Promoting, providing and enabling best practice in mental health service user and carer involvement in Croydon, Lambeth, Lewisham & Southwark and beyond. "A powerful weapon for positive change, engaged in the front lines of extending opportunities, improving services, and transforming lives."
In this edition we reveal that the DWP have resorted to new dirty tricks to cut ESA and PIP numbers. These include alleged mass reporting of ESA claimants for fraud and attempting to change the law by the back door to reduce PIP mobility awards.
We also report claims that the Tories are planning to make mental health treatment mandatory for ESA claimants in the work-related activity group.
Plus we have news of the DVLA look-up service that allows anyone to check online to see if their neighbours are claiming mobility benefits.
JOIN BENEFITS AND WORK NOW AND GET 20% OFF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP – ENDS MIDNIGHT FRIDAY
Improve your chances of getting the benefits you’re entitled to and, at the same time, help us to carry on discovering the truth about what the DWP are up to.
Plus, if you’re not already a member, join the Benefits and Work community before midnight on Friday and you can get 20% off the cost of your annual subscription.
Just type the following code into the coupon box when you pay: 9548
Claimants and carers get an annual subscription for £15.96, down from £19.95. Professionals get an annual subscription for £77.60, down from £97.00.
ESA NEWS: SANCTIONS
In the last newsletter we revealed that ESA sanctions had increased fourfold in the space of a year, up to December 2013 and are particularly targeted at claimants with mental health conditions . Whilst we had no doubt that the reason for this was to cut the cost of ESA we had no evidence to support this.
“She told me how the sick are treated and what harsh targets she is under to push them off benefits. A high proportion on employment and support allowance have mental illnesses or learning difficulties. The department denies there are targets, but she showed me a printed sheet of what are called “spinning plates”, red for missed, green for hit. They just missed their 50.5% target for “off flows”, getting people off ESA. They have been told to “disrupt and upset” them – in other words, bullying. That’s officially described, in Orwellian fashion, as “offering further support” . . . In this manager’s area 16% are “sanctioned” or cut off benefits”
Members can download a detailed guide on how to prevent and overturn ESA sanctions from the ESA section of the members area – it might be a good idea to have a quick look through it in the near future, particularly if you are in the WRAG.
The manager also claimed that:
“Tricks are played: those ending their contributory entitlement to a year on ESA need to fill in a form for income-based ESA. But jobcentres are forbidden to stock those forms. These ill people’s benefits are suddenly stopped without explanation: if they call, they’re told to collect a form from the jobcentre, which doesn’t stock them either.”
Although we have found copies of the ESA3 form online, there does not appear to be a downloadable version of the current form, suggesting that the DWP is indeed making it as hard as possible for people to make a claim.
These targets and tactics come as no surprise. What Toynbee claimed that was new to us, however, was the manager’s allegation that:
“As all ESA claimants approach the target deadline of 65 weeks on benefits – advisers are told to report them all to the fraud department for maximum pressure.”
The idea that all ESA claimants are now being reported to the fraud department when they have claimed for 65 weeks seems preposterous and almost inconceivably discriminatory. Yet the ugly lawlessness that now characterises the DWP’s attempts to cut claimant numbers means that an accusation like this has to be considered seriously.
We are now working to try to establish the truth of this claim – we’ll let you know what we discover.
Meanwhile, we’ve begun compiling a collection of ESA sanction examples taken from various online sources to illustrate how easily, and unfairly, ESA claimants can be sanctioned.
ESA NEWS: MANDATORY TREATMENT FOR WRAG CLAIMANTS
Even more troubling than any of the issues above, however, is the report that the DWP are now considering changing the law to oblige ESA claimants in the work-related activity group with mental health conditions to undertake treatment or have their ESA sanctioned. Reports in the Telegraph claim it will be part of the next Conservative manifesto.
The paper quotes a Tory source as saying they hope to reduce the number of claimants with a mental health condition in the WRAG by 90% with this measure.
We’ll keep you posted about any developments with this shameful idea, which would no doubt involve bargain basement group CBT sessions provided by some multinational outsourcing company. PIP NEWS: MOBILITY GUIDANCE CHANGED
The DWP have also moved the goalposts for PIP mobility to make it much less likely that claimants with mental health conditions such as anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder or agoraphobia will qualify for any award at all if they are able to go out, provided they have somo moved the goalposts for PIP mobility to make it much less likely that claimants with mental health conditions such as anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder or agoraphobia will qualify for any award at all if they are able to go out, provided they have someone with them.
Guidance issued to Atos and Capita at the end of May in the PIP Assessment Guide instructs health professionals that claimants who need accompanying by another person when following the route of a journey, because of a mental health condition, are covered solely by descriptor 11 (b). ‘Needs prompting to be able to undertake any journey to avoid overwhelming psychological distress to the claimant’.
This descriptor scores just 4 points, not enough for an award of PIP mobility to be made.
The higher scoring descriptors 11(d) and 11(f) will not be awarded ‘to claimants who require someone with them for support only, as this is covered by descriptor B. The accompanying person should be actively navigating.’ for these descriptors to apply.
We are now hearing in the forum from people who are being caught out by this changed interpretation of the law.
But the guidance appears to be at odds not only with the actual wording of the regulations, but also with detailed undertakings given by the DWP when they finalised the text of the PIP descriptors.
We have published a written submission in Word format in the PIP appeals section of the members area that anyone affected by these issues can make use of at appeal stage. It sets out the grounds on which we believe the guidance given to assessors is wrong and why relying on the assessment will lead the decision maker to commit an error of law.
Clearly we can’t guarantee that the submission’s conclusions will be accepted by any given tribunal. But they are definitely worth arguing and will at least give you the possibility of appealing to the upper tribunal and getting professional support via the legal aid scheme if you are unsuccessful.
OTHER BENEFITS NEWS: DVLA’S ‘SNOOP ON YOUR NEIGHBOURS’ SERVICE
Just after the last newsletter went out we reported that a new vehicle check service on the DVLA website allows anyone to find out whether their neighbours are receiving the higher rate of the mobility component of disability living allowance (DLA) or either rate of the mobility component of personal independence payment (PIP).
