and now they are likely to lose much of the support they had managed to cling onto after Clegg insulted the protest voters last year and who then promptly disowned them and left in their droves – who is left to vote Liberal Democrat now? I suspect mainly only dye-in-the-wold Tories who live in marginal Labour – Liberal Democrat constituencies who will vote Lib Dem in order to try and keep Labour out. Nick Clegg should beware his perfidy is about to catch him out.

Meanwhile David Cameron is not standing on the White Cliffs of Dover in of defence of this nation; he is standing there wondering if he should throw himself off now or later! 

What Has Cameron and the Tories Got Against Cancer Sufferers and Disabled People?

Without a doubt this so-called "compassionate" Conservative government seems to single out vulnerable groups of society and launch baffling attacks on them. We are used to seeing the Tories attack immigrants, single mothers and the unemployed. We all know when we see this start happening that an election must be approaching, but now they appear to have extended their attack to disabled people, mentally disabled people and now those suffering from serious illnesses such as cancer. The Tory attack on disabled people has been going on since day one of this Tory government and has got steadily worse.

The Tories have now come up with something called "Time Limited ESA" you can read all about this here and here. Basically this is something they have dreamt up to take even more benefits away from disabled people because they obviously believe that disabled people are not suffering enough already. Sue Marsh as always makes a compelling case, well written and clearly explained, take a few minutes to read what our "wonderful" Tory government are doing to our most vulnerable people, remembering that we are all just one illness or one accident away from joining the ranks of disabled people. Remember also that this government are doing this to people in your name, while they allow the richest 1% to prosper and go back on their promise to penalise greedy banker's bonuses, bankers, the very people who caused the mess in this country and across the world are all enjoying tax cuts.

Now you would think that the Tories (aided by their new found friends the Liberal Democrats) could not possibly stoop any lower, but hold on, they can, and it seems they find this easy. The Tories latest line of attack is to aim at those people suffering from cancer. If you read what the Tories are trying to do you would be forgiven for wondering just what it is the British Conservatives have against those people suffering from this devastating illness, they seem to be doing everything they possibly can to make their lives even more distressing and hard to cope with, it is pretty unforgivable and I just cannot believe that the Tories will find much support for attacking people in this way.

ESA affects cancer patients too!

The government began informing sick and disabled people that their benefit may stop even BEFORE the bill has been passed in parliament.

19 September 2011

From this week, thousands of letters will begin to land on the doorsteps of those who are too unwell to work - including cancer patients and those with severe mental health problems. This letter will inform them that their vital out-of-work benefit, Employment and Support Allowance (ESA), may be stopped in April 2012 because of changes in the Welfare Reform Bill – despite the fact that the Bill is still being debated in Parliament. The Government will spend £2.7m[1] on sending the letters from a contingency fund.

Under current proposals in the Welfare Reform Bill, many cancer patients and people with severe and complex mental health problems will have their ESA removed after one year irrespective of whether they are well enough to return to work. Macmillan Cancer Support estimates 7,000 cancer patients will lose up to £94 a week. In March an alliance of 30 cancer charities, including Macmillan, wrote an open letter to the Government expressing concern about the Bill and opposing ESA time-limiting.

Ciarán Devane, Chief Executive of Macmillan Cancer Support, says:

“Though we understand that the Government should alert people in advance to any changes to their benefits, the Welfare Reform Bill is not even close to being passed and yet the Government is already behaving as if it is. They are laying the groundwork for ESA time-limiting despite many Lords opposing the plans just last week at Second Reading. Lords will no doubt be angry that claimants are being told they could lose their benefits before they have had the opportunity to debate the proposals in detail.

“The letters will cause a great deal of distress to thousands of cancer patients and their families who will be left wondering whether their vital financial support will be taken away or not.  We will continue to urge the Government to think again.”

The mental health charity Mind has found that in many cases the prospect of welfare reform is causing serious mental distress for benefit claimants. Mind’s Chief Executive Paul Farmer says:

“We know that the prospect of changes to benefits can be very stressful for the people who rely on welfare whilst they are too unwell to work, and since the Welfare Reform Bill began its life, our InfoLine has seen a significant increase in the number of people calling, distressed and terrified that their benefits are going to be cut off.

