The Budget

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/17/tory-rebels-osborne-disability-benefit-cuts-just-not-acceptable

Hoping they stick to it.

It's not just left-wingers who are attacking the budget.
The IFS calls Osborne's tax claims rubbish.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/17/budget-2016-ifs-savages-osborne-tax-claims-as-rhetorical-nonsense

HS3 is the interesting one for those of us in the North, Wilma.
It will get to Leeds by 2030. I'll be too old to use it by then.
Anyway, why would someone from the North East be pleased that they will be able to cut time off getting to London by going to Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham then London, rather than directly down the King's Cross to Edinburgh route?
A big pretence to give us what we want.

I drove along the A68 today; not a single bit of dual carriageway. But the A66 and A69 are going to be upgraded because most of the route is already dual carriageway. That's why they can promise to upgrade them with only £300,000.

dpac.uk.net/2016/03/campaign-force-disability-charities-to-sever-links-with-mps-who-voted-for-esacut/

DPAC is disabled people against the cuts.
There are lots of stories on this website from people whose benefits have been cut.

Would over 100,000 people sign this petition in 9 days if they did not believe that disabled people are being treated unfairly?

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124016/

People are fighting back.

www.welfareweekly.com/disabled-tory-activist-resigns-over-benefit-cuts-and-sabotages-partys-website/

Another good thing is that the DWP has lost its fight in court to hide the statistics on disability and universal credit.

www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/16/universal_credit_internal_reviews_disclosure_order

Of course, Iain Duncan Smith might object again and refuse, proving he really has something to hide.

I was a bit concerned about the amount of money being made available for the two projects in the north, as £300 million isn't much. The tunnel proposal alone will cost billions. I hope it is completed in my life time, as I would like to see it.

lots of extra money has been promised for roads
Well, some of them are in a terrible state and are very hazardous to all road users.

On this evening's news it said there are already a lot of MPs, including tories, who are willing to make a fuss about the amount of money being taken off disabled people.
At the same time, in the Budget lots of extra money has been promised for roads.

On this evening's news it said there are already a lot of MPs, including tories, who are willing to make a fuss about the amount of money being taken off disabled people.
At the same time, in the Budget lots of extra money has been promised for roads.

wilma I am flabbergasted, to use a good old fashioned expression by your post, and you are the only person to interpret my post in that strange way.I will not be engaging in any more discussion with you on this.I think you are indulging in pedantic and very petty political point scoring.

AnnieB
We are assured that ALL the medical examiners for PIP and ESA are medically qualified. They are nurses, physiotherapists, and para medics. Some are even doctors!
This is unlike the old pre DLA days when it was AA. All exams were made by doctors as were the decisions

A while ago I made a donation to a charity supporting refugees by providing sanitary products. It never occurred to me that women here were in need or to leave sanitary products at food bank collection points. I don't know I'm born.

Yes, Jalima, but the women of these other countries can now take heart from the strength of the women in Britain. This was their victory and no-one else's.
And, sadly, I too have to agree there will always be a need for such charities regardless of the gender or age group they have to cater for.

Just stock up before you travel to some other countries around the world - eg Tax is 20% in France, 10% in Australia, 27%! in Hungary .....

Yes, I think you are right Devorgilla. But I do think that, sadly, there will always be a need for them.

I think the money has only been passed to the charities since the whole furore over the tax began to get press notice but I am prepared to stand corrected on this. I think all women regardless of income would be pleased if these charities did not need to exist. I question whether the government was being blamed for this EU diktat. I think women just wanted this put right and brought on a par with men's products.

Another EU diktat for which this government was being blamed. VAT was charged at the lowest possible rate under EU law (5%) and the money was pledged to women's charities.
So - should better-off women now be pleased that this money will not now be passed on to these charities?
The reduction by 5% on sanitary products is not going to make any difference to a woman who cannot afford them anyway, so websites that claim:
Women are resorting to homemade sanitary products due to hefty tampon tax by Cailyn Cox
1 day ago
really are meaningless.

