Posts Tagged ‘MP;s’

Please take time to view the following link  http://www.donharrison.org.uk/2012/12/05/idss-crocodile-tears/ it is a very emotional read…….

FM    >thumbsup<

Advertisements

If we disabled people have to keep on proving that we are still worthy of support from the government, then shouldn’t MP’s have to retake their exams to prove that they are also still worthy of our support!!!If they fail then they should be sanctioned and/or kicked out of government.

Maybe we should start an e-petition to put this idea through parliament???

Maybe if ATOS had to assess their capability to run the country?

I have come across the following debate ( Public Accounts Committee taking evidence on ATOS Medical Services) which was held on Monday 19/11/12 . Please see the following links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/…00/9770606.stm

Or for a transcript; here:

http://www.publications.parliament.u…-i/uc74401.htm

Very interesting viewing/reading!

P.S. Who the heck does Robert Devereaux think he is??? The way that he speaks to Margaret Hodge ‘chair’ is astonishing, I think he has a narcissistic God complex!!!

After having just finished watching the Public Accounts Committee, if the MP’s couldn’t get a straight and honest answer out of Mr Devereux what chance has any disabled person got of taking on this system and their Doctor Bill Gunnyeon.

The government are at fault in the first place by giving the contract to ATOS, aren’t they?

The chair was saying that the appeals were overturned using the same medical facts, as had been used when they were refused benefits regarding their disability.

Robert Devereux ” In about a third of all cases, the judges are saying, from their drop-down menu, that they reached a different conclusion on substantially the same facts. So in one third of all the appeals on which they are reaching a different view, they are saying, “We have reached a different view on the same facts.”

In around 60% of the cases, they are saying that they reached a different view based on oral evidence presented at the hearing. You will recall that these hearings are, regrettably at the moment, a long time after the event, and whether the condition of the person at the appeal is the same as it was at the test is something we do not know. But then, last of all-this comes back to the question you asked me-when the medical assessment relied on by the decision maker from Atos contained a significant error-

Q74 Chair: And that was in what proportion?

Robert Devereux: Less than 1%. I am thinking: here is a piece of evidence-all right, it is only one piece of evidence-and, as I said, this is the primary reason they are adducing-

Q75 Fiona Mactaggart: But you said that 30% came to a different conclusion on the same evidence, which means not necessarily that the evidence they have received is wrong, but that the judgment of the Atos assessor has been wrong.

Robert Devereux: Except that the judgments are made by my staff, on the basis of the Atos assessment. Decisions in this Department are made by decision makers.

Q76 Chair: So your staff are incompetent, are they, in a third of cases? You are taking the blame rather than Atos. Is that it?

Robert Devereux: I am not saying that, but we have to be really clear about this, because this was precisely the reason I asked about who was going to appear. The thing that we are looking at is a process based on law and decision makers in my Department, with the contracted-out tests designed by my doctor. I am really keen to be very precise about what evidence there is about what Atos is doing, what the Department is doing, and what the failings in the process are.”

There is so much more that was discussed at the above posted meeting, you really need to see for yourself!

Our opinion:

That 30% should never have lost their benefits in the first place, and some don’t even fight decisions due to their cognitive impairments and other disabilities or learning difficulties.

All of those who created the WCA should take the blame for the lives that they have wrecked.

It is also mentioned that medical evidence should be handed over at the very start of the process, but I have heard many, many accounts of people taking their medical evidence to their ATOS assessment, and the health care professional (as they call them) put the medical evidence to one side and do not even look at it. These ‘health care professionals’ are undermining and overruling the medical opinions of all of our Consultants, Oncologists, Specialists, Neuro-psychiatrists, G.P.’s and psychiatrists.

Please feel free to copy and paste this or any of my posts to spread the word to other support sites..