| According to the oracle that is RR 12:08 - Mar 25 with 2468 views | OldFart71 |
According to the oracle that is Rachel Reeves " The world has changed". No kidding Sherlock. Someone moved the goalposts. Funny that, didn't think they had goalposts on a cricket pitch. Also funny how everything has gone wrong for poor Rachel as none of
the country's current problems have anything to do with her. It's the Tories, it's Trump,it's pensioners, it's people on benefits. Anything that can be conveniently blamed on anything but her stupid policies. No I am not saying the Tories were in anyway not to blame for the current situation, of course they were. But giving pay rises to train drivers already on 60 grand a year, giving above inflation increases on the minimum wage which drives up inflation, putting up N.I. for business when all of their other costs are going up is madness. Pubs already saying a pint will cost a fiver, Council tax up by more than inflation as is water and whatever else you care to mention. No you cannot mend an economy without some pain but trying to kill the patient when you are supposed to be saving them doesn't work. |  | | |  |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:24 - Mar 25 with 2375 views | Bent_double |
Paragraphs, please try using paragraphs in your posts, makes it a lot easier to read  |  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:44 - Mar 25 with 2315 views | mrshallisfit |
Funny how we see the world differently. You say Killing the Patient. I say, sharing the load a bit more fairly - something that certainly hasn't been done in the past 15 years. | | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:54 - Mar 25 with 2268 views | BlueBadger |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:44 - Mar 25 by mrshallisfit |
Funny how we see the world differently. You say Killing the Patient. I say, sharing the load a bit more fairly - something that certainly hasn't been done in the past 15 years. |
Although, with proposed changes to benefits there's going to be quite a LOT of patients killed over the next few years, sadly. [Post edited 25 Mar 12:59]
|  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:59 - Mar 25 with 2244 views | J2BLUE |
I like you OP, which is why I find that post very disappointing.
People on minimum wage should not be held down to subsidise the rest of us. By the looks of your post you would be happy to see them poorer in real terms with an increase in line with the government inflation figure while all of the expenses you mention go up by higher amounts. I doubt many minimum wage earners are too concerned about the cost of a pint. They'll be too busy worrying about rent, bills and feeding their kids. [Post edited 25 Mar 18:59]
|  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 13:06 - Mar 25 with 2184 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:44 - Mar 25 by mrshallisfit |
Funny how we see the world differently. You say Killing the Patient. I say, sharing the load a bit more fairly - something that certainly hasn't been done in the past 15 years. |
Is it sharing the load more fairly though, what are your workings on that. Taxes on working people and small businesses up, whilst they’ve rejected wealth taxes because they ‘don’t see taxes as being the route to prosperity’. Are the wealthy contributing any more than they would have under the last government? Poor pensioners have had to heat or eat, disability benefits are in line to be cut.
As far as I can see the burden once again remains with the working and middle classes. I had high hopes for this government, unfortunately it’s turned out to be just as incompetent, albeit less corrupt than we’ve had before. It’s quite funny that people can’t view party politics objectively and turn out to defend even the poorest of policies just because of the colour of their tie. Still hoping they can turn things around, but given the direction of policy travel it feels unlikely. | | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 13:20 - Mar 25 with 2117 views | Swansea_Blue |
A fiver a pint? Excellent, that’s about a 20% reduction. At last, one of her fiscal policies Incan get behind! |  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 14:28 - Mar 25 with 1964 views | NeedhamChris |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:54 - Mar 25 by BlueBadger |
Although, with proposed changes to benefits there's going to be quite a LOT of patients killed over the next few years, sadly. [Post edited 25 Mar 12:59]
|
I'm no fan of the reforms - but this feels unnecessarily hyperbolic and a little bit scare-mongering.
Will it make life less easy for people who already have a tough time - yes. Will it kill a LOT of them? I can't see it to be honest.