We urged our visitors to complain to DVLA and the information commissioner if they were unhappy with this situation – and it seems that many of you did.
Whilst DVLA refuse to back down, the information commissioner’s office is investigating the issue and has received so many complaints that they are now saying that they are no longer looking at individual concerns and people should watch the DVLA website for news.
Meanwhile, a national expert in data protection has supported our argument that DVLA is breaching the rights of disabled claimants, calling our analysis ‘excellent’ and adding ‘I hope the DVLA will rethink.’
We’ll keep you posted.
MORE NEWS ON THE SITE
As always, there’s lots more news on the site than we have room to cover here, including:
“Hi, just like to say a big, big thank you for all the information and help that I used for my transfer from IB to ESA, I have just received confirmation that I will be in the support group! it has only taken fourteen months! I cried, the stress and added physical strain has taken its toll, but at last I can get on with “normal” life now. Thank you.” JOIN BENEFITS AND WORK NOW AND GET 20% OFF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP – ENDS MIDNIGHT FRIDAY
If you’re not already a member, join the Benefits and Work community before midnight on Friday and you can get 20% off the cost of your annual subscription.
Just type the following code into the coupon box when you pay: 9548
Claimants and carers get an annual subscription for £15.96, down from £19.95. Professionals get an annual subscription for £77.60, down from £97.00.
GOOD NEWS BY EMAIL
In this edition we have more of the feedback we receive by email. We’re now making an effort to publish more of this rather than only feedback from the forum. We are very grateful for your feedback, however you send it, and we know our readers appreciate it too.
IB to ESA Support Group “I just wanted to say that I have at last received my ESA decision from migrating from Incapacity Benefit, after waiting 12 long months. I have been placed in the Support Group without a medical/interview. I am so relieved I can’t tell you. Without your help on this website and the guidance in filing out the horrendous forms or should I say, book! It would have been even more of a nightmare. So many thanks again and I’m sure I will be needing your help again, so keep up the excellent work!” Joanne via email
DLA and ESA success “I just wanted to thank you and your wonderful site for helping me to get DLA high rate mobility and low rate care, and I’ve now been given it indefinitely! Your forms to help fill in the claim pack were invaluable and I recommend that if your thinking of joining this amazing site do not hesitate, it will be money well spent. I have just had my 6 month review for ESA ( it’s been a year since my last one! ) and although I’m in WRAG my adviser didn’t seem to worried about me looking for work. But I am prepared and with using your site I’m sure I won’t have too many problems. This website has been a great help to me and I have renewed my subscription three times! Thank you” Karen via email
SDA to ESA Support Group “Thank you so much for your guides to form-filling which we used when my daughter was switched from SDA.. She is housebound and virtually bedridden with severe ME has just heard that she is in the support group – no medical. It is to be reviewed after 2 years, but we now know where to get help! Renewal of DLA (or will it be PIP by then?) next so we will be needing you again. I’d recommend you to anyone dealing with benefits application forms. Thanks once again” Jill via email
ESA and DLA successes “I have been a member now for over two years and through your wonderful site I have been able to get ESA ( first placed in WRAG then after MR placed in S G for 2 years) for my adult 43 year old autistic daughter, together also with DLA LRC/LRM – indefinite award, although it am aware that this is all about to change in the next couple of years. Just had to find a way to express my sincere thanks to all you wonderful people.” Rosemary via email
ESA Support Group and PIP success “Hi, just to let you know, I have got my sisters latest DWP decisions through and what turn around!! . Firstly her ESA, -she was originally placed in the work activity group. Now she’s been moved to support group, with your help, after appeal. During her visits to work activity sessions, her PA recommended that she apply for PIP. She did, and after a medical, today, she’s been awarded PIP at enhanced rates for care and mobility 14 points in each!!!.which took only 3 months. Without the help of myself and BENEFITS AND WORK this simply would not have happened , she’s now a subscriber like myself. Many thanks” George via email
PIP award and ESA Support Group “Just like to say a big thank you, for all the advice and support you’ve provided. I am now in receipt of pip and esa support after waiting and struggling for 8 months to get it. The advice on your pages was invaluable. thank you.” Amy via email
ESA Support Group and DLA success “I would just like to say thank you for all your advice and information on your website, I read it all and followed the advice and was told today that after my ATOS assessment that I have been put into the support group until 2016 and also advised to ask for a review of my DLA award which is at the moment the low rate. I don’t think I would have had the confidence to go to the assessment if it hadn’t been for all the encouragement and advice. Thank you once again”
And an update:
“Just to say thanks again, if it weren’t for your website I would not have felt confident in asking for my DLA to be looked at again. I have now been awarded the highest rate both in mobility and care, so thank you all for the help and information on your site, without your site I don’t think I would have asked for a reconsideration” Angela via email
DLA renewal award “You’re not going to believe this great news! Not only did I get my DLA renewed at the same rate (thanks to your website’s brilliant how-to booklets) but they sent me the award letter on the SAME DAY that they received my application form! I hardly dared believe it but I’ve checked my bank account and the first payment has gone in this week. Thanks for all your help and support, I wouldn’t have got this DLA without the help of B&W.” Sarah via email
Successful DLA Appeal “My wife and I wished to advise you with the information supplied by your wonderful site we have recently won our Tribunal with the DWP who seemed fit to bring a case against us. We went armed to the teeth with information we downloaded from your site and it is without question the judge could see we were well prepared and agreed with the case we put forward and found the award in our favour. So a huge thank you to you and your team, as my wife and I feel that without your advice and assistance maybe the outcome may have been very different.”
