Oh, Labour! *Headdesk*

[davidgillon]

Labour have spent the past 10 days being deliberately evasive about whether they support ILF or not, then Kate Green emailed a constituent about it.

I'm not sure what worries me more, the evasion, the apparent incompetence, or the fact that even if we take what she says at face value, it'll take years to put in place, and the ILF closes in July (and I don't like her use of 'sustainable' - that's usually code for cuts).

I've been caustic about it on Where's The Benefit*: So it turns out we can't trust Labour on the ILF

* No posts in six months and then two in two days, I guess I'm back.

Comments

[jesse_the_k]

I'm privileged to watch this over the shoulder of someone deeply involved, terrified that your opponents will triumph, and anxious that these attitudes will jump the pond, where they'd find fertile soil indeed in our new Republican-led congress.

[davidgillon]

A lot of the problematic stuff already jumped the pond once, in that the harsher attitudes towards disability really started with Unum in the States, who, at the same time they were being branded 'an outlaw company' and massively sued for running 'disability denial mill's in the States, were advising Labour on how to implement their policies into the Work Capability Assessment.

Speaking of the WCA and jumping the pond (possibly with aspects of jumping the shark) details of Maximus's contract to run the WCA in place of Atos are out, and I think the interesting thing is they're contractually mandated to monitor social media and if certain levels are exceeded pass it to their corporate PR types for a 24/7 response - clearly they know Atos lost the PR war to us last time around.