Monmouthshire council backs direct care payments push
It has also been confirmed 11 people have approached Monmouthshire County Council for more information on the process of applying for the support so they can directly control payments for their own social care.
The council has retendered domiciliary care contracts in the south of Monmouthshire and some residents have complained their care provider will change.
A motion calling for the council to commit to supporting people to access direct payments, was brought forward by independent councillor for Magor West Frances Taylor.
She reminded Monmouthshire County Council's May meeting the direct payments 'are a right'.
But she said qualifying for direct payments requires an assessment by a social worker and she was aware of someone who has waited seven months for a social worker assessment and claimed there is a 'bottleneck' in waiting for advice.
Green Party councillor Ian Chandler, who is a member of the Labour-led cabinet and responsible for social care, said they were 'happy to support the motion' but said the council does comply with the legislation on direct payments.
It currently provides direct payments to 120 people who have to meet with an independent living assessor who will provide advice to them on becoming an employer, their rights and responsibilities.
'There are no bottlenecks for independent living assessors,' said Cllr Chandler.
The councillor also said 11 people have come forward seeking advice on moving to direct payments.
Caldicot Cross Labour councillor Jackie Strong said she was always keen to promote direct payments when she worked as a social worker. She said: 'I was a very passionate promoter of direct payments and probably wiped out the direct payments budget in Newport for a family some years ago.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
41 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Labour MP warns proscribing Palestine Action would be ‘kneejerk reaction'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has unveiled plans to proscribe the organisation, which armed forces minister Luke Pollard described as 'not a protest group'. Counter-terror police are investigating the break-in last Friday, when activists damaged two RAF Voyager aircraft using paint. Palestine Action claimed responsibility for the incident, and the organisation posted footage from the Oxfordshire base on its X account, claiming that the planes help to 'collect intelligence, refuel fighter jets and transport weapons to commit genocide in Gaza'. Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside Kim Johnson told the Commons that she was 'concerned by the Government's kneejerk reaction to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation'. She told MPs: 'This country has a long history of protests, as I mentioned in this chamber last week, some on British military sites, and none have been branded as terrorists.' Ms Johnson added that authorities could pursue those responsible for 'criminal damage, but not as a terrorist', and asked: 'Can the minister set out what steps his department will take to ensure peaceful protest activity is not wrongly categorised as a national security threat?' Mr Pollard replied: 'The proscription of Palestine Action has been something that has been considered over a long period of time by my colleagues in the Home Office. 'It is a decision that they have taken after considering the facts, those in the public domain and those perhaps held privately, and we are certain that this is the right course of action to keep our country safe in these difficult times.' Liz Saville Roberts, Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader, said: 'Direct action at military bases is nothing new. We remember with respect the women who marched from Wales to Greenham Common, and the thousands of women who joined them. 'They didn't just march, they pulled down fences. They criminally damaged infrastructure. 'So, does the minister recognise the risk implicit in proscribing protest groups calling out war as terrorist organisations?' Ms Saville Roberts was referring to a demonstration between 1981 and 2000, when anti-nuclear weapons protesters set up the Greenham Common Women's Peace Camp. Mr Pollard replied: 'They're not a protest group. They are people that have undertaken severe criminal damage to military assets. They're people who are increasingly using violence as part of their modus operandi. 'The decision that the Home Secretary has taken has not been taken lightly and reflects the seriousness of the intent of that organisation. 'I welcome free speech, I welcome debate and challenge, but vandalising RAF jets is not free speech – that is criminal damage, that is interventions on a military base, that is – as I say in my statement – not only epically stupid but also a threat to our national security and the Home Secretary was right to proscribe them.' In his statement, Mr Pollard had earlier told MPs that personnel at Brize Norton 'work tirelessly to support our armed forces deployed across the world to deliver military assistance to Ukraine, and they have been formally recognised for their contribution in flying humanitarian aid into Gaza, so this action does nothing to further the path to peace'. Sir Julian Lewis, the Conservative MP for New Forest East, warned that 'it would do the country and the Government no favours if they were to lose in court a challenge to the process of proscription, because whereas the secret sabotage of planes would certainly have been an act of terrorism leading to proscription, the fact is, this was a performative act which they announced they had done'. MPs will have a 'full debate' in Parliament as part of the proscription process, Mr Pollard pledged in response, as he said the bid to proscribe Palestine Action was put together after 'considerable thought'. MPs also heard that the 'fence is not formidable' at Brize Norton, after Liberal Democrat MP for Witney Charlie Maynard told the Commons that 'security at the base has been really underinvested for a long time'. Mr Maynard said he had walked around the base's perimeter in his constituency 'quite a few times'. Mr Pollard said the Government's response had already 'helped identify a number of immediate steps' to bolster security at the site. The minister added: 'He is right that much of our armed forces estate and our armed forces have been hollowed out and underfunded for far too long. 'It's precisely for that reason that I welcome the increase in defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by April 2027. 'Our armed forces are brilliant but it's time they had first-class facilities.'
