Oct 022025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Contents

Minister admits signing off on order that led to widespread cuts to Access to Work 1

All the evidence from Labour conference points in one direction: More cuts to disability benefits 2

DWP paid nearly £90,000 to disabled claimant left homeless and at risk of harm after years of errors 6

Disability minister struggles to point to any significant achievements in his first year in post 8

Labour ignores disabled people and accessible housing crisis – again – as it announces plans for new towns 10

Labour uses conference to sideline disabled people… unless they are working 11

Labour’s attacks on rights ‘have led to massive resurgence’ in disability movement, protest hears 12

Minister asks DWP to consider releasing secret reports on deaths to grieving relatives 15

No 10 meeting sees Labour hold out olive branch to disabled activists after breakdown of trust over cuts 17

Activist tells conference meeting: Hostile rhetoric under Labour has left me feeling hounded and unsafe 19

Disability Labour priced out of conference after cash-strapped party withdraws financial support 20

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week 23

 

 

Minister admits signing off on order that led to widespread cuts to Access to Work

The disability minister has admitted signing off on orders that have led to widespread cuts to disabled people’s Access to Work support packages since Labour came to power.

Disabled campaigners have been warning for more than a year of DWP cuts and inconsistent decisions on their Access to Work (AtW) claims, while there have also been mounting concerns about lengthening waiting-lists for decisions on claims.

But when social security and disability minister Sir Stephen Timms was challenged by an MP on the apparent cuts earlier this summer, he insisted that no changes had been made to Access to Work policy, although work was “underway to improve Scheme decision-making by applying the guidance with greater consistency”.

He still insists that ministers have made no changes to AtW policy.

But Sir Stephen has admitted to Disability News Service (DNS) that he signed off on an order for Access to Work (AtW) staff to apply the guidance more “scrupulously”, after being presented with a “proposal” from civil servants which they submitted to him to approve.

The confusion over who was responsible for the move began when DNS asked him who in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) had asked AtW civil servants to carry out the demand to be more “scrupulous” in applying the guidance.

He replied: “Well, the department, I guess.”

Asked if it was definitely not him, he said: “I’m not sure… I don’t want to give you a misleading answer.”

But when asked by DNS why he thought AtW staff were suddenly following guidance more scrupulously, he said he had no “no doubt seen a submission, which I have said ‘OK’ to, saying that it’ll be scrupulously applied, to achieve consistency apart from anything”.

He added: “The way things work is a proposal goes into a submission, which comes to me, and I say, ‘OK,’ and it’s very likely that I’ve been advised that we are going to apply the guidance more scrupulously.”

During the interview at Labour’s annual party conference in Liverpool, Sir Stephen said he could not remember when he signed off on the order, but that he would find out.

But when DNS suggested it would then be possible to secure this order through a freedom of information request, he suggested that DWP would resist this request because such an order would have been “advice to ministers” – which would not have to be released under the Freedom of Information Act – even though the instructions would then have been sent out to all relevant AtW staff.

Just minutes earlier, he had claimed that Labour DWP ministers were “very substantially changing the culture of the department in a pro-transparency direction” (see separate story).

Sir Stephen then claimed that the order to AtW staff might not have been written down, and that it might only have been passed on through “a conversation, a staff meeting; who knows how it’s promulgated”.

He later declined several opportunities to welcome the increase in AtW claims, which he called a “huge surge in the number of applications”.

He said the increase meant “people are having to wait longer” to have their claims dealt with, which was “a big part of why we need to reform Access to Work and why we’re consulting on it”.

Asked again if it was a good thing that more disabled people were applying to AtW, he said: “I think there’s a lot to be said for Access to Work and the opportunities it opens up to people.

But we’ve got to have a system that works efficiently and does not keep people waiting for weeks and weeks and weeks.

And that’s the aim of our reform that we consulted on in the [Pathways to Work] green paper.”

The government’s decisions on AtW reform are set to be announced later this year.

2 October 2025

 

 

All the evidence from Labour conference points in one direction: More cuts to disability benefits

Information from Labour ministers and other party sources has shown beyond any doubt that the government is preparing for further attempts to cut spending on disability benefits over the next 12 months.

As disabled people who rely on benefits await the publication of a disability benefits white paper in the next couple of months, it became clear at the party’s annual conference in Liverpool that further cuts are being planned.

Disability News Service (DNS) has this week interviewed the minister for social security and disability; spoken to disabled party members; attended fringe events; spoken (briefly) to a former employment minister; and listened to speeches by the prime minister and the new work and pensions secretary, Pat McFadden.

DNS has also received a Labour briefing; read articles by other journalists with better government connections than DNS; and listened to a broadcast interview with Sir Keir Starmer, in which he said there was a “moral case” for reducing the number of young people with “mental health issues” on benefits.

The weight of this evidence makes it clear that – despite this summer’s government U-turn over billions of pounds of cuts to personal independence payment (PIP) – further cuts to disabled people’s support are on the way.

Two key targets for cuts are likely to be PIP and the health element of universal credit, and almost certainly one focus will be on those receiving support on the grounds of mental distress and trauma, particularly younger people.

On Monday, the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, announced new details of a “youth guarantee” – first announced last year – through which every 18-to-21-year-old in England would be guaranteed either a place in college or university, an apprenticeship, or one-to-one support to find a job.

Any young person still out of work, education or training after 18 months would be given a paid work placement.

The party later confirmed to DNS that there would be “conditionality” – which is likely to mean their benefits would be cut or stopped if the placement was turned down – although there would be “exemptions”, likely to include some sick and disabled young people.

Details on whether those forced onto these placements would receive at least the minimum wage will not be announced until next month’s budget.

McFadden strongly linked “dignity” with work in his speech to the conference, and he said he wanted an “opportunity welfare state” rather than a “dependency welfare state”.

Opportunity, he said, “starts with work”, and he added: “Make work the pathway to dignity, security, and pride.”

McFadden had already alarmed many disabled people before the conference, when he claimed there were “incentives” in the system for people to declare themselves unfit for work so they can “double their money”, and also claimed people were “declaring themselves long-term sick”.