Do you think there are any areas of PIP/health-related benefits that should be changed or would you leave as is? | |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 15:37 - Mar 25 with 1847 views | Crawfordsboot |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 13:06 - Mar 25 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Is it sharing the load more fairly though, what are your workings on that. Taxes on working people and small businesses up, whilst they’ve rejected wealth taxes because they ‘don’t see taxes as being the route to prosperity’. Are the wealthy contributing any more than they would have under the last government? Poor pensioners have had to heat or eat, disability benefits are in line to be cut.
As far as I can see the burden once again remains with the working and middle classes. I had high hopes for this government, unfortunately it’s turned out to be just as incompetent, albeit less corrupt than we’ve had before. It’s quite funny that people can’t view party politics objectively and turn out to defend even the poorest of policies just because of the colour of their tie. Still hoping they can turn things around, but given the direction of policy travel it feels unlikely. |
I think you will find that inheritance tax will be levied at 40% on a great many personal pension pots that hitherto would have been passed to children free of tax. The previous govt would never have introduced such a tax.
I happen to believe the change to be fair but I do object to the fact that the rules are changing with such little advance notice. People have prudently saved for years into private pensions in accordance with prevailing rules and regs. It would have been fairer and more palatable if the changes had been introduced in phases staged over say ten years.
I am surprised that this has received such limited public comment whilst wealthy farmers unions are up in arms because their members are being asked to pay just like the rest of us - except they get a 50% discount and in any event can easily put in place succession planning from one generation to the next. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:03 - Mar 25 with 1737 views | BlueBadger |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 14:28 - Mar 25 by NeedhamChris |
I'm no fan of the reforms - but this feels unnecessarily hyperbolic and a little bit scare-mongering.
Will it make life less easy for people who already have a tough time - yes. Will it kill a LOT of them? I can't see it to be honest.
Do you think there are any areas of PIP/health-related benefits that should be changed or would you leave as is? |
Austerity cuts have long been shown to increase excess deaths and reduce life expectancy.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2024/f-June-2024/Austerity-spend
Austerity cuts have long been shown to increase excess deaths and reduce life expectancy.
Cutting PIP and penalising those unable to find work will make it harder for people to get around, subsist and ultimately make them more isolated and make it harder to access the essential services they need.
Cutting benefits for the most vulnerable will not, long term save any money. It will push more cost onto care services, the NHS and, within the metal health sector, the police.
Personally, we shouldn't even be beginning to look at reforming this until we have something resembling accessible and functional healthcare again. Attempting to starve people into jobs they are not fit for will not help anyone, not employers, taxpayers or the sick and disabled. [Post edited 25 Mar 17:09]
| |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:36 - Mar 25 with 1672 views | Crawfordsboot |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:03 - Mar 25 by BlueBadger |
Austerity cuts have long been shown to increase excess deaths and reduce life expectancy.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2024/f-June-2024/Austerity-spend
Austerity cuts have long been shown to increase excess deaths and reduce life expectancy.
Cutting PIP and penalising those unable to find work will make it harder for people to get around, subsist and ultimately make them more isolated and make it harder to access the essential services they need.
Cutting benefits for the most vulnerable will not, long term save any money. It will push more cost onto care services, the NHS and, within the metal health sector, the police.
Personally, we shouldn't even be beginning to look at reforming this until we have something resembling accessible and functional healthcare again. Attempting to starve people into jobs they are not fit for will not help anyone, not employers, taxpayers or the sick and disabled. [Post edited 25 Mar 17:09]
|
On the other hand
Has the number of people claiming disability or sickness benefit in the UK increased much faster than in other countries ?
Yes, the number of people claiming disability or sickness benefits in the UK has increased significantly faster than in many other comparable countries. Since 2019, the UK has experienced a more than 30% rise in disability benefit claimants, whereas countries like Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the US have seen stable or declining numbers. Denmark is the only other nation with a notable increase, at 13%, which is still considerably less than the UK’s surge.
