egafd.com

From yesterdays Mail..

Grandad fought in the war for cunts like this???


Disability benefits are costing taxpayers an extra ?3.1billion a year under Labour - and a major factor is a massive rise in the number of claimants who are drug addicts and alcoholics, according to newly released documents.

Over the past ten years, the Disability Living Allowance (DLA) budget has soared from ?5.7billion to ?8.8billion a year - enough to build 20 new 'super hospitals'.


And papers released under the Freedom of Information Act disclose that the number of drug addicts and alcoholics claiming the ?60-a-week payment has risen five-fold, from 3,000 in 1997 to almost 17,000 last year.

The figures also reveal:

? Claimants suffering from ' psychosis' - a form of mental illness often caused by smoking cannabis - leapt from 63,000 to 148,000.

? The claim of 'back pain - not specified' has more than doubled from 56,000 to 123,000, costing the taxpayer an extra ?291million.

? The number of deaf people in the UK has almost tripled from 13,000 to 34,600, costing a total of ?79million.

? Claimants citing 'learning difficulties' rose from 182,000 to 282,000 - a leap from ?532million to ?781million.

Critics have claimed that checks on claimants are not sufficiently stringent and that criminals have targeted the benefit.


To qualify, claimants have to complete an online form from the DWP website, which displays the message: 'Claim straight away - if you delay you may lose benefit.'


Claimants can be ordered to provide GPs' letters or attend medicals if there is not enough evidence to support their claim.


But, with more than 2.8million DLA claimants, the DWP admits it is not standard procedure.


Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'These worrying figures reveal the extent of Britain's "dependency culture".


'They show quite clearly that Labour is just ignoring many of our root social problems.


'All we are doing is spending more money on people who are trapped on benefits without doing more practical things to help them.'


In 2005, the Office for National Statistics found that an estimated ?1billion a year was paid out on fraudulent DLA claims.


As a result, Government spending watchdog the National Audit Office has refused to sign off the DWP's accounts for the past 18 years.


This January, former NAO boss Sir John Bourn said: 'Losses due to fraud are still a significant drain on the public purse and the high levels of fraud and error are one reason for the qualification of the Department's accounts.'


Recent cases include professional boxer Keith Jones who, despite fighting in more than 100 contests - some televised - managed to claim ?20,000.


Jay Somers, 49, from Merseyside, received a suspended prison sentence after admitting giving dance lessons while receiving almost ?23,000 in disability allowances.


Several internet companies now sell advice on how to legally squeeze the DLA.


One, www.benefitsandwork.co.uk, lists feedback from happy customers.


One reads: 'I feel like I've won the lottery. . . Just hope that someone doesn't burst my bubble!'


Marjorie Wallace, of the mental health charity Sane, said: 'This huge rise in the number of claimants for psychosis could be linked to the Government's relaxation of cannabis laws.


'But all the evidence suggests psychosis sufferers have remained - relatively stable. I suppose that calls into question the validity of the claimant.'


A DWP spokesman said: 'People claiming DLA must be able to demonstrate they have specific care or mobility needs resulting from their medical condition.'

Case history: The strongman who lifted ?43,000 in bogus claims
Jon Stentiford was able to collect Disability Living Allowance at the same time as holding the title of Cornwall's Strongest Man.


Despite being able to lift a half-ton Metro car for one minute, the 36-year-old, of St Neot, pocketed ?43,000 after claiming he had a bad back.


The 6ft 4in bodybuilder began receiving the benefit for sciatica - a condition that can cause lower back pain - in 2002.


But the next year, he entered the local 'strongman' tournament.


Competing under the alias John Nicholls, he stood with two 50lb weights at arm's length for several minutes.


During the competition, he was also able to carry two gas bottles over an obstacle course, heave a truck across a track and load heavy objects into a lorry.


Steve Ruark, a friend who runs the Gymnasium Centre in nearby Liskeard, where Stentiford still works out, said: 'On that day he was clearly the strongest man.'


It later emerged that Stentiford, a father of two, was able to claim DLA simply by using a false name on his application form.


Despite supposedly stringent checks - much heralded by the Department for Work and Pensions - officials failed to spot his lies and the scam was only exposed after an anonymous tip-off.


In May last year, the father of two admitted five charges of falsely claiming benefits, which also included housing and council tax benefit offences.


He was sentenced to nine months' jail, suspended for two years.

This cunt must be laughing all the way to the pub!!

If you let useless cunts take the piss, they will - as the figures prove.

Yeah well. They complain about the NHS too. Might as well fling a few billion there and sort that out as well if they are going t give junkies money to spend on drugs.

I wonder if I can get a refund on my taxes if the government use it irresponsibly like this.

Typical daily mail. Find a few bad eggs in a system where the majority aare playing it straight and pretend they are all at it.