Henry via email
ESA Support Group without a medical “I was familiar with form filling but the found the ESA50 form overwhelmingly bizarre. The design of the layout and questions asked was obvious in putting the customer at a disadvantage in fully explaining their condition. It was only with your guides that I was able to navigate the pitfalls, recording the details that were needed to fully assess my circumstances. After all my worrying, I have just had notification that I do not have to undergo the torture of an ATOS assessment and have been placed directly into the Support Group. I cannot thank you enough in helping me “survive” this turmoil. I hate to think what I would have had to go through without your guidance. Thanks again”
Steven via email
PIP success “Hi All, I wanted to thank you for this wonderful site – without which I don’t know where I’d be. I read through all of your advice, even printing a lot of it off. Using this as my trusty guide I completed an application for PIP. This was in September 2013. I was finally invited to an ATOS Assessment in December 2013. I duly attended, after reading your information on this aspect of claiming. Invaluable. I’d have been lost and a lot more apprehensive without it. I am now eligible for PIP and full component awarded. I would NOT have managed to keep going without the help I found within Benefits and Work. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart. I am 100% positive that without your website I would not have been successful in my claim.”
Leanne via email
ESA Support Group without a medical “Hi, I just wanted to thank you for your simple to follow guidance. We’ve just heard that our son has put into the ESA support group without a medical. I’m pretty confident that your help made this possible.”
Diane via email
IB to ESA Support Group “Received a phone call from DWP last week saying I will be changing from IB to Support group from next month. (no mention of a medical) I have been waiting for almost 8 months for some contact, so had been dreading the daily post all that time! I can now relax and stop worrying. I found the forms daunting and without the guidance from B&W I would have struggled immensely. A massive thank you!”
Mary via email
DLA renewal success “I cannot thank this site enough. I was given DLA at Lower rate mobility and High rate of care for 18 months and it was due for renewal in August. I received the form and carefully followed your advice. I posted the form off and within five days of sending it off, I received the great news that I would be given DLA at the same rates but the length of time had changed to indefinite. All thanks to this web site. Wonderful. Thank you so much” Michael via email
Please see below contents of this week’s news from a subscription site: Benefits and Work Publishing Ltd. Details of how to subscribe are within the body of what follows.
In this edition we warn you that, in an effort to cut benefits costs, employment and support allowance (ESA) claimants are being subjected to a massively increased sanctions regime that deliberately targets the most vulnerable.
Sanctions, primarily aimed at claimants in the work-related activity group (WRAG) who are on the work programme, have quadrupled in the course of a year. They have increased from 1,102 a month in December 2012 to 4,789 a month in December 2013, the most recent date figures are available for.
Yet over the same period the number of ESA claimants being moved onto the work programme dropped by 43% a month and the number of claimants in the WRAG rose by just 21% in total.
62% of those sanctioned have mental health conditions or learning difficulties, although only 50% of claimants in the WRAG have these conditions.
It is hard to imagine a more cynical and discriminatory project, which appears to be intended to cut ESA costs whatever the human suffering involved might be.
‘THE BEST POSSIBLE WAYS TO PREVENT AND OVERTURN ESA SANCTIONS.’
Since getting the statistics on the huge rise in ESA sanctions we have spent the last few days, creating a detailed guide to ‘The best possible ways to prevent and overturn ESA sanctions.’ – which is why this newsletter is a little on the short side, at least by our standards.
Our 30 page guide takes you through:
Quick tips to reduce the chances of a sanction
What to do if you are threatened with a sanction or actually sanctioned
How to explain the ways your condition affects you
Explaining your ‘good cause’ for not carrying out a mandatory activity
Making a written complaint to JCP and work programme providers
Complaining to your MP
Using the mandatory reconsideration and appeal process
Suing the DWP and work programme providers
Applying for a hardship payment
Applying to be placed in the support group
The guide, based in part on JSA sanctions information we have already published, includes sample letters and forms specific to ESA as well as lots of hints and tips to prevent you being seen as an easy target by work programme providers and Jobcentre Plus staff.
It will help you to avoid getting sanctioned in the first place. But if you do get threatened with a sanction, or actually sanctioned, it will take you through a range of responses from a formal complaint, to an appeal and even suing the organisations who are targeting you.
Recent statistics show that almost 90% of appeals against sanctions are successful, whilst legal insiders tell us that the DWP almost always settles discrimination claims before they get anywhere near a court. So fighting back is definitely worthwhile.
Yet a Citizens Advice Scotland report on sanctions released yesterday reveals that “many people who are hit by a sanction are not told the reason for it, or how to appeal against it” and that “many people are forced into poverty and ill health, often having to rely on foodbanks as their benefit payments are stopped.”
JOIN BENEFITS AND WORK NOW AND GET 20% OFF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP – ENDS MIDNIGHT FRIDAY
Improve your chances of getting the benefits you’re entitled to and, at the same time, help us to carry on discovering the truth about what the DWP are up to.
Plus, if you’re not already a member, join the Benefits and Work community before midnight on Friday and you can get 20% off the cost of your annual subscription.
Just type the following code into the coupon box when you pay: 5732
Claimants and carers get an annual subscription for £15.96, down from £19.95. Professionals get an annual subscription for £77.60, down from £97.00.
ESA NEWS
Still on the subject of sanctions, this summer, CABs across Scotland are raising the issue of benefit sanctions. The ‘Challenge It’ campaign aims to raise awareness of the right to appeal against sanctions. All CABs in Scotland have been issued with ‘Challenge It’ postcards and mini-cards, offering tips both on how to avoid being sanctioned and what to do if you are.
Meanwhile, the BBC has obtained DWP internal memos which says that ESA is worse than incapacity benefit at helping people back into work and now poses one of the biggest financial risks faced by the government. The memos also imply that the jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) sanctions regime is partly to blame for the rising number of ESA claimants.
PIP AND DLA NEWS
The public accounts committee has issued a damning report on the introduction of personal independence payment. Margaret Hodge, chair of the committee, has called PIP a ‘fiasco’ which has ‘let down some of the most vulnerable people in our society’.
In its report, the committee states that the Department’s failure to pilot the scheme has caused unnecessary distress for claimants who have been unable to access the support they need to live, and in some cases work, independently and describes the personal stories they heard as ‘shocking’.
