Great episode, although I do struggle with the apparent consensus everywhere that Farage comes across as authentic. To me he comes across as a cartoon stereotype of a con man. Possibly the phoneyist person I have ever heard speak

Great show, thanks guys.

The whole 'people want to go to the pub with Farage' really makes me question my connection to humanity. Even without knowing his politics he's one of the last people on Earth I feel like that about. He's so phoney and insincere, and shouts in an affected Hitler mannerism. Visceral disgust in me

I explain more about the incorrect graphic used here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmuf...

Even if (which I don't) think everything else about the conviction was ok, the new claims about breathing tubes contain a mathematical error even in their own terms. No one can say that's a crank or fringe view.
Moritz compared rate per shift, to rate per baby per shift for the comparator.

It's the direct sun as well, not just the temperature in the shade. Hard to find much respite from it when everything is designed for 'loads of natural light'.

It's like when Chrome asks 'do you want to allow replacementbicyclespokes.com to send you notifications?' and I think not just 'obviously no', but 'why are you even passing on this request to me?'

All other benefits, except jobseeking UC, maternity, and pension, are already long abolished. How are you talking about anything else?

People close to Labour seem in absolute denial.

I can't listen to any of this stuff about what Labour are doing without just thinking about how the first thing they are doing is decimating disabled people's incomes, in the same language as Duncan Smith from 2010.
If it goes ahead I never want to hear about any of them again.

If Labour think they can get away with the disability cuts and then just replace the people concerned, I've got news for them. If it goes ahead I will be done with the party for life, under anyone.

A rough measurement suggests the space of the four boxes on the new form combined is about 1/4 the size of the free space on the original. (It's not obvious because of the pizza-area effect.)
You can write in the margins or on another page, but it's a nudge

Of course, an adviser knows to ignore this and write it anyway, here or on another sheet. But not everyone will know...

I might remark that the more specific questions encourage answers that will not be accepted without more. What aids or help you need, how often, will not be sufficient. You need to give the background and anecdotal evidence about daily life as well. The space to do so has gone.

A critic, or cynic, might wonder if this has anything to do with the change now proposed to require 4 points in an activity? I.e. assistance or supervision and not merely aids or prompting.

Reply space has shrunk. The free text box has been split into aids, prompting, and assistance. There is no box for supervision.
The box for aids is far bigger than the one for assistance. On dressing, it is 17 lines compared to 5 for assistance.

Previously the form was more of a free text. In has now gone back to being close to its DLA roots, and asks a number of tedious, detailed questions on each page that are often irrelevant to the condition. But a more subtle change is maybe a more cynical one:

Which means we can virtually guarantee it will be some variation of advice about interview performance. This makes things worse as it raises the bar to getting a job - people without the barriers are better at improving their interviews (whatever that means) and it pushes me further down the list.