I do find it strange that just because someone is supposedly a bit less able to work - in other words a bit more 'disabled' - that they need more money. In other words, why they need to claim Disability Living Allowance when they are as physically able as everyone else. Is there more chance that someone with slightly more extreme alements is going to need more money for trips to the pub? Are they going to need to buy 10 packets of fags a week rather than five? Will their mobile phone calls be more expensive when they're ringing their mates to go and get pissed with, and therefore they need more money? I knew of someonce who was on benefit as he had a kind of scitzophrenia (I have no idea how to spell it). He became scitzophrenic because he smoked dope all day, every day, for about two years. He was getting about ?200 a week - his Incapacity Benefit, his Disbaility Living Allowance, and some extra benefit you get if your medication is stronger than the normal type - in other words if you were a serious case. He spent all this money on getting pissed more often, smoking more, and buying more DVD's. He didn't need this extra money. Also, the more these people get the less chance there is of them EVER coming off Benefit because they will have to earn even more money to make up all that cash.

This is all well and good but why don't people ever get as annoyed about huge wastage of taxpayers money thay occurs in the criminal justice system, health service and elsewhere ? There was recent controversy about the validity of evidence that has come from anonymous sources. Just last week it was commented that the ruling would (or possibly had) led to the collapse of a trial which up to that point had cost ?6 million pounds. What about other cases which collapse or which won't come to court although thousands of pounds have already been spent. Why do people always go for the 'benefit cheat' when they want to vent spleen ?

Similarly I watched a documentary a few months ago about a brain surgeon who was doing some work voluntarily in the Ukraine. Because their resources were very limited he donated some equipment from the UK - equipment which the NHS deemed to be 'spent'. Among these were some drill bits which the NHS deemed to be a single use item but which the surgeon argued could be used much more than once. The surgeon calculated that his hospital could save about ?40,000 a year if the bits weren't thrown away after one operation. ?40,000 and that's one hospital !

Why not look at the bigger picture of inefficiency and wastage ? The above are just two examples .. there will be many many more.

Sometimes there's a pretty good reason for venting ones spleen on the benefit cheats in these scenarios. Two years ago, at 42 years of age i lost my job and marriage and much more to a heart attack. Following a quad heart bypass (from which i'm now fully recovered) i had to attend a medical at social security as i was getting disability benefit, albeit rightfully so, and i was duly questioned by a young Polish girl of around 25 years old. I was asked during the conversation if i could walk over and close the door and silly things like that, and asked if i could make myself a cup of tea!! I said yes i could......and 2 days later received a letter saying my allowance was stopped as i was perfectly capable of returning to work, as i had demonstrated that i was capable of fending for myself! So the same government who would not protect me from losing my job because of illness were now also telling me after such surgery that i was pain free and fit for work!!!!!! Oh, and thats also aside from telling me i didn't qualify for free prescriptions for my ?40 a month medications while i was on ?65 a week sick money......I think thats a good enough reason to vent ones spleen!!!!!

Did you appeal against the decision?lester wrote:

> Sometimes there's a pretty good reason for venting ones spleen
> on the benefit cheats in these scenarios. Two years ago, at 42
> years of age i lost my job and marriage and much more to a
> heart attack. Following a quad heart bypass (from which i'm now
> fully recovered) i had to attend a medical at social security
> as i was getting disability benefit, albeit rightfully so, and
> i was duly questioned by a young Polish girl of around 25 years
> old. I was asked during the conversation if i could walk over
> and close the door and silly things like that, and asked if i
> could make myself a cup of tea!! I said yes i could......and 2
> days later received a letter saying my allowance was stopped as
> i was perfectly capable of returning to work, as i had
> demonstrated that i was capable of fending for myself! So the
> same government who would not protect me from losing my job
> because of illness were now also telling me after such surgery
> that i was pain free and fit for work!!!!!! Oh, and thats also
> aside from telling me i didn't qualify for free prescriptions
> for my ?40 a month medications while i was on ?65 a week sick
> money......I think thats a good enough reason to vent ones
> spleen!!!!!

Sure, but that's an injustice you were personally disadvantaged by. It's a bit different.

What makes me chuckle is that this is nothing compared to the tens of billions in unpaid tax by businesses and the super rich in the UK achieved by 'tax efficiency' IE exploiting the system to avoid paying any money to the state. This is the real reason why our national tax burden is so relatively heavy.

Scum like Philip Green, already rich beyond belief, accept honours whilst deciding not to pay tax. The ONLY reason that subjects like Benefits' fraudsters, or an expanded base of disability claimants, get an annual airing in the media is that they're easy to nail and won't sue.

Why don't Prremiership footballers ever come in for flack like 'fat cats'? None of them pay tax at the rate we do, due to financial experts exploiting loopholes, yet they're treated like gods by the media and the public.

It's very interesting who the media chooses to pillory and who the public loves to hate.