Mr Gray has issued a call for evidence aimed at organisations and individuals who have information that is relevant to how the PIP assessment is operating, both for new claims and Disability Living Allowance (DLA) reassessment claims.
OTHER BENEFITS NEWS
Iain Duncan Smith’s latest effort to prevent the publication of documents warning of the dangers of universal credit has been dismissed by a judge.
The judge has ordered the release of documents about the progress of universal credit, an assessment of independent reviews and a record of problems with it.
The DWP insisted publication would have a “chilling effect” on the working of the department, though in reality the chilling effect on IDS’s reputation is probably the main reason for the refusal to publish the documents. Unfortunately IDS can probably drag the legal process out for years yet or simply use his ministerial veto to stop publication.
CAMPAIGN NEWS
An estimated 50,000 people marched from the BBC’s New Broadcasting House in central London to Westminster in protest at austerity measures introduced by the coalition government. The demonstrators gathered before the Houses of Parliament, where they were addressed by speakers, including comedians Russell Brand and Mark Steel. The event received remarkably little press coverage, however.
Members of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) pitched tents and said they intended to occupy the green outside the doors of one of Westminster’s most recognisable landmarks until 22 July. A huge police presence and heavy-handed tactics ensured that the protest was brought to an end, however.
Again, the protest received remarkably little media attention.
Which makes it rather ironic that the BBC has announced that it hopes to increase awareness of disability issues with a number of on-air and digital projects after hiring its first disability correspondent, Nikki Fox.
“We want to look into how the cuts to benefits are affecting people with disabilities and how the changes to the education system may impact children with disabilities,” said Fox, who will work alongside three broadcast journalists in Salford dedicated to disability issues.
Which sounds like a very good idea. As there is more than one Nikki Fox journalist we’ve published Nikki’s twitter account details to make sure you can help keep her informed about what is actually going on.
“Thank you Benefits & Work! I’ve never heard from DWP since sending in ESA50 in March. They phoned today about something else so I asked when would hear – apparently I was assessed in April & put in Support Group until April 2016.
“Devastatingly (!) that means I’ll never get to meet ATOS as, with the help of your guides, that makes 4 years in support group without ever being called for a medical. (Plus a 5yr high care/low mob DLA award in 2011 til 2016, again without a medical).
“I keep recommending you to other people – your guides are so helpful – particularly, I think, as I have fluctuating/non-visible mental health issues, for which the medicals have been a farce, so understanding how to explain on form has been a godsend.
“Thank you. Tamsin”
MORE NEWS ON THE SITE
There’s lots more news on the site than we have room for in this newsletter, including:
Please keep your good news coming – it’s needed now more than ever.
PIP been awarded at last! “…got my letter on Saturday from the DWP…I have been given enhanced daily living component…my husband and I would like to thank you for your excellent guides that helped us at the medical and gain the money. The best subs I have ever spent Thank from the bottom of my heart.”
ESA mandatory reconsideration success “Have had the phone call, after a Mandatory Reconsideration I have successfully been moved from wrag to Support group..Many thanks to B & W. I could not have achieved this without you knowledge and guidance.”
Support Group success “My husband has once again been placed in the Support, only this time it’s for 3 years. Could we both take this opportunity to thank everyone who has offered help and pointing us in the right direction because without it, we would certainly have not been able to construct our answers properly. Good luck to you all, and once again thank you B&W”
Mandatory Recon overturned their decision “The dwp rang me this morning and have over turned their WRAG decision and have agreed to put me in the support group! Thank you so much to everyone on benefits and work for your help! It has been invaluable and I couldn’t have done it without you all. You have been a rock to my wife and I!”
ESA result after 12 months “Hi, I’ve eventually got the dreaded brown envelope through letterbox after waiting 12 months for my ESA decision from migration from Incapacity benefit. I couldn’t believe it when I read that I’ve been placed in the Support group and WITHOUT having to attend a medical! The relief is immense after a year of worry and stress so thank you for all the help and advice on here.”
Thank you! This site is a lifeline! “I hope this helps other users… After 18 months…. I finally won my DLA claim for HRM, and LRC at appeal after previously being turned down… I was in utter despair. This is where B&W came in… I found your site while confined to bed, feeling utterly miserable and having bad thoughts but from that day I never looked back. Thank you so much for the work you do. You have no idea how much you help people if we don’t let you know. I was at my wits end and you were like Angels that lifted a weight off my shoulders. You really must read the guidelines on this site; I knew instantly where I’d gone wrong. Good Luck all with your claims, and use this site it truly is a life saver! Thank you B&W for giving me my life back.”
ESA support group success “just had a call from DWP saying that my daughter has just been awarded ESA and is in the support group, and that its being backdated to last february 2013, we didnt even need to go for a medical assessment”
JOIN BENEFITS AND WORK NOW AND GET 20% OFF ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP – ENDS MIDNIGHT FRIDAY
Improve your chances of getting the benefits you’re entitled to and, at the same time, help us to carry on discovering the truth about what the DWP are up to.
Plus, if you’re not already a member, join the Benefits and Work community before midnight on Friday and you can get 20% off the cost of your annual subscription.
Just type the following code into the coupon box when you pay: 5732
Claimants and carers get an annual subscription for £15.96, down from £19.95. Professionals get an annual subscription for £77.60, down from £97.00.
And do remember: you’re welcome to republish part or all of this newsletter, provided you credit Benefits and Work
Good luck,
Steve Donnison, Sangeeta Enright and Karen Sharpe
The Office Team
Benefits and Work Publishing Ltd
Company registration No. 5962666
The £1.2bn Work Programme, the government’s flagship welfare to work scheme, needs to be broken up in the face of figures showing that as little as 5% of unemployed people on the main disability benefit are finding a job through it, a thinktank will propose this week.
The proposal is one of a series from the Institute for Public Policy Research in its Condition of Britain report, to be published on Thursday, including a proposal for a “daddy month” – four weeks’ paternity leave on the minimum wage, a plan that would cost the taxpayer £150m. More than 400,000 working fathers a year would benefit.