Asked about those earlier comments this week, Sir Stephen Timms, the minister for social security and disability, said he thought McFadden was “onto something here” and had not made a mistake with those comments.

He pointed to the increase in the universal credit basic allowance and the cut in the “health premium” which he said were designed to prevent “quite a serious problem in the current system that is forcing people to aspire to be designated LCWRA* as a kind of destination” so they receive more benefits.

But he did insist that Labour ministers “have the backs of disabled people who can’t work”.

He said: “We are determined to open up opportunities for those who can work, but also to make sure that those who cannot work, and there will always be people who cannot possibly work, and we well understand that, that they will be properly supported.”

He insisted that government ministers had not “dialled up the rhetoric” on disabled claimants, were “making a very good fist of managing a challenging situation”, and that they were not scapegoating disabled people.

He said: “That is not our intention, and I don’t think that’s what we’re doing.

What we are wanting to do is opening up opportunities for disabled people who for too long have been barred from opportunities they ought to be able to take advantage of.”

But Ellen Morrison, one of the most influential disabled activists in the party, as the representative of disabled members on Labour’s national executive committee, told DNS this week that McFadden had been “hinting at the worrying direction that this is going to take”, which looks like “increased conditionality”.

She said: “They are consistently making young people the target. We have to be really careful in the disabled people’s movement not to allow young people to become the target.”

In combination with the existing cuts to the universal credit health element, to be implemented for new claimants from next April, she said the government’s new policies suggest there will be “people who might be forced into either taking inaccessible or unsuitable work, or they are going to be faced with sanctions or destitution.

I don’t think you give people the support that they need by punishing them.”

She said this was combined with the government’s failure to commit to increased funding for the Access to Work disability employment scheme (see separate story).

Morrison said: “I don’t think it’s really about supporting people into work at all.

I don’t believe that’s the motive behind this. It’s to get people off benefits and off any kind of financial support. It’s really short-term thinking.

It’s going to be young people first and there’s more to come for disabled people. A lot more to come.”

The i Paper reported that McFadden was working with Reeves to “craft changes to the welfare system” as a replacement for the cuts the government had to abandon over the summer, and that they would be “laid out step by step over time rather than launched in one big package, in a bid to minimise the risks of a major political backlash once again”.

It also reported that Reeves told a conference fringe event on Tuesday: “A thousand people are going onto PIP claims a day, the majority of those are young people going on to disability benefits with mental health problems.

I’m not denying there are mental health problems; there are massive mental health problems, especially post-Covid.

But I would prefer to be using money to help support people to get into work and to get that treatment in the health service than to pay people to be on benefits and often have them trapped out of work without the support that they need.

I didn’t win that argument, we didn’t win that argument this year, but we can’t go on like this and keep adding to welfare costs.”

The concerns that the government plans to target young people with mental distress were further heightened by the prime minister in an interview yesterday (Wednesday) with BBC Radio Four’s Today programme.

Sir Keir Starmer was asked by the BBC’s Nick Robinson if he was “prepared to say, as prime minister, that being anxious, even being depressed, is a terrible thing to have, but it’s not a good enough reason to stop looking for work”.   

In response, the prime minister made it clear that cuts were coming and he suggested that the government wanted to provide support services for those with mental distress instead of – as highlighted by at least one concerned disabled activist – both benefits and support.

He told Robinson: “I think we need to look again at this issue of mental health and ask ourselves a fundamental question, which is: would we not be better putting our money in the resources and support that is needed for mental health than simply saying it’s to be provided in benefits.

And we’re not saying you shouldn’t have benefits for mental health issues, but I do think we need to examine this quite carefully.”

He said he was “particularly concerned about young people” and the number of young people who are on benefits for mental health reasons.

He said that was “wrong” because “if you are on benefits in your 20s, it is going to be extremely difficult to get off benefits for the rest of your life”, adding: “So there’s a moral case for changing that that I’m perfectly prepared to make.”

The government’s reluctance to reassure those unable to work was demonstrated by a brief exchange between DNS and former employment minister Alison McGovern, now a minister for local government and homelessness, who was speaking in a fringe meeting on the “dignity of work”.

Asked what her message was to those disabled people unable to work because they were not well enough to do so, and about the shortage of jobs that are available and suitable for sick and disabled people, she offered only half-hearted reassurance.

She said: “My message to disabled people is we believe in their right to work, like everybody else.

All the discussions we have been having [are] about trying to make that work suitable and appropriate.

We must always protect people who can’t work, but through new technology and forms of work I think that opens up chances and opportunities for disabled people and others and I want to make sure that people are able to take up those opportunities.”

After the meeting, DNS tried twice to engage with McGovern to ask her to provide further reassurance for sick and disabled people concerned about the government’s policy, but she twice declined to comment further, even briefly, saying she had another engagement to attend.

During the event she had heard from the non-profit organisation Timewise, which has just published research showing that only 2.5 per cent of sick and disabled people who are off work long-term move back into work in any given year.

Of the few that do, more than half (57 per cent) go into jobs that are physically demanding and are associated with higher levels of unpredictable, inflexible and excessive hours.

This contributes to another finding, that more than half of the jobs taken by those who were formerly “inactive or long-term sick” do not last for more than four months.

*Limited capability for work-related activity

2 October 2025

 

 

DWP paid nearly £90,000 to disabled claimant left homeless and at risk of harm after years of errors

A disabled person was left with “ongoing risks” of harm for more than five years – and was even left homeless – after the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) missed multiple opportunities to provide them with the benefits they were entitled to.

It took the intervention of the Independent Case Examiner to correct the years of errors with their various claims, which led to them receiving a payment of £55,000, as well as compensation of £3,000 for the “hardship” DWP had caused.

They had already received an arrears payment of nearly £30,000 in 2023, after their state pension had been wrongly stopped for four years.

The case was discussed in the annual report from the Independent Case Examiner, Joanna Wallace, who deals with complaints about DWP, and she revealed that years of errors by the department had caused “ongoing risks” to the claimant, who had “very poor physical health and housing problems”.