I guess most folk believe that society has a responsibility to its disadvantaged citizens. It is though a question of getting the right balance. On the face of it we appear to be out of step with other comparable countries. | | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:51 - Mar 25 with 1631 views | Swansea_Blue |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:36 - Mar 25 by Crawfordsboot |
On the other hand
Has the number of people claiming disability or sickness benefit in the UK increased much faster than in other countries ?
Yes, the number of people claiming disability or sickness benefits in the UK has increased significantly faster than in many other comparable countries. Since 2019, the UK has experienced a more than 30% rise in disability benefit claimants, whereas countries like Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the US have seen stable or declining numbers. Denmark is the only other nation with a notable increase, at 13%, which is still considerably less than the UK’s surge.
I guess most folk believe that society has a responsibility to its disadvantaged citizens. It is though a question of getting the right balance. On the face of it we appear to be out of step with other comparable countries. |
You can’t balance anything if there are more people claiming because more people are unfit for work. We either have a system to support people or we don’t. As there’s been a large increase in illness preventing people from working, I’d prefer more of the conversation to be around why that’s the case and what we can do to make people well again. That part of the problem (which is the only answer to driving costs down without adversely impacting people) is surprisingly lacking in many of the articles I’ve seen about this. It’s easier to just cut rather than fix the route cause though, which is the same with pretty much every issue these days.
It is right that we should be doing all we can to tackle fraud and abuse of the system; I’ve no problems with anything aimed in that direction. | |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:23 - Mar 25 with 1548 views | BlueBadger |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:36 - Mar 25 by Crawfordsboot |
On the other hand
Has the number of people claiming disability or sickness benefit in the UK increased much faster than in other countries ?
Yes, the number of people claiming disability or sickness benefits in the UK has increased significantly faster than in many other comparable countries. Since 2019, the UK has experienced a more than 30% rise in disability benefit claimants, whereas countries like Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the US have seen stable or declining numbers. Denmark is the only other nation with a notable increase, at 13%, which is still considerably less than the UK’s surge.
I guess most folk believe that society has a responsibility to its disadvantaged citizens. It is though a question of getting the right balance. On the face of it we appear to be out of step with other comparable countries. |
If we're getting more illness, we should be focusing on prevention and/or prompt treatment rather than punishing people for systemic failures that have left them unfit to work.
We were in a uniquely weak position at the start of the pandemic thanks to the incompetence, corruption and spitefulness of the incumbent government at the time and the new one appears intent on doubling down on them. [Post edited 25 Mar 19:44]
| |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:29 - Mar 25 with 1513 views | BlueBadger |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 17:51 - Mar 25 by Swansea_Blue |
You can’t balance anything if there are more people claiming because more people are unfit for work. We either have a system to support people or we don’t. As there’s been a large increase in illness preventing people from working, I’d prefer more of the conversation to be around why that’s the case and what we can do to make people well again. That part of the problem (which is the only answer to driving costs down without adversely impacting people) is surprisingly lacking in many of the articles I’ve seen about this. It’s easier to just cut rather than fix the route cause though, which is the same with pretty much every issue these days.
It is right that we should be doing all we can to tackle fraud and abuse of the system; I’ve no problems with anything aimed in that direction. |
Fraud rates you say?
https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/zero-percent-fraud-rate-for-pip,-dwp-figu | |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:40 - Mar 25 with 1473 views | Crawfordsboot |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:23 - Mar 25 by BlueBadger |
If we're getting more illness, we should be focusing on prevention and/or prompt treatment rather than punishing people for systemic failures that have left them unfit to work.
We were in a uniquely weak position at the start of the pandemic thanks to the incompetence, corruption and spitefulness of the incumbent government at the time and the new one appears intent on doubling down on them. [Post edited 25 Mar 19:44]
|
In no way am I arguing against supporting the needy and disadvantaged of our society.
I simply point out that we appear to be experiencing a significant step change in the number of claimants and that this is in stark contrast to all other similar countries. Surely it would be negligent of any govt. not to consider this.