The thinktank’s report, the product of two years’ research, is due to be launched by Ed Miliband. It will look at the social and economic problems facing the country and cover areas such as welfare, housing, childcare and improvements to social care, as well as handing more power to local councils.
The current legal entitlement for working fathers is paid at a flat rate of £138.18 a week – equivalent to just £3.45 an hour for a 40-hour working week, little more than half the minimum wage. The IPPR proposes that the statutory paternity leave entitlement should not only be extended but should be paid at least the national minimum wage, with employers also encouraged to bridge the gap between the statutory rate and the father’s actual pay.
Only 55% of fathers take the full two weeks off work when their child is born and a third do not take any of their statutory leave. Most say this is because they cannot afford to.
On the Work Programme, the report concludes that the scheme is especially failing mentally ill people, and the task of helping those on employment support allowance – the main disability benefit – to find work should be devolved to local authorities, with councils recouping some of the possible savings from the Department for Work and Pensions.
However, the report says private contractors should be left to find jobs for the mainstream long-term unemployed using a modified version of the current system of payments by results.
It says: “The Work Programme, while delivering acceptable results for the mainstream job seekers, is letting down those furthest from the labour market. Whilst one in five mainstream job seekers will find work through the Work Programme as few as one in 20 of those furthest from the labour market will.”
It also says those in areas of highest unemployment are receiving the least effective help.
It adds the “DWP has carved up the country between providers without any accountability to citizens or regard to local labour market conditions. Therefore for those out of work the system represents a postcode lottery in which success is determined not by individual effort but by geography.”
The report also says the government should offer a guaranteed six month minimum job paid at the minimum wage or above to anyone who has been unemployed and claiming job seekers allowance for more than 12 consecutive months.
The report will also set out plans to freeze child benefit to help fund a new network of children’s centres and extra free childcare, although it is understood that Miliband will reject this proposal.
The inquiry will consider the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) Access to Work programme (AtW).
Background
AtW is designed to help long-term disabled people to start a new job, or remain in employment, with practical support which goes beyond the “reasonable adjustments” which employers are required to make by law.
AtW grants can cover, or go towards, a range of practical solutions to problems faced by disabled people in the workplace—for example, adaptations to equipment; taxis to work for those who cannot use public transport; and support workers. The programme helped around 31,000 people in 2012/13.
In 2011 the coalition Government commissioned Liz Sayce to conduct an independent review of employment support for disabled people. The Sayce review highlighted the effectiveness of AtW but found a lack of awareness about the programme, particularly amongst smaller employers and people with mental health conditions and learning disabilities. Liz Sayce recommended that DWP “transform [AtW] from Government’s best-kept secret to a recognised passport to successful employment”.
The Government has since taken some steps to increase the reach of AtW, for example through increased marketing of the scheme to employers, and extending it to cover a broader range of work experience, traineeship and apprenticeship placements.
Terms of reference for the inquiry
Submissions of no more than 3,000 words are invited from interested organisations and individuals.
The Committee is particularly interested in:
The AtW application and assessment processes, from the perspectives of employees and employers;
The adequacy of ongoing support, both in terms of the aids, adaptations and support workers provided through AtW, and the help and advice offered by DWP;
The effectiveness of AtW in supporting people with mental health conditions and learning disabilities;
AtW’s effectiveness in terms of helping disabled people to:
Secure a job;
Stay in employment; and
Develop their careers; and
The steps taken so far by DWP to extend AtW, including itsmarketing and funding of the scheme.
Submissions do not need to address all of these points.
The deadline for submitting evidence is Friday 20 June.
How to submit your evidence To encourage paperless working and maximise efficiency, select committees are now using a new web portal for online submission of written evidence. The web portal is available on our website.
The personal information you supply will be processed in accordance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 for the purposes of attributing the evidence you submit and contacting you as necessary in connection with its processing.
Each submission should:
be no more than 3,000 words in length
be in Word format with as little use of colour or logos as possible
have numbered paragraphs
If you need to send a paper copy please send it to: The Clerk, Work and Pensions Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA
Material already published elsewhere should not form the basis of a submission, but may be referred to within a proposed memorandum, in which case a web link to the published work should be included.
Once submitted, evidence is the property of the Committee. It is the Committee’s decision whether or not to accept a submission as formal written evidence.
The Committee normally, though not always, chooses to make public the written evidence it receives, by publishing it on the internet (where it will be searchable), or by making it available through the Parliamentary Archives. If there is any information you believe to be sensitive you should highlight it and explain what harm you believe would result from its disclosure. The Committee will take this into account in deciding whether to publish or further disclose the evidence.
Select Committees are unable to investigate individual cases.
The deadline for submitting evidence is Friday 20 June.
How to submit your evidence
To encourage paperless working and maximise efficiency, select committees are now using a new web portal for online submission of written evidence. The web portal is available on our website.
The personal information you supply will be processed in accordance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 for the purposes of attributing the evidence you submit and contacting you as necessary in connection with its processing.
Each submission should:
be no more than 3,000 words in length
be in Word format with as little use of colour or logos as possible
have numbered paragraphs
If you need to send a paper copy please send it to: The Clerk, Work and Pensions Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA
Material already published elsewhere should not form the basis of a submission, but may be referred to within a proposed memorandum, in which case a web link to the published work should be included.
Once submitted, evidence is the property of the Committee. It is the Committee’s decision whether or not to accept a submission as formal written evidence.
The Committee normally, though not always, chooses to make public the written evidence it receives, by publishing it on the internet (where it will be searchable), or by making it available through the Parliamentary Archives. If there is any information you believe to be sensitive you should highlight it and explain what harm you believe would result from its disclosure. The Committee will take this into account in deciding whether to publish or further disclose the evidence.
Select Committees are unable to investigate individual cases.
Further guidance on submitting evidence to Select Committees is available on the parliamentary website ( PDF 2.46 MB).
Matthew Mckenzie attended this very informative meeting.
He has done great audio and video blogs as well as taking some photos.