Her report shows DWP made at least nine significant errors with the case from 2018 – including multiple missed opportunities to rectify its mistakes – when it started the process to move the claimant from disability living allowance to personal independence payment (PIP).

The errors included a missed opportunity to consider if the claimant needed extra support with their PIP claim; failing to act on a letter explaining they had moved home; and failing to follow up a letter that was returned unopened.

DWP also failed to act in 2020, when the claimant asked why they had not been receiving any pension or benefits since the previous year.

Even when the claimant contacted DWP in 2023 to explain that the lack of benefits had caused a significant deterioration in their physical and mental health, which had left them homeless, the department “continued to miss putting things right” and failed to consider any reasonable adjustments for a new attendance allowance claim.

It also failed to review the claimant’s suspended pension payments.

It was only when the claimant contacted DWP again later in 2023 that their state pension was reinstated, and arrears of nearly £30,000 were paid.

But there was no evidence of an apology, and DWP still failed to consider the suspended pension credit claim, while making a further error with a new pension credit claim later that year.

Eventually, ICE was notified of the case, and it “took the exceptional step of reaching out to DWP immediately so we could work together urgently to put things right for our customer”.

This led to DWP making a payment of nearly £55,000 in connection with the claimant’s DLA, state pension and pension credit claims.

Wallace also recommended a “consolatory payment” of a further £3,000 because of “the errors and lack of vital support to an extremely vulnerable customer, which had clearly exacerbated the long-term issues with their health and their housing situation” while DWP had “continued to miss opportunities to put things right”.

Asked this week if the case showed there were still multiple problems with the benefits system, and how one claimant could have faced so many errors, DWP said it had introduced thorough procedures to investigate and learn lessons from cases where mistakes were made.

It also said that it used sources such as internal process reviews (see separate story) and its Serious Case Panel to identify and address systemic issues, as well as ICE’s reports.

A DWP spokesperson said: “We regret the mistakes that were made in this case and we are determined to learn from them.

We support millions of people every year and our top priority is they get the benefits to which they are entitled as soon as possible, and to ensure they receive a supportive and compassionate service.”

The report says ICE cleared 2,232 complaints in 2024-25, of which 1,514 were investigated, 567 were resolved (an agreement reached before evidence in the case is requested), 97 were settled (an agreement reached after evidence is submitted but before any investigation is carried out), and 54 were withdrawn.

Of the 1,514 that were investigated, 892 (59 per cent) were fully or partially upheld, 618 (41 per cent) were not upheld and in four cases (less than one per cent) ICE was unable to reach a finding.

Of 205 cases relating to disability benefits that were dealt with in 2024-25, 73 were resolved or settled to the complainant’s satisfaction, 121 ICE investigation reports were issued, and 11 were withdrawn.

Of the 121 investigation reports, 53 (44 per cent) were upheld or partially upheld, 66 (55 per cent) were not upheld and in two cases ICE was unable to reach a finding.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

2 October 2025

 

 

Disability minister struggles to point to any significant achievements in his first year in post

The minister for social security and disability has struggled to point to any significant achievements on disability equality after more than a year in post, but he insisted that the government does not need a separate minister for disabled people.

The Labour government has been consistently criticised for not appointing a stand-alone minister for disabled people and instead combining that role with the social security brief under Sir Stephen Timms.

But in an interview with Disability News Service (DNS) at this week’s annual Labour conference in Liverpool, Sir Stephen struggled to point to any significant achievements in the 14 months since his appointment, excluding employment and work and pensions issues.

Asked for three key achievements, he pointed first to the publication in July of new five-year plans to improve the use of British Sign Language (BSL) by government departments.

This followed the British Sign Language Act, a private members’ bill introduced under the last Conservative government, which legislated for the government to report on how departments use BSL in their communications.

He also pointed to the government signing the Solfagnano Treaty (PDF) – a watered-down version of the UN disability convention – during a G7 ministerial meeting in Italy last October.

The treaty appears to have been mentioned just once in parliament – last December – since it was signed, and has been almost completely ignored by politicians, the media, and disabled people.

Sir Stephen also highlighted the “preparations” the government was making for a “cross-government plan” on disability.

Asked why there did not appear to have been any discussions with disabled people’s organisations about this plan, he said: “Internally, there’s been lots of discussion, and the fruits of that will become apparent in the coming months.”

Asked about the lack of progress in his role as disability minister, he said: “I think a lot’s been done, actually.

And I’m hoping that the fruit of that will become increasingly apparent as time goes on.”

He said he did not believe his job – with responsibility for both social security and disability – was too extensive, and he said predecessors under Conservative governments also had responsibilities that were “actually quite wide” and extended outside the “strict disability group”.

But disabled activists at the conference – and outside it – repeated the long-standing calls for a separate minister for disabled people.

Emily Pomroy-Smith, a member of Disability Labour’s executive committee, told DNS that disabled people had been calling repeatedly for a separate minister to cover disability, which was a “very, very important” demand.

She said: “The brief is massive, and it is too big for one person to do on their own.

We would [also] prefer it wasn’t sat under the Department for Work and Pensions.”

Disabled activist Klint Durham, who took part in a Disabled People Against Cuts protest outside the conference on Monday (see separate story), said he would also like to see a stand-alone minister for disabled people.

He said the remit of that post would need to cover areas across government, including housing, transport, employment and community engagement.

2 October 2025

 

 

Labour ignores disabled people and accessible housing crisis – again – as it announces plans for new towns

Labour has again ignored disabled people when making a major housing announcement, after revealing plans for a “new generation of new towns” but refusing to explain how it will ensure they are designed to be accessible to disabled people.

Housing secretary Steve Reed told his party’s annual conference in Liverpool on Sunday that the 12 new towns across England would include GP surgeries, libraries, schools, green spaces and transport links.

Building work on three of the new towns will begin before the next general election, with the government working with “world class architects”.

Reed said he would do “whatever it takes” to build the homes.

