[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Caring for carers campaign - Daily Mirror - Page 4 - Carers UK Forum

Caring for carers campaign - Daily Mirror

Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
Wow, Parsifal, I try to avoid any mathematical calculations at all before 8am because my brain isn't fully engaged until I've had at least 3 strong black coffees! I'm a bit behind today as I'm only on my second!

But the savings you mentioned are a little optimistic, it seems to me, in that it presupposes that carers who are paid will no longer need respite. I don't see that at all - in your situation, for example, the extra money would not stop you needing some extra help. And exhaustion is exhaustion, whether you have money or not.

That's the problem with using numbers to push a viewpoint: there has to be a wider argument than number crunching - you made the point yourself - just what kind of a society do we want to be?
I take your point Charles, but it does state that they are indicative figures, i.e. that, whilst based on actual figures, they are merely indicative of the costs and savings involved. Obviously there are a number of variables beginning with the figures which I have used which apply to this local authority area only and which could be very different in another local authority area, we all know that costs, and charges, vary from area to area. Likewise the number and types of services available to carers vary from area to area, carer to carer as do the costs both to the local authority and to the carer. But it does illustrate that widening access to a higher rate of financial support to a greater number of carers and not restricting it to only those on Carers Allowance still results in significant, albeit smaller than is currently the case, savings to the taxpayer.

Ultimately it comes down to the spending priorities of the British public, would they prefer to have their taxes spent on supporting carers to care and therefore also supporting the people they care for and still make significant savings or would they prefer to spend their taxes on a replacement for Trident, bailing out the banks, prosecuting an illegal war, for example, which have significant costs but few if any observable tangible benefits? Even if I was not a carer I know which I would prefer.
How would the figures stack up if the attendance alloowance was lost and the help from local authority was of little or no use many of us would be worse off by £280 per month at a stroke
the six million to me is one thing that the government always use when the "give" us something like the 150 million quid for respite care for working carers it`s a headline "look at me ive helped six million carers" but when we talk about a wage for six million- sorry but we cant give you all a living wage - we should have gone through the figures years ago and we could have had the whole "carer wage" costed 1 million high end care workers 1 million pensioner carers and 1 million low end carers and so on the truth is we dont know just what kind of care work many of us do ive said before we dont have to be cleaning bums all day long to be classed as a full tme carer.
I take your point Charles, but it does state that they are indicative figures, i.e. that, whilst based on actual figures, they are merely indicative of the costs and savings involved.
No worries, Parsifal - I was just trying to convince myself I didn't need the third coffee!! Image
Good result Image
How would the figures stack up if the attendance alloowance was lost and the help from local authority was of little or no use many of us would be worse off by £280 per month at a stroke
Alternatively, if it isn't lost, then you won't be worse off a single penny.

George, there is little use flogging hypothetical doomsday scenarios like this endlessly. Sure, it is under review, and you bet we are facing tougher times ahead - well everyone is. But with a general election over the horizon, who knows what we will be facing in 2010? And 2011, and 2040 for that matter? Your future caring career is probably quite short compared to mine - I'll most likely still be a carer in 30 years.

AA is just one of a myriad of complex interlocking benefits that are all under review, and with the economy in a parlous state, you might as well be advocating a positive message that we all buy greenhouses, stop buying meat, booze and ciggies, and plan to grow our own veg, at least that would be something practical we could do. And the veg would probably be a lot healthier too!
there is little use flogging hypothetical scenarios like this endlessly
Regardless of which scenario brought forward, I honestly believe we need keep the pressure up or else. Already some of the groups are waking up to the negative effect the new ESA is having on their members.

Within just the last few mins these articles came through.

Parkinsons

BBC

Also this ..

Mental health sanctions this covers quite a few pages going back over the last few months.

We have to raise our voices to protect the likes of DLA/AA and considering just last week McKenzie said
There is a long-held aspiration of heading for a single working-age benefit, with all the personalisation and benefits that will come with it. It would be a step along the way to have two working age benefits rather than three, and that is an achievement for which we should strive.
Reform is needed,most definitely but some of the steps they are taking are going to make matters worse for many.Reading above I dont think it will be long before the proposal for carers moving to JSA rears its ugly head again.

Would love to know your opinion on that one Rob??
As Rob say's above, I too will still be Caring in 30 years most likely.

Who knows what our government will do for the benefit or detriment of Carers over time. Image
We need to keep the pressure up!
It's essential as many people as possible air their views.

Keeping quiet and sitting on the sidelines will help no-one and could prove costly in the long run! Image

marie x
Reform is needed,most definitely but some of the steps they are taking are going to make matters worse for many.Reading above I dont think it will be long before the proposal for carers moving to JSA rears its ugly head again.

Would love to know your opinion on that one Rob??
I would abolish CA too. But I wouldnt replace it with JSA.

In my view you have to look at family income as family income and family expenditure as family expenditure, not seperate pockets for each member. All state benefits and income from the state for a single co-resident household should go into a joint account. They should be spent on useful things like heat, food, clothes, education, sport, culture, rent, holidays, not wasted on intoxicants, and at the end of the year there should be a simple account presented with receipts. If a benefit is intended for a purpose, then it should deliver that purpose and that purpose alone. The welfare state is collapsing under its own complexity and has lost sight of its objectives, which are to alleviate want, poverty, ignorance, squalor, and disease.

Why should I pay tax for someone else to spend it on drink and drugs?

Take a scenario where, as in my family, there are three adults providing care to one person.
Or there might be one carer for three disabled adults? CA is a very blunt instrument, really crude. And far too low to be effective.

Yes, I would pass all the disability-related and carers benefits to the local authorities social work departments, operating under national guidelines and codes of practice that are legally enforceable. One good reason for local variation is that the cost of living and wages in London is so much higher than in other parts of the UK. I can hire domiciliary care workers here for minimum wage, no problem.

I'd much rather have a non-means tested, whole-family direct payment based on the assessed needs and wishes of the family and disabled individual, but I would also accept you could give all or some of the care money to the disabled person as a direct payment and ask them whether they want the family to get it or wish to bring in a paid support worker. It should be their clear choice who provides them with care, not the carers.