Minister misleads MPs over plans to remove ‘fitness for work’ safety net
Work and pensions secretary Mel Stride has misled MPs about new plans to slash spending on out-of-work disability benefits by removing a vital safety net that protects those at risk of suicide.
The plans, released by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) on Tuesday – and now subject to public consultation – will make it harder for disabled people to be eligible for out-of-work benefits without facing the risk of sanctions.
As part of those plans, the government is considering removing guidance that has acted as a safety net for disabled people with significant mental distress for nearly 30 years.
DWP and its predecessor, the Department of Social Security (DSS), have repeatedly attempted to weaken and even scrap the guidance over the last three decades.
The guidance states that a disabled claimant should be found eligible for the highest rate of support if work or work-related activity would create a “substantial risk” to their health.
The measure has particularly protected those currently sectioned under the Mental Health Act, with active thoughts of suicide, or who had a recent episode of self-harm that needed medical attention.
It has meant anyone facing such a risk is found to have limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA) and does not have to carry out work-related activity or face potential sanctions if they fail to do so.
But one option in the consultation published this week is to “remove the LCWRA risk criteria entirely”, which would force disabled claimants previously protected by the guidance to undergo “tailored work-related activity” with “appropriate support”.
Stride failed to tell fellow MPs this week that his department has been trying to weaken or remove this “substantial risk” clause for the last three decades.
The Deaths by Welfare timeline*, published in draft form last year, shows how the Conservative-run DSS wrongly told its own social security advisers in 1996 that removing the “substantial risk” rules would have no detrimental effect on disabled claimants.
DWP was later forced to reinstate the clause after the Court of Appeal found that removing it had been unlawful.
DWP tried again to remove the clause in 2003, under a Labour government, but withdrew its proposals after objections from the social security advisory committee.
The government eventually managed to weaken the protection in 2015, telling the private contractors who carry out the assessments, in its WCA handbook, that the three indicators of mental distress “might” only give rise to a substantial risk in “exceptional circumstances” and that they should weigh “the benefits of employment” against any risk.
That change led to the proportion of claimants being placed in the support group of employment and support allowance (ESA) dropping by two-fifths in just three months.
There had been years of campaigning by disabled activists, particularly Black Triangle, to alert the medical profession to the existence of the “substantial risk” protection.
But Stride failed to tell MPs this week that the government weakened the protection in 2015 and claimed instead that the “original intention for substantial risk was for it to be advised only in exceptional circumstances”.
The “exceptional circumstances” part of the protection was only added to guidance by DWP in 2015, in an attempt to cut spending on out-of-work disability benefits.
Stride claimed: “It was intended to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable, but the application of risk has gone beyond the original intent.”
He told MPs that any change to the WCA would not be introduced until after the next general election in 2025.
John McArdle, co-founder of Black Triangle, highlighted the importance of the “substantial risk” clause in a speech to the UN committee on the rights of persons with disabilities in Geneva last month.
The committee was hearing evidence on the government’s progress in implementing recommendations made in a report in 2016 which found it guilty of “grave and systematic” violations of the convention, with most of those breaches caused by policies introduced by DWP ministers.
McArdle said in his speech that the government was intent on removing the “substantial risk” clause by scrapping the WCA, a move announced earlier this year, which he said would be “a full-frontal assault on our disability rights and an abrogation and repudiation” of the convention.
He told Disability News Service yesterday (Wednesday) that the new plans were “horrifying”, as the clause was just as important as it was a decade ago.
He said: “To put disabled people’s lives in such predicament would be to strip them of their rights under the convention.
“People don’t need to be bullied and tyrannised into work. There are ways to help people without holding a big club over their head.”
He said he had originally campaigned to raise awareness of the substantial risk clause a decade ago because the regulation was “the only thing that was preventing hundreds of thousands of people being thrown to the dogs”.
DWP refused to say why Stride did not tell MPs about the 2015 change to guidance, and why he claimed the guidance was originally intended to be used only in “exceptional circumstances”.
It also refused to say if Stride was aware that the department had been trying to remove the “substantial risk” rules since 1996.
*Disability News Service editor John Pring is co-creator of the timeline
7 September 2023
‘Fitness for work’ test changes are ‘horrendously dangerous’, activists warn
Disabled activists have raised serious concerns about “cynical” and “horrendously dangerous” government attempts to introduce new cuts to spending on out-of-work disability benefits by tightening its “fitness for work” test.
The plans announced by work and pensions secretary Mel Stride could see the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) no longer taking any account of whether a disabled person has a mobility impairment when deciding if they are fit for work or work-related activity through a work capability assessment (WCA).
Ministers are also suggesting removing the absence of bowel or bladder control, the inability to cope with social interaction, and the inability to access a location outside the claimant’s home, from the list of activities and “descriptors” used in the WCA.
Stride argued this week that the “rise in flexible working and homeworking” provided “new opportunities for disabled people to manage their conditions in a more familiar and accessible environment”.