Rhyl Journal
41 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Welfare reforms will lead to ‘appalling poverty'
Labour MP Andy McDonald asked for further evidence on how many people will lose out on Personal Independence Payments (Pip) as a result of the welfare reform Bill. In the Commons, Labour's Richard Burgon also claimed anyone supporting the reforms is voting to take away benefits from disabled people who need help 'to cut up their food, wash themselves and go to the toilet'. Work and pensions minister Sir Stephen Timms said the reforms will 'open up opportunities for people who have been denied opportunities for far, far too long'. It comes after Labour's Vicky Foxcroft resigned as a Government whip over the proposed cuts last week. The Government has previously said the reforms could save up to £5 billion a year. The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill will be debated on July 1, when it receives its second reading in the Commons. Speaking on Monday, Mr Burgon, Leeds East MP, said: 'Isn't the simple and sad truth that any MP who votes for this upcoming welfare Bill is voting to take Pip from disabled people who need assistance to cut up their food, wash themselves and go to the toilet?' Sir Stephen replied: 'No. What people will be voting for is reforms to open up opportunities for people who have been denied opportunities for far, far too long. We're putting that right.' Mr McDonald, MP for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East, said: 'Ministers have highlighted the scale of Pip recipients expected to lose payments make up one in 10 of the total Pip caseload, suggesting the impact of the cuts will be limited, but that's still 370,000 current recipients expected to lose on average, £4,500. 'But these numbers rest on a set of assumptions that the OBR has described as highly uncertain. DWP data shows there are 1.3 million people currently receiving Pip daily living payments who would not meet the new criteria. 'So before MPs are asked to vote on imposing such appalling poverty, will the DWP or the OBR provide further evidence underpinning these claims?' Sir Stephen replied: 'Well, the OBR has published its assessment. (Mr McDonald) is absolutely right, their assessment is that one in 10 of those who are receiving Pip in November next year will have lost it by 2029/30.' He added: 'Following that, we will be able to introduce the biggest investment there has ever been in employment support for people out of work on health and disability grounds, because we don't want any longer to track people on low income for years and years and years, we want people to be able to enter work and fulfil their ambitions, and that's what the investment will allow.' Pip is a benefit aimed at helping with extra living costs if someone has a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition. Data for Pip claimants begins in January 2019, when the number stood at 2.05 million. An impact assessment published alongside the Bill confirmed previously published estimates that changes to Pip entitlement rules could see about 800,000 people lose out, with an average loss of £4,500 per year. Shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately said the reforms will get 'a grand total of zero people into work, according to their own impact assessments'. Liberal Democrat MP Helen Maguire said cuts to Pip could make it harder for people to live independently, thus negating the point of the benefit. The Epsom and Ewell MP said one of her constituents feels that Pip is treated as a 'pity payment rather than a benefit designed to offset the extra costs of disability'. She added: 'Does the minister agree that cutting Pip payments simply pushes more disabled people further from living independently and also from employment?' Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said reforms were needed to preserve the system in the long term. She said: 'I do not recognise the attitude that she described there. Quite frankly we feel precisely the opposite. 'This is a vital benefit that makes a crucial contribution towards the extra costs of living with a disability. 'That is why we want to reform it, to protect it for generations to come because we do not think it's sustainable to have a doubling of the number of people on Pip over this decade from two to more than 4.3 million.' Elsewhere in work and pensions questions, Ms Kendall said the child poverty task force will look at 'all the levers that we need' to tackle the issue, when pressed on the Government's plans for the two-child benefit cap. Tracy Gilbert, Labour MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, said: 'I absolutely agree… with a number of charities that removing the cap alone is not a silver bullet to tackle child poverty, but it will make a difference. 'Can (Ms Kendall) confirm if the tackling child poverty task force is considering the removal of a two-child cap?' Ms Kendall replied: 'I can absolutely confirm that the child poverty strategy will be looking at all the levers that we need to tackle this really important issue, including in terms of social security. 'She is impatient for change for her constituents, as am I. We have already put in place a fair repayment rate for universal credit, we are increasing the standard allowance for the first time in universal credit, for the first time in its history, and rolling out free school meals. 'But I will, of course, take her representations forward and make sure they're heard by the task force.'
South Wales Argus
an hour ago
- South Wales Argus
Nick Smith MP on extra funding to protect old coal tips
A former coal tip collapsed, sending trees, slurry and debris running through the streets. Homes were washed out. Residents were evacuated. It was a worrying time and a stark reminder of the work that needs to be done to protect our communities by making coal tips safe. On behalf of residents who contacted me, I raised this with the environment minister, Steve Reed, in Parliament and then with the Prime Minister during PMQs. That's why I was especially pleased to see £118m for coal tip maintenance announced in the recent Spending Review, extra funding on top of the £25m UK Labour already committed in last year's budget. This is a great example of what happens when we have Labour in both Wales and Westminster, working together on the issues that matter most. It is also good to see Blaenau Gwent council working with the Welsh Government on this. There were many other welcome announcements for Wales. A record settlement of £22.4bn per year on average for the Welsh Government to invest in public services and drive down NHS waiting lists. £445 million secured for rail investment. £211m in local growth funding in Wales, each year for the next three years. Labour's first budget was to fix the foundations, and now we have delivered a plan for investing in national renewal. In another very welcome recent announcement, planned new laws have been set out to help clamp down on illegal off-road biking. This has become a serious concern across so many of our communities. These bikes are not only churning up our mountainsides but, increasingly, also being driven dangerously in our town centres and on our main roads. Through the regional roundtable group I established I've held many meetings with local police and landowners to discuss tackling this, and so I strongly welcome the proposed new powers for police to crack down on anti-social vehicle use, not just on off-road bikes, but also cars. These include the ability to seize and destroy vehicles after 48 hours, down from the current 14-day period, and the power to seize any vehicle involved in antisocial behaviour, without needing to first issue a warning. In our manifesto, we promised to get tough on this menace, and these laws are a strong step in the right direction. I know communities across our valleys will welcome this action.