There were presentations from Active Minds and Employment Support — a new service. Kam Patel: Personal Independence Payment — replacing DLA (Disability Living Allowance). Croydon Discretionary Scheme (CDS), Replacing social funding e.g. crisis loans and Access to Work with Special Guest Mary Dunleavy, Q and A session on PIP.
The audio and video blogs contain a huge amount of information on benefits, access to work, PIP payments and more! They are well worth a watch or a listen.
PIP should be a national scandal: Iain Duncan Smith’s new system already has a huge backlog and people are dying waiting
‘The PIP catastrophe is just the most extreme of Duncan Smith’s disasters. Nothing – not one of his programmes – has worked as planned.’
She calls it: “Heartbreaking, truly astonishing, I’ve never seen anything like this.” Emma Cross is a senior Macmillan Cancer Support benefits adviser, and she says delays in Iain Duncan Smith’s new personal independence payments (PIP) leave the sick utterly destitute. “Does anyone know how many people are struggling?”
Macmillan’s mountain of PIP cases includes a mother being treated with chemotherapy for bowel cancer, whose operation left her with a colostomy bag. She gave up work and, with no other family to help, her husband gave up his job to care for her and their two-year-old child, taking her to frequent hospital appointments. They claimed PIP last September – and they have heard nothing since. No-one answers queries, lost in the gigantic backlog.
Until registered for PIP, which pays from £21-£134 a week, they can’t claim other crucial benefits: carers allowance, severe disability premium, escape from the bedroom tax, a bus pass, taxi cards to get to hospital, or a heating grant (she feels intensely cold). With credit cards maxed out, they have no idea what they’re due as PIP has tougher criteria: if this woman can just about walk more than 20 metres, she may get nothing now for mobility. Macmillan says people in this backlog are missing chemo appointments for lack of a bus fare.
“I wish this couple were an exception,” says Emma Cross. “But this is happening to so many.”
PIP replaces the disability living allowance, which Duncan Smith cut by 20% and abolished for new claimants; old claimants are being moved over. It used to pay out quickly, but PIP is an administrative calamity. The public accounts committee (PAC) queried why Atos won the contract to run it with its record of failure: Sue Marsh’s latest Spartacus report says 43% of appeals against DWP decisions based on Atos tests for employment support allowance are upheld. Margaret Hodge, the PAC chair, unearthed Atos’s tender for the PIP contract and found it had been “grossly misleading”, pretending to have hundreds of test centres inside hospitals, when in reality it had very few.
After he appeared on the Andrew Marr show this week, I challenged Duncan Smith over the PIP backlog. He waved it away airily. Oh, it’ll all be sorted by the autumn, he claimed. Nothing to worry about. That’s highly unlikely – but if so, why not pay claimants the old DLA until it’s fixed? Why should sick people pay the price for his maladministration? He batted away the idea with a shrug.
This is exceptionally monstrous, as Macmillan say people have died waiting. The 5% of cases dealt with as priority under “special rules” are those with a doctor’s letter certifying they’ll die within six months. Macmillan says it’s hard to know when people will die – six months or two years. Doctors rightly can’t write such a letter for someone who hasn’t asked for a specific death date. People need the money right now, regardless of the ghoulish prognosis demanded by DWP.
Labour’s Rachel Reeves and her team have been protesting, but the PIP story hasn’t become a national scandal. Why not? They say, glumly, that only the Mirror and the Guardian are interested, the rest turn away. Google PIP and you get myriad stories on breast implants. This reflects how much more tribal the rightwing press has become. The Guardian, as did I, covered Labour’s failings in power. The PIP saga is a “good” story. Where – yet again – is BBC news, which should be following the DWP with laser-accurate analysis?
Forget civil service factual information: Duncan Smith has just hired a Murdoch managing editor from the Sun and Sunday Times as DWP communications director. Perhaps he helps hone Duncan Smith’s terminological inexactitudes.
On Sunday’s programme IDS claimed, again, that his bedroom tax simply followed Labour’s rules on restricting the number of bedrooms claimable on housing benefit in the private sector. Not so, says the House of Commons library, it was the Tories in 1989 who cut the number of eligible bedrooms – and only for new rentals, never turfing people out of homes they already occupied.
The PIP catastrophe is just the most extreme of Duncan Smith’s disasters. Nothing – not one of his programmes – has worked as planned. It hardly matters that universal credit (UC) is years late, but last month the PAC demonstrated UC will never do what Duncan Smith claims, its work incentives shot to pieces. With council tax, housing benefit cuts and national insurance, many on UC will lose almost all ofevery extra pound earned, while most lose 65p or more. The very rich down tools over a loss of 50p in the pound. At first, it might have been ignorance, but now IDS knows his claims for UC are untrue.
After IDS’s most recent interview on the Today programme with Evan Davis, the Child Poverty Action Group analysed his facts. Will he meet his child poverty targets? “I believe we will”, Duncan Smith replies. “But you’re not on target to do that.” “I believe we will.” “So frustrating!” exclaims Davis. Duncan Smith makes this claim: “Since I’ve been in power we’ve seen child poverty fall by 300,000.” He knows that’s just from the first year when Labour’s increase in child tax credits kicked in: since then, it’s all downhill.
Duncan Smith likes to mislead on the relative measure of poverty: “Actually upper incomes fell, so the idea of a relative income measure doesn’t make any sense.” But relative poverty has nothing to do with what happens to top incomes. It’s measured against the median – the middle point, not an average nor the top. Stupidity or duplicity? Take your choice.
“The last Labour government spent £175bn in tax credits chasing a poverty target they failed to meet,” he said. But that was over 11 years and it did hit two-thirds of the target, while IDS plunges ever downwards.
If your eyes glazed over, that’s what he counts on. Bamboozling voters who don’t have graphs to hand is how he gets away with it. When challenged, he resorts to “I believe I’m right”. But the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Royal Statistical Society and scores of experts stopped him moving his goalposts. The IFS predicts he’ll put 300,000 more children into poverty by next year, up nearly a million by 2020. In 2011 IDS claimed his was “the party of the poor” – that’s a promise he has kept. Of all his calamities, PIP is probably the worst.