“It doesn’t matter if you receive ESA for depression, cancer or any other health problem, this letter will be a bolt from the blue for many which could have a catastrophic impact on their mental wellbeing.

“It is very alarming that the Government is pressing ahead with these plans without considering the anxiety that their actions will cause, and we worry that these letters could potentially impede claimants’ return to health.”

Macmillan Cancer Support and Mind wants the Bill amended so everyone eligible for ESA who has paid into the system will receive it for as long as they need it. The charities also believe it is unacceptable to make sick and disabled people wait six months to access Personal Independence Payment (PIP).

Now the Tories want to force cancer sufferers who are in the middle of their chemotherapy to attend assessments to see if they are fit to work!

Macmillan Cancer Support has strongly criticised a Department of Work and Pensions decision to propose changes to the benefits system which could have devastating consequences for many thousands of cancer patients. Under the plans being consulted on, seriously ill cancer patients in the middle of gruelling intravenous chemotherapy treatment will be forced to prove they are too sick to work. Some patients will have to face back-to-work interviews or be denied a crucial benefit - Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

This is despite unambiguous recommendations from cancer experts and 30 cancer charities who have clearly stated that patients going through debilitating cancer treatment - and who have to leave work - should be automatically eligible for ESA.

Until now, cancer patients receiving non-oral chemotherapy have been exempt from work-focused interviews and medical assessments to determine whether they may be fit for work, while oral chemotherapy or radiotherapy patients have not been given this protection. Cancer charities, representing the views of patients, have asked the DWP to end this discrepancy as the side-effects of oral chemotherapy and radiotherapy can be just as physically debilitating as non oral chemotherapy. However, instead of extending exemptions to particularly vulnerable cancer patients, the DWP is proposing to remove these from all.

This announcement also comes despite the Government’s repeated assurances that they had no interest in making it harder for cancer patients to access benefits while they are undergoing debilitating treatment[3] and would reverse changes introduced only months ago to extend protection to patients awaiting chemotherapy.

Ciarán Devane, Chief Executive of Macmillan Cancer Support, says:

“Cancer patients in the middle of treatment are, in many cases, fighting for their lives. Yet the Government is proposing to change the rules so all cancer patients will have to undergo a stressful assessment to prove they are unable to work. This shows a clear disregard and misunderstanding of what it’s like to undergo punishing treatment. Patients who previously had peace of mind would face the stress and practical difficulties of getting assessed for work they are too poorly to do.

“To make matters worse, the Government is pressing ahead with proposed changes in the Welfare Reform Bill that will make 7,000 cancer patients lose ESA after 12 months simply because they have not recovered quickly enough.

“We hope Ministers will rethink these proposals and listen to the clear views of the cancer community. Cancer is the toughest fight many people will have to face, the Government should not be making it tougher for them.”

Macmillan has launched a petition to call on the Government to make changes to the Welfare Reform Bill: www.macmillan.org.uk/welfarepetition

Disability Living Allowance (DLA)

The Government is proposing that DLA should be replaced with a new benefit called Personal Independence Payment (PIP). As part of the new benefit the Government wants to double the period that someone is required to demonstrate need before they make a claim for benefit from 3 months to 6 months. However, cancer treatment results in a sudden onset of daily living and/or mobility needs. The need for help with daily living and getting around can start immediately and escalate rapidly. Making cancer patients wait for 6 months before they can even apply for vital support is simply unfair.

Macmillan believes that people who experience a sudden onset of debilitation which is likely to be long-term should be entitled to apply for PIP as soon as their support needs arise.

Just what will it take before people realise what the Conservative and the Liberal Democrat government is doing? Will it take someone in your family to fall seriously ill or become disabled before you realise that what this government are doing is very very wrong?

Source:

Macmillan Cancer Support

More Links about government intentions that affect the seriously ill