Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Whats this about gf?

Goldfinger

Proved my point , you went crying to Ian , and it wasn't breaking any rules , etiquette is not a rule.

So Cynic can't start another thread like you said , or you will report him to Ian.

The Don't Talk To Yourself Thread , ment it wasn't your thread so why was it deleted ? Why did you thing it was such a threat to your thread if it was such a botched attempt . ?

People stripped of benefits could be charged for challenging decision
Critics argue that proposal in leaked document from Department for Work and Pensions would hit poorest people in the country

Shiv Malik and Patrick Butler
The Guardian, Thursday 20 February 2014 19.45 GMT

People who have been stripped of benefits could be charged by the government for trying to appeal against the decision to an independent judge.

Critics said the proposal, contained in an internal Department for Work and Pensions document leaked to the Guardian, would hit some of the poorest people in Britain, who have been left with little or no income.

In the document about the department's internal finances, officials say the "introduction of a charge for people making appeals against [DWP] decisions to social security tribunals" would raise money.

Other ideas include selling off child support debt to "the private sector to collect", though civil servants remark that the government would be unlikely to raise more than 5-7p in the pound from the £1.4bn currently owed to the DWP. The department currently collects arrears.

Earlier this week figures showed that in the past year nearly 900,000 people have had their benefits stopped, the highest figure for any 12-month period since jobseeker's allowance was introduced in 1996. In recent months, however, 58% of those who wanted to overturn DWP sanction decisions in independent tribunals have been successful. Before 2010, the success rate of appeals was 20% or less.

One welfare legal adviser said the number of appeals being lodged at independent tribunals would be decimated if the government introduced a charge.

Last year the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) which sets policy in the area, brought in charges for employment tribunals of up to £250 to lodge a claim, depending on the kind of case being brought. The union Unison asked judges to review the policy, saying the number of claims had dropped by more than half after fees were introduced. High court judges declared the policy lawful this month.

In the DWP Efficiency Review, which is marked "restricted", it says the proposal for charging for social security tribunals is already "under investigation" by the MoJ and officials "intend to revisit it" in the wake of the Unison court challenge decision.

However, the 80-page document points out, the policy will "entail no revenue generation nor efficiency for the [DWP] per se" but will however generate income for the justice department.

The policy proposal leak comes as the prime minister and senior religious leaders clash over the benefits system. In a letter to the Daily Mirror, 27 Anglican bishops blamed David Cameron for creating a "national crisis" in which hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to survive on the charity of food banks because of "punitive sanctions" and other DWP failures. It followed similar criticisms from Vincent Nichols, the highest ranking Catholic in England and Wales, that the government was stripping away the welfare safety net – a charge dismissed as "an exaggeration" by Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister.

The justice minister Shailesh Vara said: "The government has made clear that reducing the deficit is our top priority. It is right that the Ministry of Justice looks at all opportunities to bring down the cost of our services to the taxpayer.

"We believe that it is right to consider whether those who use tribunals should make a greater contribution to their costs, where they can afford to do so, which is why we introduced fees for employment tribunals last year.

"We will continue to keep the position under review, but we have no current plans to extend fee charging into other tribunals."

Rachel Reeves, shadow work and pensions secretary, said: "When government's own figures show a staggering 58% of appeals against Department for Work and Pensions decisions to dock jobseeker's allowance are upheld, it's clear the system is broken. Rather than penalising thousands of people by charging them to appeal, ministers need to ask why they are presiding over a broken system which is making so many bad decisions, which are overturned on appeal."

Steve Winyard, head of policy and campaigns at the Royal National Institute of Blind People, which is threatening the DWP with legal action over sanction failures, said: "Every week RNIB receives complaints about DWP failing to provide correspondence and other benefits information in Braille or other accessible formats.

"As a result, these people are at direct risk of sanction and a number have had the benefits they rely on to live withdrawn. To now say that these individuals will not even be able to appeal the inaccurate DWP decision without paying for it is a disgrace, It's a 'computer says no' approach that locks people out and leaves some with no help whatsoever, many becoming reliant on food banks as a result."

Neil Bateman, a long-serving welfare rights lawyer, also described the policy idea as a disgrace. He said: "Stopping people from challenging bad decisions actually strikes at the heart of our democratic arrangement." He said many of the people he had successfully represented over the years at tribunals would not have got justice if they had been made to pay a fee and that even £5 would be too high a charge for them.

Bateman said that from his experience, a very high proportion of appeals were caused by mistakes and poor-quality decision-making by the DWP. He said this had risen in recent years because the department had got rid of experienced DWP decision-makers, social security law had become more complex and attitudes had changed.

