|
Post by krystal on Jul 20, 2016 18:45:24 GMT 7
Can I ask those people emailing to add a sentence in your emails about the people trying to get onto DSP from those same tables. They aren't being reviewed but still have to meet the criteria are under the same scrutinisation.
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
Post by krystal on Jul 21, 2016 10:59:32 GMT 7
SOmeone from welfare rights told me the reassessments of the 90,000 wont start until either 1st of January or 1st July next year , is that correct From my reading, The legislation (Social Security Act 1991) has to be changed to allow over 35's to be reviewed. Firstly I have to say this is the worst piece of legislation writing I have seen in a while. That having been said, it goes like this: s94 - : (da) in a case where the following apply: (i) the person is under 35 years of age or is a reviewed 2008-2011 DSP starter; ***(ii) the Secretary is satisfied that the person is able to do work that is for at least 8 hours per week on wages at or above the relevant minimum wage and that exists in Australia, even if not within the person’s locally accessible labour market; (iii) if the person has one or more dependent children—the youngest dependent child is 6 years of age or over; the person meets any participation requirements that apply to the person under section 94A; *** A reviewed 2008-2011 DSP starter means a person for whom all the following conditions are met: (a) the person made (or is taken to have made) a claim for disability support pension before 3 September 2011; (b) a determination granting the claim took effect after 2007; (c) on or after 1 July 2014 the person was given a notice under subsection 63(2) or (4) of the Administration Act in relation to assessing the person’s qualification for that pension; (d) when the notice was given, the person was under 35 years of age; From my reading a "reviewed 2008-2011 DSP starter" must be under 35 years of age. They will need to change this before the can review any other age brackets. It may well take 6 - 12 months to get the amendment through (especially if they call another election).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 11:27:44 GMT 7
Legislation is not required to review people but it may be required to give the PoS aspect to over 35s. But even then I don't think so. Amending a measure does not always need to go through parliament.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 11:29:53 GMT 7
SOmeone from welfare rights told me the reassessments of the 90,000 wont start until either 1st of January or 1st July next year , is that correct From my reading, The legislation (Social Security Act 1991) has to be changed to allow over 35's to be reviewed. Firstly I have to say this is the worst piece of legislation writing I have seen in a while. That having been said, it goes like this: s94 - : (da) in a case where the following apply: (i) the person is under 35 years of age or is a reviewed 2008-2011 DSP starter; ***(ii) the Secretary is satisfied that the person is able to do work that is for at least 8 hours per week on wages at or above the relevant minimum wage and that exists in Australia, even if not within the person’s locally accessible labour market; (iii) if the person has one or more dependent children—the youngest dependent child is 6 years of age or over; the person meets any participation requirements that apply to the person under section 94A; *** A reviewed 2008-2011 DSP starter means a person for whom all the following conditions are met: (a) the person made (or is taken to have made) a claim for disability support pension before 3 September 2011; (b) a determination granting the claim took effect after 2007; (c) on or after 1 July 2014 the person was given a notice under subsection 63(2) or (4) of the Administration Act in relation to assessing the person’s qualification for that pension; (d) when the notice was given, the person was under 35 years of age; From my reading a "reviewed 2008-2011 DSP starter" must be under 35 years of age. They will need to change this before the can review any other age brackets. It may well take 6 - 12 months to get the amendment through (especially if they call another election). I've forwarded this to Senator Siewerts office.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 11:32:29 GMT 7
July 1 2014 is when the under 35 reviews began but the PoS requirement started later on from that. Same may apply here too but reviews will start when they allocate them to because legislation is not required to review anyone on DSP. But in the same token the legislating part that does need to happen is budget appropriation bills that allow those measures. But like Mike said too much speculating only fuels worries. Once messages and emails sent out thats the key.
