Lindsay Mitchell has the latest (published) figures from MSD around welfare payments. It's always interesting to look at where around a third of Government expenditure goes. However, what caught my eye was this:
There was a big annual increase in invalid benefit grants (36 percent) and psychological and psychiatric conditions continue to trend up with both invalid and sickness grants. Nearly all of the growth in sickness grants was due to psychological/psychiatric disorders and substance abuse.
36% increase seems an extraordinary leap. Still, perhaps politicians were worried there would be 100% leap if the Green's medical marijuana bill made it through parliament? It was voted down citing that the bill was "too flawed". Based on some of the bills going through recently (s59, EFB, ETS for example), it probably was.
Lindsay Mitchell: MSD releases "latest" figures (to June 30 2008)
There was a big annual increase in invalid benefit grants (36 percent) and psychological and psychiatric conditions continue to trend up with both invalid and sickness grants. Nearly all of the growth in sickness grants was due to psychological/psychiatric disorders and substance abuse.
36% increase seems an extraordinary leap. Still, perhaps politicians were worried there would be 100% leap if the Green's medical marijuana bill made it through parliament? It was voted down citing that the bill was "too flawed". Based on some of the bills going through recently (s59, EFB, ETS for example), it probably was.
Lindsay Mitchell: MSD releases "latest" figures (to June 30 2008)
That 36% jump in 'invalids' is a real concern, especially given how difficult it is for even medical experts to know if a patient is fudging the truth on their illness.
ReplyDeleteAs for substance abuse, surely this is sickness benefit, not invalids? Does their substance abuse render them permanently unable to work? ie a vegetative state? (aaaah, perhaps that was the applicant's state prior to the form being submitted...)
What happened to those media reports about GPs being pressured to certify sickness benefit applicants as 'genuinely sick' when not? Surely that required investigation by the authorities?
Grim.
I wonder if MacDoctor has any experiences to share on being pressured for medical certificates on dubious grounds?
ReplyDelete