Welfare benefits and employment

‘This is an idea I suggested to the Work and Pensions Select Committee many moons ago which was actually completely redesigning the levels within what was DLA and is now PIP.  One of the problems that we highlighted at the time when they brought in just two levels of PIP. Now the excuse for doing it was fatuous… ‘It’s confusing!’ well it wasn’t confusing to any of us! But it said instead of 3 levels of care we only have to have 2.  This system channels you down one of two levels, it’s a very binary system that you either fit in this or you fit in that. Disability doesn’t work like that at all.  

My suggestion at the time (I’m talking about 11 years ago) was that there should be more levels. And that you’d have things in a similar way that proxy activities in a similar way that they add up but are if we had five levels of care and three levels of mobility then we can start adding in additional criteria. It won’t be as clear to some people but it would be clear to disabled people that I got four points this I got 8 points for that etc and it added up. That’s the idea but that it adds up into better defined benefit levels because people are put into only two levels where there isn’t any nuance there and nobody is exactly in those two levels. It should be much more nuanced and it should be much more about real life experiences and real life need.  When I did the maths on it the actual figures showed a small degree of savings but what it did show was the opportunity to be more honest. For now, if you were only one point off the higher level the temptation to exaggerate is quite considerable. If everyone’s striving for 12 points but are only getting 10 or 11 they might be looking for those extra points and everyone has that fear of not making the 12 points and I think we need to remove that. We’ve forced people into this competitive and hostile environment. If we asked people ‘what do you think your level would be on this list of criteria, and then we allow people to self-assess into the right level. That only works if we use multiple levels.  

‘So that was one of the ideas and it wouldn’t need these massive levels of assessment so people whose medical evidence supports what they’ve written so it would be a much more abridged version. It would also make people feel confident that they had been honest and given what they then deserve. 

‘I’d also like to talk about the disability employment gap.  It’s a bit of a swizz. It’s done as far as I’m aware by the Office for National Statistics, where people actually self identify as having a disability. It counts in people who are ill and not necessarily of a disability that’s able and stable for work. So what you’re counting is people who can’t work and then putting them in an employment gap bigger which is a distortion these people aren’t unemployed because of their disability they may be unemployed because their far too ill to work. That really needs redefining.  

‘I have a young friend who has a learning disability he would love to have a job. He’s strong as an ox! He’s keen to work but can’t get a job. He really is in the gap because he’s employable he’s just not getting employed. Somebody else who is ill can get caught up in that employment gap figure and that’s a distortion. we need clarity of who is being counted and why. ‘ 

 ‘I think one of the things that we really need to look at as well we need some sort of system in place where dishonesty in the system can actually be tackled properly. I personally had an experience of a completely dishonest assessment. I’ve had somebody contact me this week. She had just been given six months to live due to cancer and she had her PIP assessment and they turned her down- she got nothing.  The system in place it’s just not fit purpose’ 

 ‘Interesting to hear that. I’m the research lead for the preventable harm project which I led for 10 years. This conversation seems to be mainly about PIP but we need to go back to the beginning and start with the Work Capability Assessment. These assessments are a form of disability denial which was adopted by the government a long time ago. They’ve been influenced by the second worst insurance company in America who helped design these systems. The Work Capability Assessment is based on the biopsychosocial model of assessment which was influenced by corporate America since 1992. It has failed all academic assessments which DWP totally disregard. The Work Capability assessment is dangerous and it should be removed and in the past the Labour Party has promised to remove the WCA if they get into office- and so they should because they brought it in. It’s about time somebody took some responsibility for this nightmare. It has been going on for a long time. The work capability assessment always was dangerous because it’s not there to help anyone- it’s there to prevent as many people as possible gaining access to long term disability benefit. Whilst others may want to talk about PIP I think we need to talk about the Work Capability Assessment much more because the Work Capability Assessment is a killer. There’s a 2014 NHS report that was never published which exposed that 50% of ESA applicants had attempted suicide- the DWP didn’t make anything of that but to disregard it. Any system that forces ill people to the point where they need to consider taking their own life is clearly fatally flawed and I don’t hear any serious suggestions about how bad this system is.’ 