But Labour this week failed to make any pledge that accessibility would be central to the design of the new towns.

Asked for Reed’s promise to disabled people on the new towns, the Labour party had refused to comment by noon today (Thursday), three days after Disability News Service (DNS) asked the question.

Nearly 15 months after the general election, disabled people are still waiting for the new government to say whether it will introduce stricter minimum accessibility standards for new-build homes in England, three years after a pledge by the last Conservative government – which was never fulfilled – to take action to address the critical shortage of accessible housing.

At last year’s conference, after DNS questioned the party on the failure of ministers to mention the accessible housing crisis, a Labour spokesperson had promised that the government would “set out its policies on accessible new build housing shortly”.

A year on, and disabled people are still waiting for that promise to be fulfilled.

Reed was also the latest Labour minister to say the government was fighting for “hard working people”, apparently ignoring those who are unable to work, including many disabled people who need accessible homes.

He was speaking as an independent report – commissioned by the government – recommended 12 potential locations for new towns across England, with at least 10,000 new homes in each location.

But a brief search through the 135-page report appears to show no mentions of disabled people or the accessible housing crisis, although there is a brief reference to the need for “homes for older people, as well as specialist housing built to accessible and adaptable standards”.

Emily Pomroy-Smith, a member of Disability Labour’s executive committee, said the new towns appeared to be a “really exciting opportunity to set the benchmark for accessibility” and it was crucial for disabled people to be involved in those plans from the beginning.

She said there was no reason why accessibility could not be built into the foundations of the programme.

Disabled activist Flick Williams, a retired disability equality trainer and access consultant, who was in Liverpool to take part in a Disabled People Against Cuts protest outside the conference (see separate story), said she was not at all optimistic about the new towns announcement.

She said the “signs were there” when there was no mention of the accessible housing crisis in last autumn’s National Planning Policy Framework.

She said: “We are just missing from everything they do.”

She said her message to Reed was: “If you want disabled people to be active in the labour market, you need to build us accessible homes.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Labour uses conference to sideline disabled people… unless they are working

The Labour party has used its annual conference to stress – once again – that its focus is on supporting “working people”, rather than disabled people who are unable to work.

In his 6,300-word speech to the conference on Tuesday, the prime minister did not mention disabled people once, other than in relation to the work of carers, care workers and volunteers, and a brief mention of his late disabled brother who he said was “badly failed by the education system”.

In contrast, he mentioned “working people” 17 times, including telling the conference audience that the state will be “accountable to working people”, that he wanted to see “working people in control of their public services”, and arguing that it was “working people who paid the price of Tory decline”, while stressing that “Labour is the party for working people” and that he would “fight for working people”.

The concerns about Sir Keir Starmer’s focus on “working people” date back to 2022 and a speech he made to Scottish Labour’s annual conference, at which he declared publicly that Labour was “the party of working people”.

His chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has an even longer troubling track record, having said 10 years ago that Labour did not want to be seen as “the party to represent those who are out of work” and that it was “not the party of people on benefits”.

In his own speech, earlier on Tuesday, health and social care secretary Wes Streeting stressed his determination to build a National Care Service “worthy of the name”.

Labour’s only significant social care announcement was the first ever fair pay agreement for care workers, with an initial £500 million in funding to deliver “better pay, terms and conditions” for adult care workers across England.

In contrast to the prime minister’s speech, Streeting mentioned disabled people three times, highlighting how many disabled people were now surviving with conditions “that would have cut their lives short thanks to breakthroughs in medical science that allows them to not only survive, but to thrive”.

He said that “if we want to match longer lives with better lives, then we must build a social care system to meet their needs”.

And he highlighted the government’s decision to provide more funding for disabled facilities grants, which has provided “safety, dignity, independence and quality of life”, as well as “the biggest uplift in carers’ allowance since the 1970s”.

It has been clear since at least 2022 that Labour’s priority in government would be lifting the pay of care workers before any moves to reduce or scrap care charges.

Any firm decisions on long-term reform will wait for the conclusions of an independent commission, led by former civil servant Baroness [Louise] Casey.

The first phase of the commission will report next year, but the second phase, with recommendations for longer-term reform, will not be completed until 2028.

Last year, Disability Law Service published research which found that disabled people across England were continuing to face unlawful discrimination and inequality on an “unparalleled” scale because of “unjust” social care charging policies.

2 October 2025

 

 

Labour’s attacks on rights ‘have led to massive resurgence’ in disability movement, protest hears

The Labour government’s attack on disabled people’s support has led to a “massive resurgence” in the disabled people’s movement in the last year, a protest outside the party’s annual conference has heard.

Monday’s protest highlighted Labour’s failure to stop the “slow violence” that has led to the killing of countless disabled benefit claimants at the hands of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), and the government’s refusal to act on the genocide in Gaza.

The Genocide Abroad, Democide at Home protest was held just outside the boundary fence of Labour’s annual conference in Liverpool.

The speeches were at one point being watched by nearly 100 protesters and passers-by.

The aim of the protest was to draw parallels and links between the genocide in Gaza and the “democide at home”, with activists believing that thousands of disabled people have been killed by Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) state violence in the last 15 years.

But it also expressed solidarity with trans rights activists and called for links between the three movements.

The protest began with a recording of the names of more than 100 disabled people who had lost their lives through DWP’s actions and failings, including Errol Graham, Jodey Whiting,  Stephen Carré, Roy Curtis and Faiza Ahmed and more recent victims of DWP bureaucratic violence such as Tracie, Kevin Gale, and David.

The protest was organised by Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) branches from Merseyside, Leeds, Manchester and York.

Rick Burgess, from Manchester DPAC, said the Labour government had not tried to reverse the Conservative cuts to disability support but instead “attempted to push farther and further”.

He said the attempted cuts to personal independence payment would have led “to many more deaths”, but disabled people forced the government to back down.

He said: “We did that. We started the end of this absolutely pathetic and failed Starmer government.”

He then led a chant of “no more benefit deaths”.

