Abolishing the triple lock, privatising the NHS and using immigration as a poverty alleviation tool- will Reform UK win over or lose voters with such policies?

I would guess those wanting to make money out of these things, in the way that the do from health in America, would be rubbing their hands at the idea. We can already see private-equity firms, who don't necessarily manufacture drugs or treat patients, buying GP practices, combining it with other practices creating larger organisations, increasing revenue/reducing costs to the owners by changing operations then eventually selling or recapitalising the company.

I think that those who think they are above social democracy, i.e, democracy belonging to all, rich, poor and those in the middle will also feel quite gleeful.

Having heard Reform voters being interviewed I don't think they are voting on policies. It's usually about liking Farage and hating immigrants.

In the unlikely event of Reform becoming the government their voters will soon realise that they have shot themselves in the foot.
The NHS will be privatised and people who can ill afford it will need health insurance.
They are threatening to cut PIP payments so only the severely affected will get support.
These policies will affect many of those who vote Reform.

Vintagewhine

Having heard Reform voters being interviewed I don't think they are voting on policies. It's usually about liking Farage and hating immigrants.

Which is just as some voted for Brexit Vintagewhine, and sadly would have a similar result.

Voting for Brexit was, as I have said before, was like giving up work in order to save the petrol money getting there. Just because this group share someone's unthought through hatred does not mean they will make life better for them.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

I agree that PIP needs to be changed but what Reform propose is extreme.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DaisyAnneReturns

I would guess those wanting to make money out of these things, in the way that the do from health in America, would be rubbing their hands at the idea. We can already see private-equity firms, who don't necessarily manufacture drugs or treat patients, buying GP practices, combining it with other practices creating larger organisations, increasing revenue/reducing costs to the owners by changing operations then eventually selling or recapitalising the company.

I think that those who think they are above social democracy, i.e, democracy belonging to all, rich, poor and those in the middle will also feel quite gleeful.

Similar to what equity firms have done with many vet practices.

Yes indeed, it’ll be all their Christmases at one.

I think one of the issues here is “voters” often confuse the private healthcare many have, which effectively offers more choice for non-urgent or non-life critical events or effectively “queue jumping”

I don’t think they have the first clue about how privatising our entire NHS would affect them (& us).

Pay every time you visit a GP.
Pay the full price for all drugs:medicines.
Pay for every ambulance you call.
Pay for all your children’s visits, vaccines etc.
Pay for all your maternity care and birth.
Pay for all and any operation, including food, accommodation, surgeon, anaesthetist, nurses etc
Pay for all cancer care.

The list is endless and insurance will be enormous especially for anyone with existing conditions, disabilities and the elderly. Then there’s the fact that insurance won’t cover all costs.

The raw truth is people will die.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

In terms of PIP, whatever stories we hear, it is actually quite a difficult benefit to get awarded.The old DLA and even older Incapacity Benefit were totally flawed as people were never called in for regular re-assessments.

As a general rule, and there are exceptions, PIP is generally awarded for up to 3 years at a time before reassessing, failing to attend up to 3 consecutive assessments (assuming missed and rebooked) would normally result in the benefit being suspended.

As I stated earlier, there are exceptions.

Please remember PIP is awarded for a huge variety of conditions, which include severe-learning disabilities, downs-syndrome, severe-autism, dementia, as well as lifelong physical medical conditions such as MS and epilepsy, and mental health conditions, where those mental health conditions impact a persons day to day life.

It’s awarded as cash so the person impacted can use the money in the way it which it gives them the most benefit.

Around a quarter of those claiming PIP, which is only awarded to those of working age, currently 18-67, and often use the cash to help get them to work.

Those with severe mobility issues can opt to swap their entire mobility award for a mobility car.

Reform won’t lose my vote as they never had it and never ever will 🤣🤣🥳🥳

I do think that the benefit system needs to be tightened, but PIP is not sick pay - it is to mitigate the impact of disability so that people can work, or live dignified lives. It is meant to be spent on things like mobility aids, or incontinence pads, or taxis, so that the lives of the disabled are not entirely miserable.