He is also considering removing protective guidance which states that a claimant should be found eligible for the highest rate of support – with no conditions or potential sanctions – if work or work-related activity would create a substantial risk to their health (see separate story).
Disabled People Against Cuts today (Thursday) promised that it would “fight back against this new atrocity with everything we have”, and said: “DPAC know how much fear this has caused amongst disabled benefit recipients.”
Stride claimed in a speech to MPs that his plans – due to be introduced from 2025 – were about ensuring that “those who can work are given the right support and opportunities to move off benefits and towards the job market”.
But the DWP press release highlighted the real-terms increase in spending on “incapacity benefits” from £15.9 billion in 2013-14 to £25.9 billion this year, a rise of 62 per cent.
Stride told MPs that the proportion of disabled people “being given the highest level of award and deemed to have no work-related requirements at all” had risen from 21 per cent in 2011 to 65 per cent last year.
But he did not tell MPs that the early 2010s saw the beginning of years of activism and research that exposed the links between the WCA and the deaths of disabled claimants, eventually forcing DWP ministers to ease the harshness of the assessment and make it easier to qualify for the ESA support group and avoid work-related conditions.
DWP claims in this week’s consultation document that the WCA had not changed significantly in the last decade, with a press release describing the proposals as “its first significant update since 2011”.
In fact, as the then minister for disabled people, Justin Tomlinson, told MPs in 2020, the government “commissioned five independent reviews” of the WCA from 2010 to 2014 and “implemented more than 100” of their recommendations.
The new plans follow months of attacks on disabled people on out-of-work benefits in the media.
This led to disabled activists from the National Union of Journalists – backed overwhelmingly by fellow union activists – calling for the press regulator to strengthen its code of practice, following news stories published by papers including the Telegraph which had “demonised” disabled people who cannot work.
The broadcaster Jeremy Vine faced calls to issue a personal apology after a member of his team published a social media post in his name that asked if it was time to “crack down” on sick and disabled people on out-of-work benefits.
The hostile articles continued this week, with Daily Mail columnist Andrew Pierce attacking “an army of shirkers” who he said were claiming “sickness benefits which British taxpayers are footing the bill for”.
In another article, the Mail quoted a “senior government source” saying they believed that only a million of the 2.4 million people currently receiving universal credit or ESA and not expected to carry out any work-related activity were “so disabled they are incapable of doing any work”.
The Mail headlined the article: “One million on sickness benefits will have to find a job.”
It echoes a hugely controversial interview given by DWP adviser David (later Lord) Freud to the Daily Telegraph in 2007, in which he claimed that fewer than a third of the 2.7 million people claiming incapacity benefit were “legitimate claimants”, a claim that was comprehensively discredited.
Stride has already announced plans to scrap the WCA after the next election, which will see eligibility for the extra payment for those currently assessed as having limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA) awarded instead to anyone who receives both universal credit and personal independence payment (PIP).
This would mean eligibility for a new “health element” of universal credit being decided through the PIP assessment, and it could see more than half a million disabled people losing out financially.
This week’s plans to tighten the WCA are now being put out to a public consultation, which will end on 30 October.
Ellen Clifford, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts and author of The War on Disabled People, said she believed the plans to scrap the WCA were a key reason the government refused to appear before the UN committee on the rights of person with disabilities last month.
The committee was hearing evidence on how the UK government has implemented recommendations made in a report in 2016 which found it guilty of “grave and systematic” violations of the convention, with most of those breaches caused by policies introduced by DWP ministers.
Clifford said she believed the idea behind the WCA reforms was to force workers into filling vacancies “for all the ‘bad jobs’ with pay too low to make a living from and insecure hours”.
She said ministers had “ignored the major safeguarding concerns” raised by DPOs and charities, and that disabled activists feared the proposals would be brought in whichever party – Labour or Conservative – wins the next election.
She said: “They are effectively getting rid of out-of-work benefits for disabled people and denying the realities and prevalence of disability to do it, at the same time ramping up sanctions which are proven to discriminate against disabled job-seekers.
“It is horrendously dangerous.”
Disability Rights UK said the proposed reforms were a “cynical” attempt to cut benefits and impose conditions on disabled people.
Ken Butler, DR UK’s welfare and benefits adviser, said: “The government’s proposed changes to the work capability assessment are less to do with helping disabled people into work than a cynical attempt to impose conditionality and to reduce benefit payments.
“The consultation proposals include excluding consideration of someone’s mobility problems altogether, and also removing the assessment category of work having a substantial risk to health.
“This means that disabled people may be forced to work beyond their capabilities.
“Help and support can be offered to disabled people to get us into work without work capability changes, conditionality and sanctions.
“The carrot always works far better than the stick. Disabled people are not scroungers, skivers and work avoiders, as this policy appears to indicate.”