 ‘I just wanted to say pre-2014, the previous labour administration when they brought it in. It did use clinical documents from the doctors.  I didn’t have an issue with that.  It’s things like recently – I had somebody come and tell me I can use stairs because I have an adapted ground floor flat. There are no stairs here. It’s those sorts of lies. But previous to 2010 the assessments were working. My parents both went through that assessment and it did work for them. It’s the way this is being done now, as I said the denial of disabled people, and that’s exactly what the tories have been doing.’ 

  ‘Just to touch on the reform of the assessment process- the process is an important part of moving to a paper-based system as they are doing in Scotland. It can be really positive, but the eligibility is really important. You can’t get away from that, even if you have the nicest assessment processor in the world, it doesn’t really matter how nicely you ask someone if they can walk 20 metres if they can’t walk twenty metres, you’re going to get the same answer. The other thing to think about is supporting lifetime awards, so if you’ve got a progressive lifelong condition, you’re not getting better and there’s no reason that if you’re already receiving the enhanced rate of support, that you should have to undergo another assessment.’ 

 ‘For me, it’s about finances. I couldn’t afford to go to college. Pre-2010, I got my benefits and an extra few quid on top to go to college and study science. Now, that’s not possible.  There’s the cost of going to college, there’s assessors denying disabled people the finances they need to get about. When you apply for bus passes etc, the councils are very picky about it. A personal example: I’m on a mobility scooter and PIP assessed me on my mental health- I can’t get a bus pass as a result. I can get a blue badge fine, but as I don’t drive, there’s no point. There are so many barriers that prevent us even retraining, let alone getting out to work. I mentioned to my local MP that I’d like to be a councillor, but that I do suffer sometimes with agoraphobia, rather than try and say to me, ‘right there’s hybridisation and you can do it’, his response was just ‘how are you going to do that if you can’t leave the house?’ It really knocked my aspirations. People need to understand that we want to get out into work, we just need something put there so that we can get out there.’ 

 ‘Is the 64 billion the DWP says they spend on disability benefits the actual cost of PIP DLA and ESA that are being paid out or does this figure have a lot of hidden costs? There used to be the 50 billion figure and we managed to get a break down of it and we discovered it was only 23 billion and the rest was payments to councils, for care etc. It wasn’t a fair representation. I’d be interested to know what that 64 billion is including.’  

 ‘My difficulty is the evidence is given is very selective. They will say what they want you to hear, they will found figures and talk about billions but when you break it down, they are exaggerating greatly most of the time. They will never answer a direct question. I wouldn’t go to the DWP for figures.’ 

 ‘More of a statement- the way this government are run, they seem to think throwing money around works. Every time they’re asked a question it’s a figure not an action. I’d much rather hear about actions rather than how much they’ve spent. Money doesn’t tell you a thing.’ 

 ‘I’m just looking at the figures, it looks like they spent 15.4 billion on ESA in 2017-18 and around 60% of those people were in receipt of DLA or PIP. It gives you info about the employment gap. The irksome thing about the 64 billion, is that it doesn’t come close. It’s carers allowance, housing benefits, not just disability benefits. It also includes the costs of assessments. It may be people in work or people not claiming. We all know the 64 billion isn’t true.’ 

 ‘How can Labour regain trust from the disabled community? It starts with an apology. The Labour government brought in the work capability assessment , it might be helpful if you say at the time, subsequent labour administrations had no idea that the model was disability denial. But you need to start where the fault lies. The disabled community will never forget that it was Labour who brought in the WCA, it has caused untold damage to millions of people and the deaths keep on rising and nobody is accrediting them to anybody. If you want to gain trust, be honest and tell them that the research commissioned by Blair was influenced by corporate America and no one knew it would do so much damage.’ 

 ‘I just want to support what’s been said. Some research the organisation I work for did provide that £100 in the pocket of a non-disabled person is only worth about £68 to a disabled person. So I think it is important that the party should try to support people into work and make the workplace more accessible to others.’ 

 ‘Just on reasonable adjustments- if you go to an interview nowadays and you’re not already in employment, and you need an adjustment, you will not get that job. That’s just how it is. Unless you’ve got your foot in the door, you’re out on your ear. They’ll find a way around discrimination. But that’s how it’s been for 7/8 years that I know of.’