To accuse the current govt. of doubling down on the needy is too simple an analysis | | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:45 - Mar 25 with 1466 views | BlueBadger |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:40 - Mar 25 by Crawfordsboot |
In no way am I arguing against supporting the needy and disadvantaged of our society.
I simply point out that we appear to be experiencing a significant step change in the number of claimants and that this is in stark contrast to all other similar countries. Surely it would be negligent of any govt. not to consider this.
To accuse the current govt. of doubling down on the needy is too simple an analysis |
Similarly, doubling down on punishing the most vulnerable when it's been shown to increase costs and cause more problems than it solves without making any plan to treat underlying causes is massively simplistic and extremely harmful. | |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:03 - Mar 26 with 1177 views | Crawfordsboot |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:45 - Mar 25 by BlueBadger |
Similarly, doubling down on punishing the most vulnerable when it's been shown to increase costs and cause more problems than it solves without making any plan to treat underlying causes is massively simplistic and extremely harmful. |
Oh dear! Can you at least acknowledge that it might just be possible to want to support the disadvantaged and vulnerable whilst at the same time wanting to ensure that the system is working as intended. I for one am interested to know why/how in recent years the number of claimants in the UK has increased by 30% whilst holding steady or reducing in most other comparable countries.
The two are not mutually exclusive, though you present them as being so. | | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:11 - Mar 26 with 1158 views | bluelagos |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:03 - Mar 26 by Crawfordsboot |
Oh dear! Can you at least acknowledge that it might just be possible to want to support the disadvantaged and vulnerable whilst at the same time wanting to ensure that the system is working as intended. I for one am interested to know why/how in recent years the number of claimants in the UK has increased by 30% whilst holding steady or reducing in most other comparable countries.
The two are not mutually exclusive, though you present them as being so. |
It is a very uncomfortable question, with my initial thoughts being that we have an aging population, plus of course the effect of COVID (long Covid)
But look a bit deeper and it's reported that other European countries haven't had similar rises (suggesting those reasons may only be a small part)
Spoke to someone the other day - and I genuinely haven't a clue how many claimants are dubious. But what I do feel (and saw when teaching in a deprived area) is that the dependency culture quickly develops where people on benefits sometimes get used to it, and take advantage.
What percentage of claimants? 5%, 05%, 25%? - fiik. |  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:12 - Mar 26 with 1153 views | BlueBadger |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:03 - Mar 26 by Crawfordsboot |
Oh dear! Can you at least acknowledge that it might just be possible to want to support the disadvantaged and vulnerable whilst at the same time wanting to ensure that the system is working as intended. I for one am interested to know why/how in recent years the number of claimants in the UK has increased by 30% whilst holding steady or reducing in most other comparable countries.
The two are not mutually exclusive, though you present them as being so. |
We were in a uniquely vulnerable place in this country with neglected underfunded services, an incompetent and corrupt government, negligible pandemic planning and preparation - the pandemic then saw another spike in long term illness in the form on long covid.. Added to this, we Brexited and compounded on those issues. | |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:15 - Mar 26 with 1143 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:11 - Mar 26 by bluelagos |
It is a very uncomfortable question, with my initial thoughts being that we have an aging population, plus of course the effect of COVID (long Covid)
But look a bit deeper and it's reported that other European countries haven't had similar rises (suggesting those reasons may only be a small part)
Spoke to someone the other day - and I genuinely haven't a clue how many claimants are dubious. But what I do feel (and saw when teaching in a deprived area) is that the dependency culture quickly develops where people on benefits sometimes get used to it, and take advantage.
What percentage of claimants? 5%, 05%, 25%? - fiik. |
Agreed, it appears to be an issue. Making work pay might be one disincentive to such a choice? |  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:30 - Mar 26 with 1105 views | bluelagos |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:15 - Mar 26 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Agreed, it appears to be an issue. Making work pay might be one disincentive to such a choice? |
Absolutely.
Economically cutting those benefits also works, but of course that then punishes those who are genuine claimants. And the idea that we starve people into work - why not just bring in the work house and be done eh.