Burgess added later: “We still have a political system that absolutely denies disabled people’s right to live a good life on equal terms with everyone else.

We need social security, we need social care, and we need social justice.”

Referring to Gaza, he said: “If governments see genocide is a viable policy solution, they will start thinking about using it elsewhere.”

Billie Gibson, from Crips Against Cuts Merseyside, led a series of chants, including “Keir Starmer, disabled harmer” and “don’t cut PIP, tax the rich”, before telling the protest that the “warfare on disabled people needs to stop”.

Dr China Mills, who leads the Deaths by Welfare project at Healing Justice Ldn, told protesters: “Disabled people have been telling us for well over a decade that the welfare system is killing people, and Labour, from New Labour to now, have cooked up many of the policies that kill people.

People are being killed because the government doesn’t think that disabled people matter or have any value and because to them work equals worth.

We think that these killings go deeper than mistakes or flaws in the system.

The system isn’t broken; it is functioning exactly as it was designed.”

Jessica Ryan, from Disability Rebellion, which helped promote the protest online for those who could not attend in person, highlighted the impact of Labour’s cuts on the next generation of disabled people, and the unfairness of the government’s treatment of disabled people.

Rhi, from Merseyside DPAC, but also a researcher for the Trans Safety Network, said: “This is a government that seems extremely determined to be remembered for its genocidal foreign policy and its democidal domestic policy, as well as attacking our right to protest.

As a disabled and trans person, I have long insisted that disabled people’s liberation and trans people’s liberation will be one and the same fight, and that our oppression is built with the same tools, but these last few years have made this increasingly clear to more and more of us.

It is a terrifying time to be a disabled person in the UK right now and it is a terrifying time to be a trans person here, too.

Disabled people and trans people are under attack but when we join together to fight back, we are much, much stronger.”

Emma Hewitt, from Leeds DPAC, said she had been a disability rights activist for 20 years but it had only been in the last 18 months that she had “really seen the attacks on us”.

She said: “It’s not just the fact that they are cutting our services, it’s the fact that they are attacking us, they are attacking our right to live.

It’s so painful that not only do they not care about us, but they are quite happy to spend the money that we need for our support on genocide (in Gaza).

There has been a massive resurgence in the disabled people’s movement, and it just fills me with so much hope.

Every town in this country, every city, has got a disability rights group, not just Disabled People Against Cuts, we’ve got Crips Against Cuts, who are this amazing new group, Disability Rebellion, you guys are my heroes, you’ve been finding new ways for us to be able to campaign so no-one gets left behind, so everyone has a voice.”

Disabled activist Flick Williams, from York DPAC, said it was “so important” to be at the protest because the imminent DWP white paper – which is expected to include a series of further cuts to benefits – will be published later this year.

She said she had been struck by the names of those who had been killed due to DWP “slow violence”.

She said: “I just thought: there are going to be so many more.”

Another disabled activist, Klint Durham, told DNS he had travelled to Liverpool from Leeds to show his “contempt for the Labour government and its attack on disabled people and the welfare cuts”.

After 14 years of Conservative austerity, he said, he could not believe that a Labour government “would think to introduce more cuts”, and that it was “very clear” that the Labour-run DWP needed to “listen to organisations of disabled people and not charities”.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

2 October 2025

 

 

Minister asks DWP to consider releasing secret reports on deaths to grieving relatives

A minister has asked the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) whether it could release secret reports to families whose relatives’ deaths have been linked to DWP’s actions and failings.

Ever since Disability News Service (DNS) first revealed the existence of the secret reviews in October 2014, DWP has repeatedly refused to even alert the families of those who have died that an investigation has been carried out.

The department has insisted – as it did last week when it again refused to tell lawyers for the family of Jodey Whiting whether it carried out a probe into her case – that such reviews are “internal retrospective investigations focused on organisational learning, not public accountability”.

The probes were previously known as peer reviews but are now called internal process reviews (IPRs).

The only IPRs ever to be released to grieving relatives have come after orders made by a coroner or a judge.

DNS is aware of only two such cases, including the IPR ordered to be released by the coroner who heard the 2021 inquest into the death of Philippa Day.

But DNS told the social security and disability minister Sir Stephen Timms this week that safeguarding adults reviews and domestic homicide reviews are released to families and are published, although the identities of the subjects of the reviews are disguised.

DNS also pointed to the eight-year campaign for justice and accountability led by Jodey Whiting’s mother, Joy Dove, and her struggle to secure the IPR she believes was carried out into the circumstances surrounding her daughter’s death.

Speaking during an interview with DNS at Labour’s annual conference in Liverpool, Sir Stephen said: “Internal process reviews are what the name implies, they are for internal consumption within the DWP to look at where we got things wrong and how are we going to put them right.

So that is kind of the nature of them, so I don’t think it’s surprising inherently that they are not shared more widely.”

But he then said that DNS was “raising a very reasonable issue here, and particularly asking whether families should, in certain circumstances, be able to see them”.

He said he had asked DWP civil servants “to take a look at this, and I am going to be receiving some advice on that subject”, although he said it was “difficult and there is a duty of confidentiality that the department owes to people”, even after they have died.

He added: “There might be a need to change the law here.

Anyway, I’ve asked officials to have a look at this and to come back to me.”

His comments came after Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, told DNS last week that he was hoping to use the government’s new Hillsborough Law to force DWP to release IPRs to relatives.

During Sunday’s interview, Sir Stephen admitted that it was only because of a DNS news story that he became aware that a report – commissioned by Conservative work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey in 2020 – had called for DWP to reduce suicides of benefit claimants and other “very bad cases”.

The Complaints, Suicides and Other Matters report was written by Tory peer Baroness [Lucy] Neville-Rolfe, but DWP has told DNS that it would be too expensive to find out what happened in response to the 11 recommendations she made five years ago.

Among her recommendations was for DWP to set up a new register of “very bad cases”; to review its safeguarding system, including an analysis of its effectiveness in reducing suicides; and to review the IPR system.