|
|
|
Post by bunyip on Jul 21, 2016 11:46:12 GMT 7
Yes you are right Krystal a guy from welfare rights told me it wont start for 6 or 12 months l hope they don't pick all the over 35's who got the DSP between 2008-2011 as l got mine in 2008. So do you think they will use the same legislation and just amend the age to over 35 ? could they also amend the years 2008-11? or do you think they will most likely keep it and review all the over 35's between 2008-11. It seems unfair they do it by years , someone who got the DSP in 2008 deserves to keep it just as much as someone who got it in 2007 but the person from 2007 doesn't get reassessed
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Jul 21, 2016 11:55:53 GMT 7
We need to get this thread back on track, which is about approaching politicians to let them know we will be encouraging pensioners to vote for those that openly support protection of the genuinely disabled and offer realistic solutions for those who may be threatened with being moved to other benefits.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 12:06:52 GMT 7
We need to get this thread back on track, which is about approaching politicians to let them know we will be encouraging pensioners to vote for those that openly support protection of the genuinely disabled and offer realistic solutions for those who may be threatened with being moved to other benefits. Agreed this is what my focus is going back to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 12:09:35 GMT 7
When I emailed Labor people I let them know my disappointment in their support of the previous dsp attack on under 35s and hoped they would reconsider their stance now the gov has considered more attacks.
|
|
|
Post by murphy on Jul 21, 2016 12:10:42 GMT 7
My vote helped oust Wyatt Roy, bringing in ALP Susan Lamb, so I've approached her by email, initially sending Banjo's email regarding the voting power of DSPers, and then sending a more personal email outlining my concerns about the treatment of DSPers, asking her to seek information about DSS' algorithm -- essentially trying to humanise the 790K figure.
If I can get a good day, it is my intention to visit her office. I'm very mindful that ALP introduced the 2012 impairment tables, but it can't hurt to try to get Lamb to realise that the LNP treatment of DSPers has a real effect on us -- that we need transparency and fairness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 12:19:04 GMT 7
My Senate vote helped a swing against Zed Seselja which is awesome even though sadly he got re-elected but by next election he be gone hopefully. Because its suspected another election on the cards in the next few months or year these emails will be extremely crucial.
|
|
|
Post by murphy on Jul 25, 2016 11:11:36 GMT 7
Xenophon's reply. I specifically asked about protecting DSPers and finding out the review algorithm.
Dear Murphy Thank you for writing to Nick Xenophon with your perspective living as a disability support pension. I have shared your thoughts with Nick and his advisers for their reference. Nick requested I respond on his behalf. Nick will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind when debating any legislation on this issue later this year in Parliament. He has concerns about Australia’s ageing population and that the cost of living is exceeding their means. He would like to see utility costs on par with CPI in terms of increases, no more, and if costs do increase higher than CPI there needs to be a rebate in place for those on a government pension. If you agree with this, you may like to write to your Federal MP to gain further support. I hope this information is of assistance. Thanks again for contacting Nick. Kind regards Sarah Randall Electorate Officer Office of Nick Xenophon | Independent Senator for South Australia
|
|
|
Post by nomadic on Jul 25, 2016 19:16:34 GMT 7
Reads like another of those nothing said replies that I recieved every time I wrote to him and many others over the years. nothing whatsoever about protecting DSP'ers or the algorithm. I had a good analogy about the questions i asked them. There is a bottle of beer on the table and everybody agrees that the beer belongs to nomadic. morally and legally. But before i get to drink it I have to get an answer from a politician, public servant or Hank Jongen of C/L. The question is very straight forward and easy to answer. What color is the bottle of beer? A number of replies were received with various answers to this question. All along the same lines as one i recieved from Shorten. "THE SKY IS BLUE" Not one ever mentioned the beer bottle. But through sheer determination I eventually drank it.
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Jul 25, 2016 21:55:08 GMT 7
"THE SKY IS BLUE" Not one ever mentioned the beer bottle. But through sheer determination I eventually drank it. nomadicNext beer I have I'll salute you sir.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Jul 26, 2016 7:11:56 GMT 7
Nice to see that props used to support and demonstrate an argument are not going to waste.
|
|