The whole conversation is, as I said very uncomfortable. We need to support those who need help, encourage those who can work to do so, whilst recognising and challenging the dependency culture.
Upping the minimum wage and/or raising tax thresholds seems sensible - but both need to be paid for. Increasing business taxes risks more job losses.
It's all a bit of a tightrope to be fair to Reeves | |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 10:41 - Mar 26 with 1005 views | DJR |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:54 - Mar 25 by BlueBadger |
Although, with proposed changes to benefits there's going to be quite a LOT of patients killed over the next few years, sadly. [Post edited 25 Mar 12:59]
|
https://www.bmj.com/content/388/bmj.r593
"Ministers have argued there is a “moral case” for these cuts, and that “people that can work [should be] able to work.”3 However, the chancellor’s approach is unlikely to achieve this goal for two key reasons. First, high rates of economic inactivity in the UK reflect its almost unique failure among industrialised countries to recover population health after the pandemic,456 which came on top of over a decade of declining health linked to austerity,7 as well as long term structural weaknesses of precarious employment in a low pay economy.8 Second, health outcomes and economic policy are inseparably intertwined—even if the government chooses to focus solely on the economy, it cannot expect growth without a healthy population.56
Evidence from austerity
The experience of the past 14 years of austerity is a warning. From 1945 to 2012, life expectancy in the UK rose steadily. But after 2012 it flatlined, and for those in the most disadvantaged areas, it declined,9 caused by deep cuts to social security and local government spending.71011 The list of consequences is shameful, including increased infant mortality, deterioration of mental health, particularly in young adults,12 and record numbers of children being taken into care in England.1314
Policies justified on the grounds of austerity—including real term reductions in the value of benefits, stricter eligibility requirements, and harsher sanctions—have harmed health and pushed millions of people, especially children, further into poverty.151617 The cost of living has risen sharply in recent years,1819 leaving prices far higher than they were just five years ago. The combined result is that, since 2010, more people in Britain are experiencing destitution and many more people in full-time work live in poverty.20
Since 2012 the UK has seen the largest rise in child poverty among countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, according to Unicef.21 Child poverty adversely affects child mental health, creating a cascade of mental health challenges into young adulthood,22 which in turn creates difficulties transitioning into the labour market, and higher social security spending in the long term.23
A key proposal in the green paper is to tighten access to PIP—a benefit covering the extra costs of disability or long term health conditions—by raising the eligibility threshold. The Fraser of Allander Institute, an independent economic research centre, estimates that saving £1bn a year could mean about 250 000 fewer people receiving PIP.24 Existing evidence suggests this is unlikely to increase employment rates.2526 Previous governments have sought to restrict eligibility to, and levels of, these benefits. Most notably, just over one million existing recipients had their eligibility re-assessed between 2010 and 2013, with benefits removed if the assessor thought they were fit for work. This led to an increase in 290 000 people with mental health problems, increased antidepressant prescribing, and an estimated 600 suicides.2728 It did not increase employment, but rather shifted people, particularly those with mental health problems, onto unemployment benefits, many of whom later moved back onto disability benefits.
The idea that introducing sanctions or restricting the value of, or eligibility for, social security is an effective, harm reducing or “moral” means of increasing “economic activity” is not borne out by evidence.1726 When people become too sick to work, or when people with disabilities lose the support they need to enable them to live and work independently, there are costs to the state as well as to society, notably in terms of health and social care. Instead, enhancing social security and public services to improve population health, and creating high quality, better paid, and accessible jobs, is better evidenced as the key means to support people into work, and to reduce the costs of social security for those who are experiencing in-work poverty.6 Policies and interventions to improve health are more likely to achieve the economic gains the government is pursuing, and further cuts are unlikely to achieve either the “moral case,” or the reductions in public spending, that the chancellor is seeking.