Sir Stephen said on Sunday: “I actually did not know that Baroness Neville-Rolfe had done a report for the DWP until my office told me that you were likely to ask me about it.

That’s the first time I was aware of this report having been done.”

DNS has been writing news stories about the report since May this year, but it appears that no-one in DWP briefed him on the report or those stories until the lead-up to the conference.

Sir Stephen said he would now ask civil servants what happened in response to the 11 recommendations made in the report.

He said: “I will find out about it.”

He said Labour ministers were now “very substantially changing the culture of the department in a pro-transparency direction.

I’m not claiming that we’ve entirely got there yet, but we’ve made a lot of headway.”

Sir Stephen also confirmed that the disabled members of his new independent disability advisory panel would no longer be expected to sign non-disclosure agreements, following a backlash over the “completely unacceptable” measure.

Instead of an NDA, DWP said it would “collaboratively agree the confidentiality arrangements as part of the terms of engagement with the panel once the membership is confirmed”.

The deadline for applications has now been extended by two weeks to 13 October.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

2 October 2025

 

 

No 10 meeting sees Labour hold out olive branch to disabled activists after breakdown of trust over cuts

Senior figures in the Labour party pledged to try to rebuild trust with disabled people at a meeting with activists earlier this month at 10 Downing Street, Disability News Service can reveal.

The 90-minute meeting between a delegation of seven disabled people and senior figures within the Labour administration took place on 2 September.

It came after a text message from Joe Watkinson, deputy vice chair of Disability Labour, to Claire Reynolds, who was at the time the party’s political director in Downing Street, but is now Labour’s executive director of stakeholder relations.

Watkinson had suggested the need for a meeting to try to rebuild Labour’s relationship with disabled people after the damage caused by the government’s attempts – later abandoned – to cut billions in spending from personal independence payment, and the cuts that will be introduced through its Universal Credit Act, and to ensure disabled people “have a voice and can be heard in a constructive way”.

He told Disability News Service (DNS) at this week’s Labour conference in Liverpool: “Disabled people cannot afford a Reform government.

The only hope we have is via a Labour government. We need to reset the relationship with disabled members and that’s at the core of everything we need to do.”

Among the disabled people who attended the meeting were representatives of the Co-operative Party – where Watkinson is chair of the party’s disability network – union activists and representatives of Disability Labour (DL), including Kathy Bole, DL’s chair, and Emily Pomroy-Smith, another member of DL’s executive committee.

As well as Reynolds, other Labour representatives at the meeting included a work and welfare special adviser, and a representative of the party’s general secretary.

It is not yet clear what promises the party will make to those who attended the meeting, other than a pledge to hold further such meetings.

But Watkinson said: “It was a very constructive meeting. It was taken seriously. It was a very frank and honest discussion.

For the majority of the meeting, they sat there and listened.”

Pomroy-Smith said: “It was about using our lived experience to inform what they were doing. They were ready and listening.

Claire really did fight for this. She really fought for the meeting to happen, and she’s continuing that in her new role.”

She said the government representatives they met were aware of the level of anger among disabled people at the way the PIP and universal credit cuts had been handled earlier this year.

She said: “What we were coming with was solutions. The focus was how can we rebuild and what does that look like.

It was about moving forward. How do we prevent it from happening again.”

Among the issues raised were the kind of language used by ministers, and inaccurate briefings on social security reform.

Pomroy-Smith added: “At the moment there is a real need to amplify the voices of disabled people and not be spoken about.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Activist tells conference meeting: Hostile rhetoric under Labour has left me feeling hounded and unsafe

One of the only disabled activists to speak at Labour’s annual conference has delivered a powerful rebuke to ministers who have failed to do anything to curb the rising levels of disability-related hostility.

Fingers, a disabled RAF veteran who campaigns with Crips Against Cuts and the new group Disabled Resistance, told a fringe event on Monday how her car had been attacked and she had been called a “scrounger” after a young man saw her blue parking badge on the dashboard.

She told an Amnesty International UK fringe event on fixing the broken social security system: “What the language of the last 18 months has done to me is, for the first time in my life… I feel hounded, I feel unsafe.”

She said she felt as though the hostile rhetoric directed at disabled people had turned her into “a non-person”.

She said: “You’re looking at someone who is unsustainable. Why do I have to be a unit of productivity in this country?

The words we use are fundamentally important. Not one newspaper has run an editorial or article about how these words are making us feel.

I fought for the country, I worked for the NHS, and now I am effectively a ‘useless eater’.”

Fingers, who also used to chair a mental health charity, told Disability News Service (DNS) after the meeting that four young men had walked past her car as she was waiting at traffic lights in Loughborough about a month ago.

They had seen her blue badge and one of them then bounced on the bonnet of her car and shouted: “Bloody scrounger!”.

She wound down the window and gave them a “stream of obscenities and invective”, but later her anger turned to fear for her safety and that of other disabled people.

She told DNS: “The rhetoric surrounding people who require support because of ill-health has become positively threatening.

It has been encouraged tacitly by the government.

It dehumanises people who can’t work and there has been not one shred of fightback by the government about the knock-on effects of their rhetoric.

It has given a licence for anybody at all to pick on and say hateful things about disabled people, and it’s everywhere, and that makes me feel unsafe.”

The former Labour member, who joined the party to vote for Jeremy Corbyn as party leader and left when he was replaced by Sir Keir Starmer, said she had expected this kind of rhetoric from a Conservative government, but it was “shocking” that it had continued under a Labour government, which had even made the situation worse.

She was also critical that the fringe event had been held on an inaccessible stage without a ramp, as highlighted by Daily Mirror columnist Susie Boniface, who chaired an event in the same location within ACC Liverpool.

Although she is not a wheelchair-user, Fingers has a physical impairment and struggled with the inaccessible stage, which she said was “shameful for Labour”.

Because of the lack of chairs in the conference centre, she had already been forced to resort to sitting in the accessible toilet to prepare for her presentation at the fringe event.

She said: “I was in quite a bit of pain when I left that conference. It would have been alleviated if I had had anything other than a disabled loo to sit on.”