John McArdle, co-founder of Black Triangle, said the government’s proposals were “a cynical attempt to cut the budget” with no apparent thought to the impact on sick and disabled people.
He said: “They are trying to make it so that everybody is subject to conditionality, both those out of work and in work.
“Sanctions don’t work. The government’s own evidence shows that sanctions don’t work.
“It’s not going to do much more than tyrannise people and make more people destitute and homeless.”
He said the reason more disabled people were found not fit for work and placed in the ESA support group after the early 2010s was that DWP began to realise the “dangerous and precarious situation” they were being placed in by the WCA.
Public health experts from Liverpool and Oxford Universities showed in a study in 2015 that the process to reassess claimants on old-style incapacity benefit through the WCA from 2010 to 2013 was “associated with” an extra 590 suicides across England.
A DWP spokesperson refused to say if the department had carried out any health-related research into the reasons for the increase in disabled people being found to have LCWRA.
7 September 2023
Autistic man to receive £20,000 from NHS after refusal of job interview adjustments
An autistic man will receive £20,000 compensation after a “discriminatory” refusal to make the reasonable adjustments he requested for a job interview with the government agency responsible for NHS digital technology.
Chris Tyerman applied in August 2021 for posts in cyber security with NHS Digital but after being shortlisted for the job was told that some of the adjustments he needed to be made ahead of an interview were not possible.
As he struggles with communication, among his requests were to be able to see the questions he would be asked in advance, and for his interviewers to avoid open-ended questions.
But NHS Digital – which became part of NHS England earlier this year, but described itself at the time as a Disability Confident employer – rejected these requests, arguing that all applicants had to be treated the same, a clear breach of the Equality Act.
His request to have a skills assessment or work trial was also rejected.
Tyerman, from Barnsley, has several long-term health conditions as a result of treatment for lymphoma as a child, and has a masters degree in computing information security and forensics.
When NHS Digital rejected his requests, he decided not to attend the interview because he felt its efforts were paying “lip service” to the need to make adjustments.
He also decided that if NHS Digital was not willing to offer reasonable adjustments in the interview, it would not provide the adjustments he would need to do the job.
NHS Digital later claimed that employment and security checks meant a work trial would be “prohibitive”, while providing questions three days before the interview would not be a reasonable adjustment, and avoiding open-ended questions would be “unreasonable”.
Tyerman applied a second time for a position, as a cyber security adviser, in October 2021.
This time, a telephone interview took place, but there were further problems with securing the reasonable adjustments he needed, including a refusal to avoid asking open-ended questions, which led to him being unsuccessful with his application.
When he finally received feedback on his failure to secure the position, he was told his answers to the open-ended questions “were not strong/in depth enough”.
Tyerman believes NHS Digital’s actions were discriminatory under the Equality Act, as well as breaching the NHS Constitution for England and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
After NHS Digital failed to provide a “positive response” to his complaint about his treatment, he took his case to an employment tribunal.
During the tribunal process, NHS Digital requested a medical report to confirm his autism diagnosis, despite having seen a report from a clinical psychologist who had already diagnosed him, and Tyerman receiving support from an autism service funded by his local council.
A settlement in the case was reached after a conciliation process led by Acas.
But it was only after a 16-month legal battle that NHS England offered a £20,000 payment as compensation for injury to feelings, although it failed to admit liability.
It has also agreed to accept Tyerman’s feedback as part of its review of how it deals with reasonable adjustments for disabled staff members and job applicants.
Tyerman welcomed the settlement by NHS England and said he felt “vindicated”, but he described the initial “aggressive” defence by NHS Digital as “destructive, inappropriate and a waste of NHS resources”.
He said: “The adjustments I asked for were reasonable and I hope that the outcome will encourage a more positive attitude to recruiting neurodiverse people.”
He told Disability News Service: “I believe that more autistic individuals would be able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills effectively if the NHS was more flexible in its job application processes.
“For example, rephrasing the question when the answer given isn’t the one that was expected.
“Autistic people find it much more difficult to correctly identify exactly what a question is asking than those without neurodiversity.”
He added: “I would like to thank my family who supported me. I wouldn’t have been able
to take this case without them.”
An NHS England spokesperson said it would “not be appropriate” to comment on individual cases.
But she said: “The NHS is committed to providing reasonable adjustments for candidates and staff with long-term conditions, impairments, disabilities, and caring responsibilities with feedback from candidates used to review and improve policy.
“The annual Workforce Disability Equality Standard report published this week shows important progress is being made with record numbers of disabled staff members on NHS boards.”
Those new figures from NHS England show that only 72.2 per cent of disabled staff reported they had all the adjustments they needed to perform their duties in 2021, a fall from 76.6 per cent in 2020.
The annual report on NHS England’s progress on workplace disability equality also found that 17 per cent of disabled staff experienced harassment, bullying or abuse from managers, compared with 9.6 per cent of non-disabled staff.