"Under this government there is an attitudinal issue in terms of evidence of increased DWP staff antipathy towards clients and that all results in decisions which are wrong which eventually get turned over at appeal," Bateman said.

Aldwick if you think you are right report it here to IAN not me........

IANs the management not yourself or I........

MoneyAM

MoneyAM Customer support: support@moneyam.com

Aldwick please let me know of the outcome. Thankyou.

Thanks gf.

That's a very bad move. Charging for challenges is terrible, the first one should be free at least.

Max the idea is obviously to stop poor people from making an appeal. Its £250 upfront.

How can someone depending on a food bank even contemplate paying that amount.

Expenses MP Hazel Blears to quit Commons in 2015

Former Labour Cabinet minister Hazel Blears - who repaid thousands of pounds of capital gains tax at the height of the MPs' expenses scandal five years ago - is standing down as an MP


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10652513/Expenses-MP-Hazel-Blears-to-quit-Commons-in-2015.html

They cant gf, and that's probably the reason for introducing the charge.

Exactly.

Goldfinger

Waste of time he is bias. But Why did you thing it was such a threat to your thread if it was such a botched attempt . ?

I meant botched because of the number of posters you got on each thread on the 3 threads. i count 5 and 2 of them are you and me.

Always difficult no matter what to take on an established thread.

Anyway having taken note of your posts and Cynics i have updated the header,, so you cant blame me for not trying.

Their are people on here who are genuinely interested in the day today political scene.

Its up to you and others to mix the content up get post/subjects trending like we have on politics.

Now come on I cant be any fairer than that.

21 February 2014 Last updated at 03:58

UK floods: Damage 'could have been prevented'

Some of the damage caused by the recent floods could have been prevented if the correct water management techniques had been used, says a group of leading environmental and planning experts.

In an open letter, they urged the prime minister to adopt a clear strategy for future flood prevention.

The call came as shadow chancellor Ed Balls said a Labour government would make investment in defences a priority.

Downing Street said it was spending more than ever before on protection.

It comes a day after the Met Office confirmed the UK had seen its wettest winter in records since 1910.

Two severe flood warnings remain in place in the Somerset Levels, which has been one of the worst-hit areas, with prolonged flooding since the severe weather began in December.

There are 70 flood warnings, and nearly 120 less serious flood alerts, currently in place across England and Wales.

The Environment Agency has warned that with more unsettled weather on the way, the risk of flooding could be slow to disappear.

Urban landscape taken in the flooded Somerset village of Moorland
The experts said a special conference should be convened to discuss how to avoid a repeat of the recent floods


In the letter to the Daily Telegraph, experts from 17 environmental and planning organisations - including landscape architects, engineers, hydrologists and ecologists - made a plea for the government to listen to them when it came to devising a flood defence policy for the future.

"While we are pleased to hear that the prime minister will provide leadership and funding, it is essential that government actions are based on best practice developed over many years," they said.

"Water management techniques could have helped prevent the effect of flooding on villages, towns and over surrounding land seen recently.

"Emergency measures are in order for the immediate crisis. But in the long term, the management of water requires a clear strategy."

They suggested measures to cut the risk of future flooding, including:

Use of forestry and land management to hold back water in the upper reaches of rivers, as well as dredging for the lower reaches
Fitting sustainable drainage systems on existing buildings and new buildings
Buildings and land that cannot be properly protected should be made to withstand flooding

All new housing on flood plains must be resilient when built
More co-operation between experts, the water companies, internal drainage boards, local authorities, the Environment Agency, and Natural Resources Wales, as well as between them and landowners or residents
The letter urged David Cameron to hold a cross-departmental conference, similar to one set up to deal with ash dieback, and to include Whitehall departments, the Environment Agency and other experts to prevent a repeat of the scale of damage caused by recent floods.

Writing in the same newspaper, shadow chancellor Ed Balls accused the government of "short-termist salami-slicing" of budgets for flood defences.


We must... prioritise preventative spending that can save money in the long term”

Ed Balls
Shadow chancellor
He claimed 300 "shovel-ready" flood defence projects were shelved last year because of a lack of funding.

"Of course, if Labour wins the next election, there will need to be spending cuts... But how we make those cuts is vital," he said.

"Our zero-based review of public spending - a root-and-branch review of every pound spent by government from the bottom up - is clear that we must eliminate waste and inefficiencies, but also prioritise preventative spending that can save money in the long term.

"There can be few better examples than investment in flood defences."

Spending on defences was boosted after the 2007 floods, Mr Balls said, but the coalition government then cut it by 17% in real terms in 2010.