We all know instances where people play the system (like my daughter's ex-SIL who claimed to be unable to work because of agoraphobia, yet went shopping in daughter's town a few miles from her own home, so she could get a lift back from her brother (my daughter's ex) and have lunch with friends whilst she was there - a day out, basically, which is not something most agoraphobics can do. But that doesn't mean that everyone on benefits is doing that.

I would prefer there to be an expectation that everyone works in some capacity - she could have worked from home, for instance - and been encouraged into some sort of work that allowed that. If people were genuinely helped (or coerced) into some sort of work, the lead-swingers would recover and find more sociable jobs, and the genuine cases would have the dignity of earning a living and contributing to society.

Julie Burchill writes in today's i paper about how she works aged 67, despite being a wheelchair user with multiple disabilities.

Enjoy spending your PIP on cocktails! an embittered ex-friend wrote to me, in what was obviously meant to be a devastating end to our tempestuous alliance. (She has spent much of her adult life spending her own benefits on holidays in the sun; her various mental ailments have been rediagnosed repeatedly.) But it’s not my PIP I spend on my copious cocktails – I spend my PIP on the expensive business of being disabled. I spend it on adult nappies, night pads, enough cleaning products to stock a small hospital, an endless supply of bed-sheets and towels, three types of wipe, a cleaning service to keep my flat decent now I can no longer use the vacuum cleaner without being in danger of being pulled over by it, personal assistants and physiotherapists. In short, it makes my life a little bit easier after suffering the life-changing devastation two years ago which saw me attempt suicide soon after the finality of my injuries sunk in.

The money I spend on cocktails is the money I earn, at 67, by dragging my broken body out of bed every morning at sunrise, then positioning my halfling-haunches on the couch and turning on my laptop, and using my brain to make my living, the way I’ve done since I was 17.

Yes, sometimes I long to lie a-bed, but I’m glad I don’t when I meet my daily deadline, and when my time comes to leave this mortal coil, I’m pretty sure that my last thoughts won’t be “O, I wish I’d spent more time googling new symptoms that might make me unfit for making my own living!” I’m happy to leave that to others, with their desperate, disparate Desert Island Disabilities.

That all seems fair to me. JB is not a particularly sympathetic character (much of the article is about how others should be denied disability benefits), but love her or hate her she can't be accused of being a scrounger, and the same is true of a lot of benefit claimants.

As I say, I have little sympathy with those who don't pay in but expect to take out, whether they are disabled or not - and obviously the profoundly disabled are amongst those the welfare state has to protect with no expectation of payback. But I think we need to fight shy of tarring whole groups with the same brush. Some disabled claimants could work, but so could some able bodied people who choose not to, and not all claimants are scroungers.

Will Reform UK voters worry about access to free healthcare to sufficiently disenfranchise Reform voters- many of which are in older age groups? Will they consider the risks of such policy proposals to their personal financial circumstances and their ability or lack of ability to pay for health insurance and the likelihood of needing to pay additional £ deductables to augment insurance pay outs to fund private health care bills? Will the party lose voters currently in receipt of PIP? Or is the anti immigration unifying driver so strong it will overcome all all such considerations?

I don’t underestimate Reform UK voters and think they will- or at least a number of them would reflect on such impacts that it will lead to a reduction in the Reform UK voter base. The policy proposals from Reform are shifting further to the right, possibly as a reaction to falling polls plus to compete with Restore biting at the heels of Reform UK vote share- so this is a risk and could back fire.

AI Overview of Reform UK voter demographics

Reform UK voters skew heavily toward older age groups, men, and working-class backgrounds with lower formal educational qualifications. Their base strongly mirrors the demographic profile of the 2016 EU 'Leave' campaign, though recent trends show targeted inroads among younger, economically disillusioned voters via digital platforms.