7 September 2023
Scottish government reopens Independent Living Fund after ‘human catastrophe’ warning
Disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) have welcomed the Scottish government’s decision to open the Independent Living Fund (ILF) to new claimants for the first time since 2010*.
The decision by Scotland’s new first minister, Humza Yousaf – which will only affect disabled people in Scotland – was announced on Tuesday as part of his first Programme for Government.
It came a day after seven Scottish DPOs** wrote to the first minister, calling on him to prioritise disabled people and “reset” his relationship with them.
They warned in the letter that disabled people in Scotland were facing “a human and social catastrophe” and that “successive policies have not only failed to tackle disabled people’s poverty, inequalities and poorer life outcomes” but had widened them.
They said that a “lack of focus and attention, combined with no accountability or political leadership and a genuine gap in disability competence politically and in your Government” had led to disabled people and DPOs feeling “dehumanised and deprioritised”.
They also told Yousaf: “As Scotland’s leading DPOs we urge you to intervene, using your leadership to stop more disabled people dying and instead create conditions which enable officials to focus on disabled people’s equalities cross Government.”
The DPOs have been working with the Scottish government for six months on an Immediate Priorities Plan, and Yousaf’s programme confirmed on Tuesday that the government was working with DPOs to implement the plan, which would recognise “the disproportionate impact the cost of living crisis and the pandemic has had on this group, setting out clear actions for change”.
But Scottish DPOs that signed the letter stressed this week that these actions now needed to be resourced, measured and monitored.
Tressa Burke, chief executive of Glasgow Disability Alliance (GDA), said her organisation was “absolutely thrilled” by the decision on ILF Scotland, which helps disabled people with high support needs to live independently.
Yousaf referenced a visit last month to GDA in his speech to the Scottish parliament, telling MSPs that the “very moving testimony” of GDA’s Purple Poncho Players had helped persuade him to open ILF Scotland to new claimants next year, with an initial investment of £9 million.
Burke said: “We feel as though we have been heard. He has listened and he has acted.
“There is no better demonstration that he has acted on lived experience than reopening the ILF.
“That is an absolute win, it is a re-setting of the relationship that DPOs have with the Scottish government.”
She also welcomed the commitment to the Immediate Priorities Plan in the Programme for Government.
But she said: “The really important thing that’s missing from it is we need resources and we need measurable actions. That is incredibly important.
“The real devil will be in the detail: can we get actions that are resourced and that are measurable and can we set up a government structure with political oversight and disabled people’s involvement through the DPO movement in Scotland.”
She said there needed to be action across government on “disability equality competence” – understanding the barriers disabled people face and how to overcome them, while all policies – such as those on child poverty, welfare rights and employment – needed to be accessible to disabled people.
Lyn Pornaro, chief executive of Disability Equality Scotland, which also signed the letter, said it had been “a welcome change to have disabled people mentioned specifically in the Programme for Government for the next year.
“It was also encouraging to hear the commitment to re-opening the Independent Living Fund Scotland.”
But she said the government had also committed to ending social care charges, and that had not yet happened.
She said: “As DPOs we have been working with Scottish government around the Immediate Priorities Plan and therefore welcome the finalising and publishing of this.
“However, it has been stressed over and over that this plan, and the wider Disability Equality Strategy, needs proper resourcing.
“For our members, and all Deaf and disabled people across Scotland, we hope that the first minister and his government take their commitments fully and act quickly to reduce the ongoing disparity between us and non-disabled people.
“For too long, disabled people have had their human rights systemically eroded, been discriminated against, and been ignored.”
Bill Scott, senior policy advisor for Inclusion Scotland, another of the DPOs to sign the letter, said the ILF announcement was “very much welcomed”, as was the pledge to increase the Scottish child payment in line with inflation, as families including disabled children or disabled parents are more likely to qualify.
But he said the depth of disabled people’s poverty in Scotland was “now endangering their lives”.
He said: “Both the Scottish and UK governments need to do much more to provide targeted financial support to disabled people to help them cope with the cost-of-living crisis.”
He added: “The real issue is that changing laws is one thing but making housing, transport, health, education and other services more accessible to disabled people is another.
“That will cost money and there’s no mention of extra funding for that in the Programme for Government.”
Responding to the DPO letter – before Yousaf announced his Programme for Government – a Scottish government spokesperson said: “The Scottish government remains committed to advancing equality for disabled people, who we recognise are disproportionately impacted by the UK government’s welfare cuts and current cost-of-living crisis.
“We are working closely with disabled people’s organisations to develop actions that combat the effects the crisis continues to have on disabled people’s lives.”
*The Independent Living Fund has been closed to new applicants since 2010. It closed completely across the UK in June 2015, but the Scottish government established ILF Scotland, which provides funding for former ILF recipients through the Scottish government, and administers funding for former recipients from Northern Ireland
**Disability Equality Scotland, Glasgow Centre for Inclusive Living, Glasgow Disability Alliance, Inclusion Scotland, Lothian Centre for Inclusive Living, People First Scotland and Self-Directed Support Scotland
7 September 2023
Ministers yet to draw up any power cut protection plans, 11 months on
The government is still considering whether it needs to draw up plans to protect disabled people who rely on life-saving medical equipment in their own homes if there are power cuts, 11 months after it was warned about possible winter blackouts.