Solving this austerity fuelled health crisis will take political will and commitment to recreate a society with high quality public services (to provide both the services the population needs and fulfilling work) and rebuild a social security system that lifts people securely out of poverty. If the government is serious about supporting people with disabilities and long term health conditions to work, it needs to collaborate with people with relevant lived experience (for example, disabled people’s user led organisations), employers, and researchers to develop and implement effective, evidence based policies and interventions." [Post edited 26 Mar 10:43]
|  | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 11:18 - Mar 26 with 956 views | OldFart71 |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:30 - Mar 26 by bluelagos |
Absolutely.
Economically cutting those benefits also works, but of course that then punishes those who are genuine claimants. And the idea that we starve people into work - why not just bring in the work house and be done eh.
The whole conversation is, as I said very uncomfortable. We need to support those who need help, encourage those who can work to do so, whilst recognising and challenging the dependency culture.
Upping the minimum wage and/or raising tax thresholds seems sensible - but both need to be paid for. Increasing business taxes risks more job losses.
It's all a bit of a tightrope to be fair to Reeves |
Your point on genuine claimants is a very good one. So far none of the political parties have been able to truly make a good job of it. The Tories had a go at it whereby they employed a company that only got paid if they got claimants off the system therefore it mattered not whether the claimant was genuine or not and whether medical advice backed the claimants claim for a benefit. I therefore have serious reservations as to whether Labour will honour their statement that those in need won't slip through the net. | | | |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:28 - Mar 26 with 882 views | itfcjoe |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 19:40 - Mar 25 by Crawfordsboot |
In no way am I arguing against supporting the needy and disadvantaged of our society.
I simply point out that we appear to be experiencing a significant step change in the number of claimants and that this is in stark contrast to all other similar countries. Surely it would be negligent of any govt. not to consider this.
To accuse the current govt. of doubling down on the needy is too simple an analysis |
Some interesting bits from Fraser Nelson on his substack
https://substack.com/home/post/p-159171926
His basic view is that cutting what they are doing now is the worst way to do it, because you will end up going after those in need as much as those who shouldn't be claiming as much as they are.....but that by doing it this way it is an easy and quick win financially - i.e. £x billion is there straight away for the books.
But that we need to slow down how many people are able to claim it - 2,000 people a day enter disability benefits and now 1 in 4 adults in the UK claim some - and that those on it need to be reassessed every 18 months properly.
As it is, sticking people on to disability has just solved a problem and then they have just been left there - no attempt to get them back into the workforce; and it's therefore too easy for those who want to be there, and too soul destroying for those who don't.....so the worst of both worlds |  |
| |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 12:33 - Mar 26 with 861 views | itfcjoe |
| According to the oracle that is RR on 08:11 - Mar 26 by bluelagos |
It is a very uncomfortable question, with my initial thoughts being that we have an aging population, plus of course the effect of COVID (long Covid)
But look a bit deeper and it's reported that other European countries haven't had similar rises (suggesting those reasons may only be a small part)
Spoke to someone the other day - and I genuinely haven't a clue how many claimants are dubious. But what I do feel (and saw when teaching in a deprived area) is that the dependency culture quickly develops where people on benefits sometimes get used to it, and take advantage.
What percentage of claimants? 5%, 05%, 25%? - fiik. |
Was listening to something on Times Radio the other day, and somebody had done a documentary on this - he said he was at the job centre and a claimant turns up and said he has too much anxiety, has had to have 4 cans of beer to summon up the courage to even get to this meeting and therefore can't work and is signed off as a disability claimant.
It's easy for the assessor, it's easy for the claimant, there's no attempt to help and that person who most likely has alcohol dependency issues is just left as is and that's the end of it. He's now on the disability list for a long time, no reassessments of any substance etc.
You find lots of 'sickfluencers' on line who coach people through these too.
Whether people think they are scroungers, justified, genuinely sick as a population we'll never know the breakdown - but the rose can't continue as the system for PIP is too generous for it to do so. It needs to be that generous for those who need it to work | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