Age and Gender
Older cohorts Support peaks sharply among voters aged 55 and older, with the highest concentration traditionally found in the 60–69 age bracket- health and social care support needs high.
Gender split Men are significantly more likely to back or consider voting for Reform than women, roughly averaging a 2-to-1 or 3-to-2 ratio across major polls.
Younger exception While older voters dominate, a small sub-segment of younger men ("contrarian youth") engage with the party over economic frustration and social media campaigns.

Education and Social Class
Education level Support drops sharply alongside higher education. Voters whose highest qualification is below A-level heavily favour the party, while university graduates make up a single-digit percentage of the core base.
Working class The party performs strongly among routine, manual, and lower-skilled occupational groups (C2, D, and E social grades), doing substantially worse in affluent, heavily middle-class constituencies.

Political and Economic Outlook
EU Referendum The vast majority voted to leave the European Union in 2016
Motivations Immigration policy serves as the single largest unifying driver for three in five supporters, coupled with deep anti-establishment sentiment and economic anxiety regarding public services and the cost of living.




Cossy

Reform won’t lose my vote as they never had it and never ever will 🤣🤣🥳🥳

Ditto

I know exactly what pip/DLA is Cossy. I also know it can be abused.
To stay on DLA/PIP when a person is totally well imo is just plain wrong.
Same with attendance allowance. I know a lady who’s almost blind, several other serious conditions was knocked back, (finally got it after appealing).
Yet someone else I knew hardly anything wrong got it no problem.

I don’t think reform are the answer
but that system needs a good overhauling imo whoever is in.

Happygirl79

Cossy

Reform won’t lose my vote as they never had it and never ever will 🤣🤣🥳🥳

Ditto

Ditto. But I wonder whether it will lose their usual Reform voters..

Interestingly, when I was a civil servant, and I do have conditions considered disabilities, I worked with many more colleagues who were disabled, and very visibly so, than I ever did in my various private sector job roles, at which I spent 75% of my working life.

It’s quite hard sometimes to persuade companies to take on people with disabilities, despite all the legal protections.

Companies, often wrongly, consider them to be a liability. In the same way, back in the day, some organisations didn’t wish to employ women, because they might “swan off to have children”.

In one particular jobcentre I worked alongside two blind colleagues (one brought her dog in with her), they both had additional software on their computers to be able to speak their notes etc, one deaf person, two people in wheelchairs, all of these were visibly disabled. Then two colleagues I knew well had serious diagnosed mental health disorders. All this in one location.

Sometimes, when seeing claimants claiming to be “too ill too work” it was pretty hard not to point out colleagues and very bluntly say, “if they can work, so can you”.

Think we simply need more resources for helping the disabled to do some form of paid work, even for a few hours each day or week and less stigma among employers to consider employing them in the first instance.

It really should be easier now, with lots of jobs still able to offer hybrid working and I absolutely believe paid work brings with it an entire package of benefits outside of those obvious financial ones.

I agree Cossy. The NHS, Civil Service, public sector organisations are more willing to make reasonable adjustments perhaps? Working can improve health and well being when it give a person purpose and an income.

It would be great to see a government scheme that encourages more private companies, of all sizes, to make reasonable adjustments to support the recruitment of new employees who have a long term condition or disability, perhaps with some type of incentive. It might also prove cost effective in context of reducing welfare bill.

Julie Burchill who I disagree with often is a phenomenal writer.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

The welfare bill is also supporting over a million graduates who are looking for work. Their young lives are blighted by rejection and the need to claim benefits.
It's a disgrace that young fit people who are desperate for work can't get jobs. There is one job for ever 49 applicants last time I checked. Possibly worse now .

I wouldnt support any government that doesn't look at the considerable increase in young people claiming pip, etc - I would think they were negligent.

Galaxy

I wouldnt support any government that doesn't look at the considerable increase in young people claiming pip, etc - I would think they were negligent.

👏👏👏