DNS reports elsewhere this week that Disability Labour – which often provides free access advice to the party at its annual conference – was priced out of attending this year’s event by the party.

Meanwhile, disabled Labour MP Nadia Whittome told the Amnesty fringe event that she was “really proud” to have played a small part in the backbench rebellion that led to the government withdrawing its planned cuts of billions of pounds to spending on personal independence payment.

But she pointed out that cuts to the health element of universal credit for most new claimants are still going ahead next spring.

She said campaigners must continue to fight against further government cuts to disability benefits, and against disability discrimination, and for investment in public services.

She echoed Fingers’ comments on the political rhetoric and told the fringe event: “People’s worth is not determined by their economic contribution.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Disability Labour priced out of conference after cash-strapped party withdraws financial support

The campaigning organisation that represents disabled people within Labour had to cancel plans to attend this week’s conference in Liverpool after the party asked it to pay thousands of pounds in fees.

Members of Disability Labour appealed for last-minute financial help during a visit to 10 Downing Street earlier this month (see separate story) but were told the party could no longer afford to help it cover its costs at conference.

For the first time since 2018, Disability Labour – which has spent years providing free advice to the party on access issues – was asked to pay for a space for a stand at Labour’s annual conference, but it was told this would cost £2,500.

Disability News Service (DNS) has been told that other Labour-affiliated socialist societies have also had to pull out of attending the conference this week because they could no longer afford the increasing cost and because of the lack of financial support from the party.

The party has told DNS that the changes to financial arrangements at the conference were applied equally to all 21 socialist societies and were not unique to Disability Labour.

Disability Labour said this week that it did not believe it had been singled out.

Last year, it had to pay only a few hundred pounds to cover the cost of electricity and other costs, including hiring a small stand where its members could provide advice to other disabled party members and use as a base to lobby politicians and delegates on disability issues.

It would likely have had to pay thousands more to hire a venue at the conference for a fringe event, and hundreds of pounds more for accommodation in Liverpool.

Emily Pomroy-Smith, a member of Disability Labour’s executive committee, said the party “did express regret” that it had not been able to offer the same support as in recent years, and Disability Labour was now in discussions with the party about future support.

She said: “We want to work with the party to get us back here.

We are asking the party to meet us halfway and work with us so next year we can be back. It’s really important.

In a year where we have seen difficulties and damaged relationships with disabled people and communities, it’s really important that we see a willingness to rebuild that, which we have had.

Obviously, it’s disappointing that we are not able to be here in our normal capacity.

The Disability Labour stand is a hub for disabled people. We end up supporting disabled members and visitors’ access issues and signposting them [to support].

We do provide a service.”

She added: “Conference is getting more and more expensive. That’s not just for Disability Labour.”

Local hotels have increased prices by as much as six times their usual rates, she said.

Joe Watkinson, deputy vice chair of Disability Labour, said: “Disabled members need us to be here. It’s important that we are here.”

Pomroy-Smith and Watkinson were only able to attend because the independent transport trade union TSSA covered many of their expenses, paying for Pomroy-Smith’s accommodation and travel, and travel for Watkinson.

Kathy Bole, Disability Labour’s chair, said they were told at the No 10 meeting in early September that the party’s financial problems meant it could not support Disability Labour at this year’s conference.

Bole said Disability Labour executives had reluctantly decided not to use a large chunk of the society’s limited funds to hire a stand and host a fringe event.

Disability Labour is a socialist society affiliated to the Labour party, but has members from across the Labour spectrum, although its leadership and membership have traditionally supported causes on the left of the party.

It has a long history of acting as a “critical friend” of the party at its annual conference, raising concerns about access, policy and the need for co-production.

It has also spent years lobbying Labour to do more to address disability discrimination within the party.

Last year, it was critical of the new Labour government’s decision to appoint only a part-time disability minister, and supported a disabled delegate who was refused entry to the conference with her assistance dog.

In September 2022, its members supported calls for the party to do more on eliminating the barriers faced by its own disabled members.

It raised similar concerns the previous year, prompting a pledge from the party’s general secretary that he would put an end to the years of discrimination experienced by disabled party members.

And, as part of the party’s online conference in September 2020 – in the early months of the pandemic – Disability Labour pushed the party for a stronger commitment to plans drawn up by disabled people that would solve the social care crisis by setting up a co-produced National Independent Living Service.

Disability Labour has also hosted important fringe events, and in September 2023 its event was attended by four shadow ministers.

This event drew the promise from shadow disability minister Vicky Foxcroft that, if Labour won power, “every single one of our ministers will be ministers for disabled people”.

A Labour party spokesperson said in a statement this week: “We are committed to providing a safe and accessible environment at conference for disabled people.

There are more accessibility stewards working at conference this year compared to last year, and we have also provided these stewards with an increased level of training.

We also continuously engage with Disability Labour on a wide range of issues, including greater celebration of Disability History Month which the party has begun work on.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

The family of a disabled man who died after not being given any food for nine days while being treated in an NHS hospital has told ITV News, “we thought he was having nutrition… but as it turns out, they were starving him.” This comes as an ITV News investigation has revealed a crisis in the care of people with learning difficulties and autistic people. Bereaved families have told ITV News they believe their children died due to failures in NHS care: https://www.itv.com/news/2025-10-01/i-dont-want-to-die-downs-syndrome-man-starved-to-death-in-hospital

2 October 2025

 

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

Apr 092025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

#WelfareNotWarfare

Call protests now over the parliamentary recess 8-22 April.

While lavishing money on the military the Labour government is continuing to pursue its attack on support for Deaf and disabled people announced in Rachel Reeves’ Spring statement.

We are calling for DPAC groups and supporters to call local protests across the country to demand the damaging cuts to social security for Deaf and Disabled people are stopped.

We want MPs to commit now to vote against these cuts which will drive people into poverty.

Local protests are a chance to reach Deaf and Disabled people who are worried about the cuts and isolated – we need to turn fear into anger and action.

We can raise awareness of the true scale and impact of these vicious cuts and build the solidarity in our communities needed to defeat them.

