Government to amend deprivation of liberty scheme to cover 16- and 17-year-olds | Community Care


The government will amend its planned replacement to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) so that it applies to 16- and 17-year-olds, not just those over 18, a minister has confirmed.

Junior health minister Lord O’Shaughnessy pledged to amend the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill so that the proposed Liberty Protection Safeguards applied to young people aged 16 and 17, in a House of Lords debate on the bill yesterday (15 October).

The government had been criticised for excluding 16- and 17-year-olds from the scheme, particularly as they had been included in 2017 Law Commission proposals to replace DoLS that form the blueprint for the government’s plans.

 

Source: Government to amend deprivation of liberty scheme to cover 16- and 17-year-olds | Community Care

Advertisements

Co-production with individuals: key advice for social workers : Community Care


Co-production is a set of core values, principles and approaches that can be used to transform the way social care and mental health support are designed and delivered. This can happen on both individual and collective levels.

On the individual level, co-production can be described as a collaborative relationship between the people who use services and the practitioner (be it a social worker, personal assistant, teacher or housing officer). By emphasising the importance of communication and negotiation between frontline staff and the people who use services, it offers an alternative to the gatekeeping and ‘gift’ models of care based on resource eligibility, or care and support delivery based on tasks. The emphasis is on power sharing, relationships and mutual respect for knowledge and expertise.

Assessment and support planning provide a primary opportunity for practitioners, services users and potentially family, friends and other supporters to work together co-productively to define goals and outcomes and to design the support needed to achieve these. This can happen in any social care or mental health context, be it self-directed support planning for personal budget or direct payment use in the community, or in the context of residential care (Sanderson and Lewis, 2011). To be co-productive, the practice should be informed by Edgar Cahn’s (2004) core values of having an asset perspective, nurturing reciprocity and building social capital. Person-centred, strengths-based and recovery approaches in mental health all have the potential to reflect these core values in assessment and support planning. For example, in mental health:

 

Source: Co-production with individuals: key advice for social workers : Community Care

No-deal Brexit: survey reveals 44% of people expect the UK to crash out of EU : The Conversation


As the Brexit negotiations grind on, and with a withdrawal agreement still seeming elusive, the British people are becoming more pessimistic about what Brexit might mean. A major new survey by the Policy Institute at King’s College London and Ipsos MORI reveals that nearly half (44%) expect the UK to leave the EU in March 2019 without a deal in place. Only three in ten expect a deal to be worked out.

If we break the population down by party support and preference on Brexit, other fascinating distinctions become apparent. The majority of Remain-backing Labour voters think the UK is heading for a no-deal Brexit, while the majority of Conservative-Leave supporters think the country will leave with a deal.

Strikingly, whatever the outcome of the negotiations, few see much personal economic benefit flowing from Brexit. Only 14% of the public expect that leaving the EU will result in an increase in their own standard of living in the next five years, with twice as many expecting their standard of living to decrease. The public have become more pessimistic since we last asked this question in May 2016, just before the referendum

 

Source: No-deal Brexit: survey reveals 44% of people expect the UK to crash out of EU : The Conversation

Citizens Advice blame rent arrear rise on Universal Credit & welfare reform : Universal Credit Sufferer


A new report released by Citizens Advice Scotland (CAS) has blamed the UK government’s welfare reforms for a rise in clients seeking help for rent arrears on. The report comes the day after the government whipped their MPs to block the release of papers showing how Universal Credit will impact families.
The report starts by saying that in Scotland, the agency has seen a 40% rise in clients seeking assistance for rent arrears. Before you can even get into the report their findings are listed, and it doesn’t make comfortable reading for the government in Westminster.
The first and possibly most damning finding for the Tories says;

 

Source: Citizens Advice blame rent arrear rise on Universal Credit & welfare reform : Universal Credit Sufferer

Relationships between families, providers and commissioners [2] – Bringing Us Together


At our third Stronger Together event, we brought together families and providers, along with some colleagues from NHS England to look at what makes a difference and what can we do now.  It wasn’t about changes in legislation, it was about transforming the way we work and working with what we have.

Let’s be honest, legislation without true accountability is as useful as an ashtray on a motorcycle.