So - to those who donate to foodbanks and homeless shelters - when you make a donation then including sanitary products and basic toiletries is a good idea.

Yes, Bijou, I remember being told that by my grandmother but we have moved on since then. Tonight's news has announced that DC has got EU to agree to UK being able to introduce a 0% level on menstrual products. Good for him, and I am not a fan, but doubt he would have pushed so hard were it not for the women's movements gathering 'the clans' for battle as it were.

In case people missed it before, in reply to Gracesgran's post at 14.34 I gave a link to the details of the consultation and it's outcome here.

Latest PIP Changes

As I said before, Appendix C gives the scoring system and the outcome of the consultation was to reduce the points for Activities 5 and 6. The government estimates the changes will affect 640,000 claimants.

Apologies for posting this information twice, but I don't think the vast majority realise the scale of the changes to disability benefits.

rosesarered this is what you said

But there are 'layers' if you like, or levels, from the worst disabilities to the mildest.In the past, when money was more plentiful before the crash, it may well be the case that the people on the milder end of the scale got help, and now it has to be ramped up to the people who really must have it, getting help.

I think that now money is tight, more care is being given all round.People with severe disablities must always be the ones helped first.

You've said a couple of times you think it was a good budget, which included increasing the tax threshold for paying the 40p tax rate for the next two years. So how can I not take this to mean you think it is acceptable that cuts for the disabled help fund tax breaks for the better off? I am really sorry if I have got this wrong and you're right, we don't know each other, so I can only go on what I read on here. I'm not trying to upset you.

Granddaughter you may be interested in this:
Message from the RBL:
Yesterday the Government confirmed in the budget that from April 2017 all veterans in England will have their compensation for Service injuries protected when local authorities assess them for care costs.
We will continue to campaign for the new rules to be replicated across the United Kingdom.

It's a start anyway.

Think the sugar tax is great might help stop little kids losing their teeth so early in life
As long as people are not deprived of the choice - I know a parent who has been very conscientious about not allowing her children sugary, fizzy drinks - the younger two have rotten teeth and the dentist said it is because of the 'healthy' lunchbox size packs of raisins etc which have caused the damage.

Most people take care of their children's teeth - it is always the few really bad cases where the parents may have been neglectful that get the publicity.

A sugar tax on soft drinks is a kneejerk reaction to a much wider problem.

Regarding the Disablity allowance being taken away from those that need it I am not very happy about it seems very mean of the government makes me quite angry !!!!!!

Think the sugar tax is great might help stop little kids losing their teeth so early in life well done Jamie for pushing for it !!!!!!

Wilma !! Where do I say what you have just angrily commented that I have said that 'it's acceptable to take money away from disabled people and give more to families who pay more income tax' .......?
This is simply untrue.And while we are on the subject, I too would happily pay more income tax ( if I paid tax, which I don't.)in order to help disabled people meet their needs.You don't know me so can't say how our views on this differ.
I agree Gracesgran that perhaps the public need to know a lot more about it.

have just read about the fact that newspaper had to be used by women unable to afford sanitary towels. When I first started menstruating (1934) sanitary towels were not widely available and I had to use towelling and wash it out.

I think the very small increase in insurance premium to pay for flood defences is a really good idea. Many of the flood victims cannot get insurance because of the vulnerability of their properties. About time our own citizens get some help.

But Jamila, many who work for PIPS are not medically qualified , when a person first applies for benefit they are interviewed and boxes are ticked, no medical check up . Staff are told they must interview X number a day ,it's a case of the computer says no

I worry that the reduction of sugar in drinks will lead to more 'sugar free' drinks with nasty sweeteners
Me too, westieyaya - as far as I (and many others) are concerned the jury is still out on aspartame. I would rather give my DGC a very small amount of squash with sugar occasionally - and they drink mainly water - than any amount of a low calorie drink with that stuff in it, and make sure they get plenty of exercise.
However, it predominates the shelves and will become even more widespread in everyone's diets.