National Grid ESO, which controls the flow of energy around Britain, warned in early October 2022 that there could be periods when it needed to order “interruptions” to customers’ electricity supply for “short periods”.
Since that warning, Disability News Service (DNS) has been trying to secure information from the government on how it proposed to protect those in England who rely on equipment such as ventilators and dialysis machines in the event of major winter power cuts.
As a result of the government’s continuing refusal to release that information, DNS complained to the information commissioner, which launched an investigation into the failure of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to release any plans it had drawn up.
DNS had also asked for a copy of any guidance sent out to the NHS in England to help trusts prepare for the protection of people who rely on medical equipment at home.
Following the intervention of the Information Commissioner’s Office, DHSC has now admitted it is still considering its “policy position” on whether it should issue any guidance, and it is therefore withholding the information because its internal paper is “incomplete”.
It has told DNS: “DHSC is still in the process of determining the department’s policy position on whether guidance should be issued specifically on the matter of the use of at-home medical devices during a power outage.
“The document is an internal scoping paper that is being used to record information gathered during the policy exercise and to identify options for potential action by the department and its arms-length bodies.
“This activity continues and the document remains in draft.”
DHSC has also clarified this position by admitting that it did not send any guidance to the NHS last winter to help trusts protect disabled people who rely on medical equipment at home.
It said: “DHSC did not send any guidance to NHS bodies that specifically covered those who rely on medical equipment at home, such as ventilators or dialysis machines.”
The information commissioner ruled yesterday (Wednesday) that DHSC did not have to release the scoping paper because the document was “unfinished”, although it pointed out that the government’s “thinking” on the issue should “arguably” have been “at a more complete stage” by the time DNS submitted its freedom of information request in late April.
Alan Benson, a leading disabled campaigner, particularly on accessible transport, relies on a collection of vital equipment at home, including a day-time and a night-time ventilator, two powered wheelchairs, and an electric hoist, while he also needs to stay warm for health reasons.
He said: “After 11 months we discover government are still deciding whether to make a decision and withholding information despite acknowledging the public interest to release it.
“This Kafkaesque situation leaves disabled people like me, who rely on electricity supplies for the very air we breathe, entering another winter of uncertainty.
“I fear we will only see action when power fails and the situation becomes critical, by which time it may be too late.”
7 September 2023
Disabled people’s trust in PIP assessments is ‘severely lacking’, says Tory MP
A Conservative MP has told his own government that disabled people’s trust in the disability benefits assessment process is “severely lacking”.
Elliot Colburn was introducing a debate on three parliamentary petitions that between them have been backed by tens of thousands of disabled people and allies, each of which focused on flaws in the assessment process.
He told MPs on Monday that it was “absolutely time for reform and change” and that personal independence payment (PIP) claimants saw the assessment system as “confrontational and judgmental”.
He highlighted one case in which a disabled person with a mobility impairment was found ineligible for PIP after being assessed by a dental hygienist.
Colburn repeated the call that has been made repeatedly over the last decade for claimants’ doctors and medical specialists to “play a more central role” in the early stages of a disability benefit application.
Labour’s Sir Stephen Timms, chair of the Commons work and pensions committee, said it was “absolutely clear” that PIP assessments “are not working well”, and he called on the government to accept more of the recommendations made in his committee’s report on disability assessments, which was published in April.
Among the recommendations that were not accepted was the committee’s call for all assessments to be recorded, unless the claimant opts out.
Sir Stephen said: “We will get to the bottom of why [something “fundamental” is wrong with the system] only if assessments are routinely recorded, so that when things go wrong it is possible to look at what actually happened in the assessment and try to learn from the errors to get things right in future.”
The SNP’s David Linden, a member of the work and pensions committee, said the government’s approach to assessments was both “ineffective” and “inhumane”, and “favours evidence provided by the assessor rather than the claimant”.
He said the system also “operates on the presumption of scepticism” and “perpetuates a cycle of despair and frustration”.
Marion Fellows, his party’s disability spokesperson, compared PIP assessments with the system introduced by the Scottish government for its adult disability payment (ADP).
She said ADP had been designed in partnership with disabled people, which has been “crucial to designing an improved service that is very different from the DWP’s system”.
She said the ADP system was “starting from a position of trust”, with the Scottish government assuming that disabled people are applying “because they need it, not because they are trying to con somebody in the system”.
And, she said, it had “removed the burden from individuals to provide supporting information, so the onus will instead be on Social Security Scotland to collect the information it requires.
“The Scottish government have put an end to the anxiety of undignified physical and mental assessments, to private sector involvement and to the stressful cycle of unnecessary reassessments.”
Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, said PIP claimants were facing “difficult, stressful and sometimes humiliating assessments, followed by weeks or months of uncertainty as they await the outcome”, while many face even more “stress and uncertainty” as they appeal unfair decisions.
She said: “Many of the disabled people I have spoken to during my time in this role have told me that they live in fear of the government reducing or taking away their benefits.”
She added: “If we are to restore trust in the DWP and create a system that is fit for purpose, we must work closely with disabled people.
“They can tell us what changes, big or small, could make the process easier and less humiliating for claimants.”
Tom Pursglove, the minister for disabled people, described some of the improvements the government was introducing to the PIP assessment process.
They include matching specialist assessors to claimants’ primary health conditions, while most assessments are now carried out by telephone “to alleviate some of the stress associated with travelling to and attending observational assessment”.
And he said DWP decision-makers now have more time to “proactively” contact claimants “if they think additional evidence may support the claim”.
He said DWP’s Health Transformation Programme would “create a more efficient service and a vastly improved claimant experience, including speedier management of claims and improved trust in our services and decisions”.
The programme is also introducing the option of applying for PIP online and being able to upload medical information digitally.
Some claimants can already apply online, and he said DWP plans to make this available across England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2024.
Pursglove said the average length of the end-to-end journey for new PIP claims had fallen from 26 weeks in August 2021 to 13 weeks in April 2023.
7 September 2023
Government refuses to reveal equality impact of ticket office closures
The government has refused to release its own analysis of how the proposed closure of nearly 1,000 rail ticket offices will impact on disabled people and other groups protected under the Equality Act.
On the day before the end of a consultation into the proposed closure of most ticket offices in England, the Department for Transport (DfT) rejected a request from disabled campaigners to see its equality impact assessment (EIA).
Although the assessments carried out by the 13 individual train companies have been released (see separate story), the government’s assessment of the overall impact of the closures has not been made available.
The disabled-led campaigning organisation Transport for All (TfA) had asked to see this assessment through a freedom of information request.
But DfT denied the request and said that an EIA might still be used to “formulate” a government policy decision on ticket office closures, if passenger watchdogs object to any of the proposed closures and train companies decide to ignore those objections.
It claimed that its ministers and officials “need a safe space away from public scrutiny” to develop their policy, while train companies need to be confident that they can share information “in an environment which suitably encourages free and frank discussion without fear that information will be prematurely released to the public”.
But TfA said it was “unacceptable that the general public has been denied access to the Government’s own programme-wide assessment and analysis of the proposals, information that could have aided in shaping responses to the consultation”.
TfA has asked the government to reconsider its decision not to release the equality impact assessment, arguing that DfT had “deprived the public of vital information that would have shaped their responses” and that it was “overwhelmingly in the public interest for us to have a full account of what the accessibility implications of these plans are on a system wide level”.
It added: “It is only the Government who continue to try and evade scrutiny. We can only speculate what it is they might be trying to hide.”
Baroness Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said last week that the equality watchdog was “particularly disappointed that the Department for Transport has not yet shown us or published an equality impact assessment on their proposals”.
TfA has previously shown that the proposed closures would have a “disastrous” impact on disabled rail passengers.
It has described how the details within proposals published by the train operating companies “completely contradict” pledges they have made around access to support for disabled passengers, staffing levels, ticket sales, and the treatment of rail staff.
And it has concluded that the proposed closures “will make it impossible for disabled people to access the support we need to travel by rail”.
There were more than 680,000 responses to the consultation by the time it closed on Friday (1 September).
Transport Focus and London TravelWatch will now examine these responses and the closure proposals before responding to the train operators by 31 October.
The train companies can then refer their proposals to transport secretary Mark Harper if they disagree with the conclusions of the two watchdogs.
7 September 2023
Train company assessments provide fresh evidence of ticket office closure concerns
Documents published by train companies show how their plans to close hundreds of ticket offices across England will risk the safety of disabled passengers and make it harder for them to obtain assistance and buy tickets.
Information contained in equality impact assessments (EIAs) released by the 13 companies shows scores of concerns about the impact of the closures on disabled people and other groups protected by the Equality Act.
The assessments were released as part of a major consultation into the proposed closures, which ended on Friday (1 September).
All 13 companies have now released EIAs and while some have provided a detailed and thorough description of the potential impact of the proposals, others – such as LNER (PDF) and Southeastern (PDF) – appear to have dismissed or ignored many of the potential impacts.
Among the companies that have provided detailed EIAs was Northern (PDF), which warned that the lack of staff presence could “increase personal security and safety concerns” for disabled passengers.
Figures produced by the RMT union have previously shown that more than 2,200 jobs across the country will be cut due to the closures.
Northern’s EIA also highlighted that nearly half of train stations in Britain have either no or only partial tactile surfaces on their platforms, which means that a reduction in staff available to assist visually-impaired and blind passengers could “adversely affect them”.