In our recent post, we talked about what the families and providers had to say about when relationships work between families, providers and commissioners.  However, in order to be realistic, we also have to talk about when relationships don’t work.

When it didn’t go well.

General:

  • When staff and home is 300 miles away, transition is difficult.
  • Hospital don’t like home staff being allowed in unit so no way for young person or family to get to work together before discharge.
  • No communication with the other Borough’s teams
  • Young person was seen as a diagnosis, not as an individual
  • Family were seen as the problem
  • Family did not get to share their vast knowledge or insight into what helps, works and doesn’t for their child or young person
  • Autism seen as a mental health issue
  • Not enough understanding of behaviour being a symptom

 

Source: Relationships between families, providers and commissioners [2] – Bringing Us Together

Outrage as disability assessment reports are ‘altered’ to refuse benefits support


There is growing evidence to suggest that disability benefit assessment reports are being deliberately “altered” or “tampered” with in order to deny disabled people the benefits support they desperately need, it has been revealed.

Evidence suggests that assessment reports for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) sent to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) are routinely “audited” by DWP officials so that the altered reports bear little or no resemblance to the originals.

Work and Pensions Secretary, Esther McVey MP, is now facing calls to explain the reasons behind these “audits”, after SNP MP Marion Fellows highlighted the case of one of her constituents who was refused PIP based on an audited assessment report by a DWP official.

 

Source: Outrage as disability assessment reports are ‘altered’ to refuse benefits support

Henry Newman: How to manage No Deal? To start with, pledge to reduce tariffs. | Conservative Home


Another alternative, any comments?

61chrissterry

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Brexit negotiations are stalled. Only one issue matters – the Irish backstop. Despite all the drama and noises off about Chequers, “Norway for now”, and Super Canada, none of that matters if we cannot agree a divorce. And, unless the EU shifts tack, the only path to an orderly divorce is via the backstop. So we are facing down a growing risk of No Deal. No Deal could mean tariffs on trade with our largest partner – the EU. So, the Government should commit now to reduce our overall tariffs in the event of No Deal.

No Deal should be nobody’s preferred option. It would mean significant disruption. Aviation, haulage and transport, citizen’s rights, and many other areas would potentially be affected. Almost by definition it would suggest that relations across the Continent had broken down – the political and strategic effects could be profound.

But there might be little choice if the alternative would mean a backstop which threatens the long-term integrity of the United Kingdom. So what would it mean in economic terms? Open Europe’s analysis, published yesterday, reveals that in the medium term the static macroeconomic effects of No Deal would be material but relatively small. GDP growth would be affected – down an estimated 2.2 per cent by 2030.

Our model considers the cost of tariffs with the EU, as well as costs for customs and other non-tariff barriers. But despite these new costs, we found that No Deal would not be the biggest determinant of our prosperity over that period. Over the medium term up to 2030 the UK economy would continue to grow by around 30 per cent, even in the event of No Deal. Our research is in line with findings by the LSE, PwC and the OBR. Yes, other people have come up with bigger numbers, including the Treasury, but they have thrown in other effects which are much harder to model successfully.

What our research also shows is that the Government could take action to mitigate some of the medium-term effects of No Deal. If we left without a deal, there would be tariffs payable on our trade with the EU under WTO rules. (Britain can’t just choose not to levy tariffs on European trade). But we can change our overall tariff regime. Although our WTO commitments impose a maximum level on tariffs which can be charged with any member state, it’s open to the UK to charge less as long as they do this on a most-favoured nation basis. WTO commitments are a ceiling not a floor.

So in our No Deal report Open Europe looked at the effect of lowering all our tariffs on industrial and manufactured goods to zero (and we phased in reductions on agricultural goods). We then also improved our openness to services trade and foreign investment (we moved the UK to “best in class” levels). These steps – which the UK could do without any negotiation – would dramatically reduce the impact of No Deal. Our model suggests that the macroeconomic effect over the same period up to 2030 would be reduced from a 2.2 per cent to 0.5 per cent drag on growth.

 

Source: Henry Newman: How to manage No Deal? To start with, pledge to reduce tariffs. | Conservative Home

A Brexit alternative for the Cabinet today | Conservative Home


Is the below mentioned a reasonable alternative, has suggested, what are your views?