• This article was amended on 11 April 2014. The earlier version said incorrectly that “Atos, the firm contracted to deliver it [PIP], has walked away”. Atos’s contract to deliver PIP is to continue as planned; it is Atos’s separate contract to administer work capability assessments (WCAs), used to determine qualification for employment and support allowance, from which the company has announced it will be exiting early. The article also referred to “appeals against Atos tests”. To clarify: the appeals are against DWP decisions based on WCAs.
Critics argue that proposal in leaked document from Department for Work and Pensions would hit poorest people in the country
People who have been stripped of benefits could be charged by the government for trying to appeal against the decision to an independent judge.
Critics said the proposal, contained in an internal Department for Work and Pensions document leaked to the Guardian, would hit some of the poorest people in Britain, who have been left with little or no income.
In the document about the department’s internal finances, officials say the “introduction of a charge for people making appeals against [DWP] decisions to social security tribunals” would raise money.
Other ideas include selling off child support debt to “the private sector to collect”, though civil servants remark that the government would be unlikely to raise more than 5-7p in the pound from the £1.4bn currently owed to the DWP. The department currently collects arrears.
Earlier this week figures showed that in the past year nearly 900,000 people have had their benefits stopped, the highest figure for any 12-month period since jobseeker’s allowance was introduced in 1996. In recent months, however, 58% of those who wanted to overturn DWP sanction decisions in independent tribunals have been successful. Before 2010, the success rate of appeals was 20% or less.
One welfare legal adviser said the number of appeals being lodged at independent tribunals would be decimated if the government introduced a charge.
Last year the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) which sets policy in the area,brought in charges for employment tribunalsof up to £250 to lodge a claim, depending on the kind of case being brought. The union Unisonasked judges to review the policy, saying the number of claims had dropped by more than half after fees were introduced. High court judges declared the policy lawful this month.
In the DWP Efficiency Review, which is marked “restricted”, it says the proposal for charging for social security tribunals is already “under investigation” by the MoJ and officials “intend to revisit it” in the wake of the Unison court challenge decision.
However, the 80-page document points out, the policy will “entail no revenue generation nor efficiency for the [DWP] per se” but will however generate income for the justice department.
The policy proposal leak comes as the prime minister and senior religious leaders clash over the benefits system. In a letter to the Daily Mirror, 27 Anglican bishops blamed David Cameron for creating a “national crisis” in which hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to survive on the charity of food banks because of “punitive sanctions” and other DWP failures. It followed similar criticisms from Vincent Nichols, the highest ranking Catholic in England and Wales, that the government was stripping away the welfare safety net – a charge dismissed as “an exaggeration” by Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister.
The justice minister Shailesh Vara said: “The government has made clear that reducing the deficit is our top priority. It is right that the Ministry of Justice looks at all opportunities to bring down the cost of our services to the taxpayer.
“We believe that it is right to consider whether those who use tribunals should make a greater contribution to their costs, where they can afford to do so, which is why we introduced fees for employment tribunals last year.
“We will continue to keep the position under review, but we have no current plans to extend fee charging into other tribunals.”
Rachel Reeves, shadow work and pensions secretary, said: “When government’s own figures show a staggering 58% of appeals against Department for Work and Pensions decisions to dock jobseeker’s allowance are upheld, it’s clear the system is broken. Rather than penalising thousands of people by charging them to appeal, ministers need to ask why they are presiding over a broken system which is making so many bad decisions, which are overturned on appeal.”
Steve Winyard, head of policy and campaigns at the Royal National Institute of Blind People, which is threatening the DWP with legal action over sanction failures, said: “Every week RNIB receives complaints about DWP failing to provide correspondence and other benefits information in Braille or other accessible formats.
“As a result, these people are at direct risk of sanction and a number have had the benefits they rely on to live withdrawn. To now say that these individuals will not even be able to appeal the inaccurate DWP decision without paying for it is a disgrace, It’s a ‘computer says no’ approach that locks people out and leaves some with no help whatsoever, many becoming reliant on food banks as a result.”
Neil Bateman, a long-serving welfare rights lawyer, also described the policy idea as a disgrace. He said: “Stopping people from challenging bad decisions actually strikes at the heart of our democratic arrangement.” He said many of the people he had successfully represented over the years at tribunals would not have got justice if they had been made to pay a fee and that even £5 would be too high a charge for them.
Bateman said that from his experience, a very high proportion of appeals were caused by mistakes and poor-quality decision-making by the DWP. He said this had risen in recent years because the department had got rid of experienced DWP decision-makers, social security law had become more complex and attitudes had changed.
“Under this government there is an attitudinal issue in terms of evidence of increased DWP staff antipathy towards clients and that all results in decisions which are wrong which eventually get turned over at appeal,” Bateman said.
It is understood that the Department for Work and Pensions is exploring the possibility of replacing the WCA with a streamlined system, based upon written medical evidence acquired from claimants, their GP’s and consultants.
Critics of the face-to-face interviews argue that scrapping the WCA would lead to a speeding up of the process, fairer outcomes for sick and disabled people and savings for taxpayers, due to less appeals being lodged against negative decisions.
At long last, it now appears as if the DWP may agree. A spokesperson for the department told the Daily Record:
“Expediting the process will reduce the uncertainty faced by claimants, improve outcomes for those not eligible for employment and support allowance and reduce the consequent burden on taxpayers.”
The move comes after private firm Atos withdrew from a £500 million contract with the DWP, forcing the government to seek a new provider. The DWP continue to insist that the contract was terminated by the government.
Labour MP Tom Greatrex said:
“The WCA process hasn’t worked for years and the Government have failed to address it.
“The experience is demeaning, causes anxiety and 40 per cent of the tests are overturned on appeal which demonstrates it’s not fair or accurate.”
The demeaning ‘fitness for work’ work test for disabled people should be scrapped, PCS says following publication of an independent review.
The work capability assessment is not designed to support people into employment, but to cut their benefit entitlement, the union says.