Last year, an inquest jury found that the lack of tactile paving caused or contributed to the death of 53-year-old Cleveland Gervais, at a station in south-east London in February 2020.
Northern also warned that a reduction in staff available to provide “turn up and go” assistance for disabled passengers who do not want to book assistance in advance has the potential to “negatively impact” their “travel experience”.
Another train company to raise concerns about the safety of disabled passengers was Greater Anglia (PDF), which warned in its EIA: “Crime, anti-social behaviour and fear of crime (including hate crime) may increase as ticket offices are closed and static colleague presence reduced.”
Greater Anglia also warned that delays in members of mobile staff teams getting to stations could prevent disabled passengers from securing the assistance they need, and it could lead to them “attempting to self-board, putting themselves at great risk”.
East Midlands Railway was one of several train companies that raised concerns in its EIA (PDF) that visually-impaired or deaf passengers may not be able to navigate a station or access help points.
It also warned that neurodiverse passengers “may decide not to travel by rail or feel more anxious travelling through stations with reduced/no staff”, while it raised concerns of “an increased risk of anti-social behaviour as there will not be staff at the station”.
Many of the companies highlighted concerns with the accessibility of ticket vending machines (TVMs), as the industry expects more customers will have to use them when ticket offices close.
Avanti West Coast warned that (PDF) “TVMs may not be accessible for some disabled customers, including those with visual impairments”, while C2C (PDF) said that TVMs “are not accessible to all”.
TransPennine (PDF) said in its EIA that disabled passengers may even “potentially be victims of financial extortion if they need to give their bank card to others to assist them with purchasing tickets”.
Chiltern Railways (PDF) was another to raise concerns about inaccessible ticket purchasing, stating in its assessment: “With the removal of the ticket office, some customers may be unable to understand, be familiar with, or find it difficult to use technology.”
South Western Railway (PDF) was among those to highlight concerns about passengers who rely on hearing loops, which are usually only available in ticket offices and not around the station.
It pointed out in its EIA that a ticket office “is a focal point of a station where customers can get assistance in buying a ticket and journey information” and without a ticket office “the focal point of the station is lost”.
It also warned that people with learning difficulties might struggle to buy tickets without a ticket office, and that with fewer staffing hours available at some stations they “may become a place for targeted intimidating behaviour from perpetrators”.
West Midlands Trains said in its assessment (PDF) that a “reduced staff presence” could result in “less support for people through the station environment”, while it also raised concerns over reduced access to toilet facilities and waiting-rooms.
All the companies stressed in their EIAs that they would take “mitigating” measures to reduce the possible harmful effects of the closures.
In its EIA mitigation (PDF), Great Western Railway argued that there would be a transition period “designed to help make the changes more gradual”, while it said the industry was investing in simplifying fares “to make it even easier for customers to self-serve” and was “training staff to help support customers purchase tickets”.
Greater Anglia argued that a strong communications strategy would “help to reassure customers”, while staff presence may even improve so stations “may appear busier and feel more secure”, with its staff “trained to proactively look out for and help any customer who may need assistance”.
But some of the EIAs talked of how the company would seek advice from groups representing disabled passengers to “find and implement suitable mitigations”.
In response to concerns about blind, visually-impaired or deaf passengers not being able to navigate stations, East Midlands said it was “reviewing” its “current wayfinding offer” and would be consulting its accessibility and inclusion panel, while staff “will still be available to support with the purchasing of tickets and navigating the stations during certain hours”.
Govia Thameslink, which operates Gatwick Express, Great Northern, Southern and Thameslink, said in its EIA (PDF) that it would be “consulting with organisations representing customers with lived experience” to find a solution to the hearing loop issue.
It also said it was “working at an industry level” to find a solution for discounted tickets that are available to wheelchair-users and blind and visually-impaired passengers but can only be obtained at ticket offices.
There were more than 680,000 responses to the consultation by the time it closed on Friday (1 September).
Transport Focus and London TravelWatch will now examine these responses and the closure proposals before responding to the train operators by 31 October.
The train companies can then refer their proposals to transport secretary Mark Harper if they disagree with the conclusions of the two watchdogs.
7 September 2023
Watchdog warns ticket office closures could breach Equality Act and UN convention
The equality watchdog has warned that the proposed closure of nearly 1,000 rail ticket offices across England could breach both the Equality Act and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said it remained “concerned” about the potential impact of the closures on disabled rail passengers, while there were “important questions” over whether they complied with equality laws and the UN convention.
In its response to a consultation on the closures, which ended last Friday (1 September), the EHRC warned that the closures could “increase the barriers to accessing rail travel for disabled and older people”.
It also warned that cuts to staffing could affect the safety of passengers, particularly disabled people, women, members of the LGBT community, and younger and older people.
The commission pointed out that because it was unclear how overall staffing figures would be affected by the proposals, those responding to the consultation “cannot know whether there will be sufficient staff available to meet the needs of those seeking assistance”. It said this was a “serious concern”.