61chrissterry


The Cabinet meets this morning.  Its members will wonder whether No Deal is now inevitable.  Perhaps the EU is now so set on carving up our country in any settlement that a collapse of the talks cannot be avoided.  But there is a potential escape route.

The EU’s support for the backstop is only one of many problems in the wider negotiation.  These cluster around the Prime Minister’s Chequers scheme, which was unequivocally rejected at Salzburg last month.  As the EU sees it, Chequers, with its core proposal to harmonise goods but not services with EU regulation, would breach the four freedoms of movement of goods, services capital, and workers; threaten the unity of its internal market, and potentially undercut EU27 businesses.

Were the backstop to be reduced to the onlydifficulty in the talks, it is possible to imagine that the EU would move to resolve it.

This is what would happen were Theresa May to take up a solution that the EU itself has offered – namely a Canada-style settlement.  Donald Tusk proposed it last spring.  “It should come as no surprise that the only remaining possible model is a free trade agreement,” he wrote.  “I hope that it will be ambitious and advanced – and we will do our best, as we did with other partners, such as Canada recently – but anyway it will only be a trade agreement.  I propose that we aim for a trade agreement covering all sectors and with zero tariffs on goods. Like other free trade agreements, it should address services.”

 

Source: A Brexit alternative for the Cabinet today | Conservative Home

SURPRISE! SURPRISE! Universal credit rollout delayed yet again


No matter how long they delay the process progressing, will it ever solve the problems.

My own view is No, because to solve a problem you have to firstly find out what the problems are and where they are and then you have to have the willingness to allocate time, money and all others to find an effective solution. There is the major problem, for does this Government really wish to solve the problems, for they wish to remove as many people as possible from the benefit systems. Therefore the problems with Universal Credit (UC) are a bonus for the Government in achieving their aim, for if people are in crisis and this affects their health and their ability to live then this is achieving one of the Governments aims in reducing the number of people on benefits.

So all this Government talk is just a ‘whitewash’ for they do not want to solve the problems.

Govt Newspeak

Holly Sargent has had to sell her possessions because of problems receiving universal credit

Ministers have bowed to pressure and are planning to further delay the rollout of flagship welfare reform Universal Credit. The system, which will merge six benefits into one payment, has been beset with problems.

Leaked documents seen by the BBC reveal plans to spend hundreds of millions of pounds to prevent claimants suffering hardship as they move onto it. The government said it always intended to introduce the benefit slowly.

Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey told the Commons on Monday that she had been discussing details of universal credit with the chancellor and details of this would be revealed in the Budget later this month.

The universal credit system was originally supposed to be up and running by April 2017, but is now not expected to be fully operational until December 2023. Massive overspends and administrative problems have…

View original post 867 more words

The EU is heading deeper into trouble, says FREDERICK FORSYTH | Frederick Forsyth | Columnists | Comment | Express.co.uk


If I were to offer you a sequence of numbers – two, four, six, eight, 10 – and then say, “Carry on”, you would probably suggest – 12, 14, 16 and so on. That is the direction of travel. With numbers it is easy because it is logical. Human behaviour is not logical but over a period consistent behaviour can give a trend. It even works in politics and more so in economics. Let us consider the EU.

Last week our Prime Minister was treated with utter contempt by the entire collegium of the leaders of the other 27 member nations. Frankly, this was largely her own fault. If you persist in bending over you may get a kicked rear end and she certainly did.

In quite a long life watching politics I have never seen a leader of our country so determined to seek out and take the most blithering advice, nor appoint idiots specifically to give it to her. Out in the lead of this troupe of bumblers is her closest adviser Mr Olly Robbins, though as he is a diehard Remainer it may be that is what his civil service colleagues wish.

It appears that he is the principal architect of the knock-kneed Chequers plan which has consistently flown like a wingless suet pudding. Yet still she goes on with it, despite the contempt of Brussels and the EU27. But lest we are all tempted just to cut our wrists and get it all over with, let us glance at the direction of travel.

 

Source: The EU is heading deeper into trouble, says FREDERICK FORSYTH | Frederick Forsyth | Columnists | Comment | Express.co.uk