Last week the appeal court upheld a ruling that the tests discriminate against claimants with mental health problems, learning disabilities and autism.
The government has failed to implement all the recommendations in the first three independent reviews into the WCA.
The fact that this fourth review, published today (12), contains 37 recommendations – including some basic things such as allowing claimants to see what is being written about them – shows how flawed the test is.
The union’s view – shared by the TUC, the British Medical Association, a range of disabled people’s organisations and more than 120 MPs – is that the assessments are not fit for purpose and should be scrapped.
There is mounting anecdotal evidence showing people are being found “fit for work” so denied employment and support allowance and put onto jobseeker’s allowance. They are then denied that because they are not able to start work or meet the conditionality requirements of JSA.
Sanctions for disabled people claiming ESA have increased by 156% in the last year.
PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “No one joined the employment service to administer a system designed to harass people and take benefits away.
“Our members want to support people into work and claim the benefits to which they are entitled. But, consistent with the government’s approach to social security, these tests are not designed to help people and they should be scrapped.”
Today Iain Duncan Smith is being questioned by the Commons work and pensions committee on universal credit, after finally admitting last week that the scheme’s targets had been “reset”. Last week, the petition calling for a cumulative impact assessment of the way welfare reform affects sick and disabled people, known as the WOW petition, passed 100,000 signatures, triggering its consideration for debate by the backbench business committee. To add to Duncan Smith’s woes, the well-respected Centre for Welfare Reform has released details of its report, How Norms Become Targets, which exposes the myth that Atos, the private company responsible for assessing the needs of people unable to work, does not do so on the basis of targets.
Today also sees the publication of the stunning People’s Review of the Work Capability Assessment (pdf). It has been compiled by the anonymous organisation, We Are Spartacus, whose activism in this area has been hugely empowering. The report is a collection of statistics surrounding welfare reform and reactions of MPs, charities and professional groups to the way in which it has been administered. An almanac of condemnation, if you will. Most importantly, the report compiles statements from sick and disabled people actually going through the system.
These are most encouraging developments and point to a sea-change in the way our democracy works in this internet age. There is no doubt that without extensive use of the internet and social media, the compilation of such a detailed report would have been impossible and its publication unnoticed. For too long, this group of most vulnerable people, many of them with serious health and mobility problems, have been too easy a target for cost-cutting governments of all hues to demonise, recalibrate and victimise. This is no longer the case. Vulnerable people have grabbed the issue by the scruff of the neck and are taking the fight to the government. It is inspirational and points the way to a level of democratisation hitherto unseen.
I encourage you to read the report. It is packed with striking statistics and heartrending stories, in the words of people being put through this inhuman and degrading assessment. It contains the stories of those who can no longer speak, having taken their own lives or succumbed to their illness, while being hounded by the very department which is meant to protect them, people like Peter whose leg fused as a result of injury and, having suffered a stroke which meant he couldn’t grip with one hand, received a text telling him to attend the Jobcentre. He sent his partner a text which read “I give up”. He was found hanging at his home.
It contains incredibly powerful quotes which show that dissatisfaction with Atos is spread across MPs of all parties. Dr Sarah Wollaston, the Conservative MP, said of the assessment procedure: “Not surprisingly, it adds to their [claimants] sense of worthlessness – already stoked by a longstanding political narrative from both sides of the political divide that they are ‘shirkers, not workers’ or a drain on Britain’s ‘hardworking people’. They are neither.”
It contains tragic and often simultaneously humorous stories of ridiculous assessment reports, like the one on a 59-year-old woman who had had a hysterectomy following cervical cancer, which observed: “There is no evidence that the client is currently pregnant.” Or the one which concluded that someone who took an overdose of medication the previous night had “no current thoughts of self harm”.
This programme of welfare reform was always doomed to fail for a very simple reason. The purpose of welfare is to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable; its reform must have their interests at heart, rather than cost-cutting targets. Proper reform costs money. Duncan Smith himself recognised this simple fact before he came into power. In 2009, explaining his proposed reforms, he recognised that they would lead to a rise in the welfare bill in the short-term.
Iain Duncan Smith’s fall from grace, because of a botched IT system which has already caused £140m to be written off, is properly a cause of both frustration and comedy – like Al Capone being arrested for tax evasion. But I must ask, we all must ask: how many of the vulnerable people mentioned in the Spartacus report would still be alive today if that money has been properly spent?
The fitness-for-work test used to determine whether hundreds of thousands of disabled people are eligible to claim sickness benefits puts people with learning difficulties, mental health problems and autism at a disadvantage, the court of appeal has found, upholding an earlier ruling that had been challenged by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
Three charities – Rethink Mental Illness, Mind and the National Autistic Society – welcomed the judgment and called for the government to stop using the “flawed assessment” immediately until this problem was fixed.
“The judges in the original ruling independently confirmed what our members and supporters have been saying for years – the system is unfair for some of the most vulnerable people in our society and is failing the very people it is meant to be supporting,” the three charities said in a statement after the ruling on Wednesday.
“It’s fantastic that the court of appeal has upheld this judgment … It would be irresponsible for the DWP to carry on using these flawed assessments as they are. They must halt the mass reassessment of people receiving incapacity benefit immediately, until the process is fixed.”
Two anonymous claimants initiated a judicial review into the fairness of the work capability assessment (WCA) earlier this year; this review will continue unless the government launches a further appeal.
The DWP said “significant improvements” were being made to WCA and that the court’s decision would not trigger a pause in assessments.
“It is a complicated judgment on an appeal against an interim judgment by the upper tribunal, with no effect on day-to-day business, which continues as usual,” a spokesman said.
We told you a few days ago that we were carrying out an investigation into whether those with mental health issues were less likely to win an ESA appeal than people appealing a decision solely on the grounds of having a physical disability.
We are somewhat surprised to find out that the former were more likely to win than the later – 41% compared to 38%.
These figures were obtained by the mental health charity MIND and forwarded to the Welfare News Service.
South London Involvement Forum 