The commission also said it was “essential” that the proposed changes did not increase barriers for disabled people who wanted to continue to enjoy “spontaneous” travel through “turn up and go” services.
Last month, Disability News Service reported how campaigners were warning that the right of disabled people to enjoy spontaneous travel on the rail network was under “serious threat” due to the proposed closures.
The commission said that spontaneous travel was “fundamental to ensuring disabled people can realise their right to independent living” under article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
EHRC also warned in its consultation response that the arrangements made by train companies after any closures could be “confusing” for disabled and older passengers because of the possibility of “significant inconsistency in the provision of rail services” across the 13 train companies involved.
And it said it was “particularly disappointed” that the Department for Transport had yet to release an equality impact assessment of the proposals (see separate story).
It reminded both the government and the 13 train companies of their obligations under the Equality Act to consider the impact of the proposals on disabled people and other minority groups.
The watchdog welcomed the decision to extend the initial length of the consultation from 21 to 58 days, but it said it believed that this “still remains inadequate” for many disabled and older people and the organisations that represent them “to consider the possible impact of proposed changes and to raise their concerns”.
It has also been told that some of the consultation documents were inaccessible to some disabled people, while new documents were added during the consultation period, which “will have potentially further reduced the amount of time for some disabled people to consider and voice their concerns on these proposals”.
And it said that the complexity of the process – with 13 train operating companies submitting their own proposals – made it difficult to understand the wider impact of the closures, including how they would affect accessibility.
The commission said it believed the consultation period should have been closer to three months, rather than the two months eventually agreed by train companies.
If that was not possible, it said, “more could have been done to help rail travellers to understand the variable impact of 13 different proposals on their potential travel arrangements”.
EHRC said in its consultation response that the proposed changes “largely rely on digital technology to supplement the role of staffed ticket offices” alongside “roving staff”, but disabled and older people are more likely to experience digital exclusion.
This means disabled and older passengers “may experience additional barriers to planning journeys and buying tickets, such as significant delays when purchasing tickets if staff are occupied elsewhere or if they are travelling outside of staffed hours”.
It warned that any move by train companies towards “digital by default” service provision would not meet the “reasonable needs” of disabled people.
There were more than 680,000 responses to the consultation by the time it closed on Friday (1 September).
Transport Focus and London TravelWatch will now examine these responses and the closure proposals before responding to the train operators by 31 October.
The train companies can then refer their proposals to transport secretary Mark Harper if they disagree with the conclusions of the two watchdogs.
7 September 2023
Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week
Dozens of young autistic people have died after serious failings in their care, despite repeated warnings from coroners, BBC News has found. The investigation found issues that were flagged a decade ago are still being warned about now: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66731265
Concern is growing over provision for children with special educational needs after new figures revealed that a record number of complaints have been upheld by England’s local government ombudsman this year. Analysis of the decisions showed that some children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) had been without a school placement for more than a year. The rise comes as the SEND system struggles with rising need and years of underfunding: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/sep/03/special-educational-needs-provision-crisis-england-record-complaints
The UK government risks contempt of court unless it improves its response to requests for transparency over the use of artificial intelligence to vet welfare claims, the information commissioner has said. Over the past two years, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has increasingly deployed machine-learning algorithms to detect fraud and error in universal credit claims. But the DWP has refused freedom of information requests about the system and has blocked MPs’ questions, arguing that providing information could help fraudsters: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/03/uk-warned-over-lack-transparency-use-ai-vet-welfare-claims
More than 200 applications for free travel passes are to be reviewed after a council was reprimanded for turning one down for a man awaiting a hip replacement. The London Borough of Newham apologised to the man and paid him £400 to compensate for the uncertainty and avoidable frustration, after the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman found the way the council carried out assessments was not in line with guidance. The ombudsman concluded that the council did not have a specific policy in place for determining applications for Freedom Passes: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/newham-council-freedom-pass-review-b2406859.html
Protestors have taken their fight to County Hall amid an ongoing row over the treatment of an older, disabled woman they say is being “treated like a prisoner” in a care home. Campaigners claim Christine Lee was “illegally” moved from her flat to a care home following an assessment of her health. But the 75-year-old, who has MS, is now facing eviction in a week’s time from the facility where she has spent the last year, with no idea where she will end up: https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/23767197.protestors-say-christine-lee-75-a-prisoner-care-row/
Somerset Council has been fined nearly £4,000 after a woman was left unable to properly bathe for 18 months. The woman requested a disabled facilities grant from the council in May 2020, which would allow small changes to be made to her home – meaning she could receive care at home rather than moving into a care home. Her son complained after officers failed to respond to multiple queries regarding the outcome of her initial assessment, with the council eventually fitting the adaptations in early 2023: https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/23762764.somerset-council-fined-nearly-4-000-lgsco-ombudsman/
7 September 2023
News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com