"Rather than the short-termist salami-slicing of budgets we have seen, we need instead to make long-term decisions now that can save money in the future," he said.

Grant scheme
In response to the letter, a Downing Street spokesman said: "We are looking at all potential options to tackle flooding and are spending £2.4bn on flood management and protection from coastal erosion. That is more than ever before.

"We have already announced a record level of capital investment at £370m in 2015/16 rising to over £400m in 2020/21 as part of our long-term plan to improve resilience.

"We need to employ a range of techniques to alleviate flooding, including dredging in some areas.

"We will look at the lessons to be learned to see where additional flood protection can help."

On Thursday, Mr Cameron announced the government's scheme to provide grants for homeowners in England hit by the floods would begin on 1 April.

Claimants will be eligible for payments of up to £5,000, to help cover future protection for properties.

Are you affected by flooding? If you would be willing to be interviewed by the BBC please fill in the form below.

Send your pictures and videos to yourpics@bbc.co.uk or text them to 61124 (UK) or +44 7624 800 100 (International). If you have a large file you can upload here.

I'm ashamed that this food bank crisis is happening in Britain
Feb 21, 2014

Trussell Trust chairman Chris Mould says people are at their wits' end thanks to rising food prices and bills, higher bus fares and cuts in benefits

Neil Atkinson/Sunday Mirror
Fighting poverty: Chris Mould
Food banks are big news. Yesterday’s open letter from church leaders talks of a national crisis... “a disgrace”.

All this concern from well-informed and respected leaders is vital in giving a voice to ordinary people who really are struggling.

We can add to that independent research in a report that was commissioned by the Government itself shooting down the idea that the food bank explosion is just “supply and demand”.

This study says all available evidence points in the opposite direction: it’s about real and growing need.

But amid all this, what I’m thinking about most is the doctor I spoke to yesterday who told me of patients who sit with their heads in their hands in “utter despair” because benefit cuts mean they can’t pay the rent and buy food.

He treats them on the NHS for anxiety and depression and sends them to the local food bank.

Then there’s a single dad I know who struggles on a zero-hours contract and needs his local food bank when his wages drop without warning.

The stress grinds him down. I hear him say he has not replaced his shoes for six years and I’m ashamed.

Trussell Trust food banks provided three days’ nutritionally balanced food to 738,000 people in 2013. But these figures are really about mums, dads and kids who can’t eat tonight.

Mums at their wits’ end thanks to rising food prices and power bills, higher bus fares and cuts in the benefits that used to bridge the gap. We must not forget the stories – we must to fight to get them heard.

The bishops are right to raise the alarm and it’s great to see politicians from all parties taking a lead to get an inquiry off the ground through the newly formed All Party Parliamentary Group on Hunger and Food Poverty.

We all hope for a future where fewer people need food aid. The consensus we have seen this week about the urgency and reality of the problem could be the point where the tide actually turns.



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/trussell-trust-chairman-food-banks-3168066#ixzz2txx0GbxN
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

About 6,500 homes have been flooded during the last two months.

I bet you're glad it didn't happen to you! Now the rain has eased off quite a lot, here's the sort of problem(s) you'd now be facing:

What happens to a house when the water drains away?

e.g.

There can be subsidence - which causes foundations to "sink", and heave - which forces foundations upwards. Subsidence occurs when the ground under a building "shrinks" through lack of water, whereas heave occurs when the ground expands because of excess water.

Modern wiring can withstand a short period of flooding, but if a property has been flooded for more than a few hours, it will probably need rewiring - downstairs at least.
"My experience of flooding is that if water gets in, it never dries out completely, the plug sockets get saturated and have to be replaced and dampness goes into the cables,"

When it comes to internal walls, damaged plaster, plasterboard and wallpaper will have to go. Holes might also need to be drilled through plasterboards or dry linings to drain trapped water and aid ventilation, according to Knight. Timber partitions may rot if not dried properly. The Office of Public Works advises people not to redecorate for at least three months after walls have dried and repairs have been done.

And there's more.... MUCH MORE!

It must be truly awful ExecLine, I feel so sorry for these people.

What are the costs to Insurance Companies?

This will come back to haunt the torrid party!

(Read the whole findings of the new moral crusades of Cameron)

21 February 2014
Five lose housing benefit cut appeal


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26288112

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26288112

Bad enough just having your house robbed and the invasion of your privacy attacked.

God knows what it must be like for those poor devils on the Somerset Plains when its water that as destroyed your house and life to a certain extent.

Cant do with these people saying they should be allowed to flood. Thats bunkum.

Got to get all parties together and come up with LONG TERM solutions which start immediatly.