  • The scale of cuts is over £9bn – a majority of people are against the cuts based on the earlier figures which underestimated this by almost half.
  • Changes to PIP (Personal Independence Payments) alone will hit 1.5million Deaf and disabled people.
  • The attempt to rush these cuts through means that the Labour government is expecting MPs to vote the attacks through without being fully informed as to the impact.
  • Despite all the lies about how these cuts will get people into work there has been no assessment of employment outcomes from the proposed cuts – the first vote is expected Summer but these figures from the OBR (Office for Budgetary Responsibility) are not due to be published until October 2025.
  • Employment impacts will be negligible. A lack of suitable employment will prevent people moving into work while many will be forced out of jobs by the impact of the cuts both personally and on the wider economy.
  • The cuts will cause destitution, add huge additional pressures to local authorities, our NHS and mental health support services. They will take a significant amount out of the economy as disabled people’s spending power is reduced.
  • There has been no assessment of impacts of the abolition of the WCA (Work Capability Assessment) combined with the PIP cuts as government failed to provide enough detail to the OBR before the Spring Statement.
  • No costings have been made for the increased number of appeals predicted by the OBR – this is awaiting assessment by the Ministry of Justice.

 

What we are calling for:

Local protests over parliamentary recess 8-22 April 2025.

Where possible target MPs strategically. See our list here: https://dpac.uk.net/2025/04/mps-who-support-disability-benefit-cuts/

Many MPs no longer operate public offices or surgeries – where this is the case could you protest at local Constituency Labour Party meetings, Town Halls or local events where MPs will be attending. Even if the MP isn’t in attendance it makes the point but please do be aware that we want Labour Party members onside so we are protesting the position their MP has taken and not protesting against them.

As always, we encourage the use of creativity to make protests inclusive and attention grabbing.

Make sure there are options for people to take part and be involved even if they can’t attend in person. National DPAC is about to produce this online engagement toolkit but local groups should look to produce your own options for members.

If you are protesting outside an MP’s office please follow these guidelines: https://dpac.uk.net/2025/04/guidelines-for-protesting-specific-mps/We want to make our point but do not prevent people who need to see their MP for help with benefits appeals, asylum applications or other urgent needs from doing so.

Where May Day rallies, Stop the War and We Demand Change events are being organised in your area reach out now to organisers to request someone from your DPAC group can speak to raise the fight against benefit cuts – an attack on the whole working class.

If you have an MP who has come out against the cuts do something to positively acknowledge this – letters to the local press on why they are right to reject the cuts can help our message reach a wider audience. You can find a list here: https://labourlist.org/2025/04/spring-statement-welfare-reforms-liz-kendall-rachel-reeves-labour-rebels/

And keep up the letter writing and most importantly every DPAC member should try to arrange a face to face meeting with your MP. These do make a difference even if the MP doesn’t appear to be listening and/or just trots out the party line. Make them give up their time for you. Make them see how many people this matters to and how it will impact their majorities if they follow Starmer, Reeves and Kendall in their performative cruelty.

Resources

Norfolk DPAC has created a resource deposit with template materials that local groups can share and use. Link coming soon!

 

 

 

 

Dec 052024
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Time: 9am

Date: Tuesday 10 December 2024

Place: outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2A 2LL

The legal challenge against the consultation on changes to the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) will be heard in the high court on 10 and 11 December.

DPAC is holding a vigil outside the Royal Courts of Justice in solidarity with the case on the morning of the first day of the hearing. The hearing is open to public and we have asked for a wheelchair accessible court room. The vigil will finish in time for those who want to listen to the hearing to go in.

We can cover reasonable travel expenses for DPAC members able to attend, as well as accommodation for those otherwise unable to get there for the early start.

Please bring banners and placards (although these will need to be left at security if you want to come in to the hearing.)

We are disappointed that Labour has chosen to defend the case in order to push ahead with the same changes proposed by the Tories.

An interim hearing in the case held in November heard that no evaluation of equality/disability impacts or employment outcomes was carried out on the proposals either before or during the consultation – only policy costings were worked out.

The consultation documents justified the proposed changes on the grounds that they would support more disabled people into employment. No information was given about the reduction in benefit rates that the changes would entail.

The claimant in the case alleges that the consultation was therefore flawed.

Just a few weeks after the close of the consultation the proposed changes were included in the Autumn 2023 budget as a way of making savings.

A forecast from the Office for Budget Responsibility showed that only 3% of the 453,000 disabled people predicted to lose out by 2028/9 as a result of the changes will be able to move into employment.

The changes will only apply to new benefit claimants – although existing claimants will be affected if they come off benefits and then reapply.

The two groups of claimants who will be impacted are those with mobility impairments and those in the “substantial risk” group, who are those deemed to be at risk of self injury and/or suicide if forced to look for work.

Around 424,000 claimants will as a result of the changes only be able to access out of work benefits at 47% of the rate existing claimants do.

Those with mobility impairments will have to undertake mandatory work search activity and be subject to conditionality and sanctions.

Those in the substantial risk group will not have mandatory work search activity. However, there are increasing expectations in terms of engagement with the Department for Work and Pensions.

These changes will lead to deeper poverty among disabled people and unquestionably to more benefit deaths.

The proposed changes also ignore the findings and recommendations from the special inquiry under the Convention on the Rights of Disabled People carried out by the United Nations Disability Committee which found the UK guilty of grave and systematic of violations of Disabled People’s rights due to austerity and welfare reform.

If you are unable to attend the vigil but want to show solidarity please take to social media using the hashtag #NoMoreDeathsFromBenefitCuts.

Please also contact your MP to ask for their support in opposing disability benefit cuts and to tell them what you think the consequences of these cuts will be.

Nov 052024
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

DWP ordered to disclose key documents about “dehumanising” plans to reform Work Capability Assessment

During a hearing about the “rushed and disingenuous” consultation used to justify proposals to tighten the Work Capability Assessment, the DWP was ordered by a judge to disclose key internal documents to Ellen Clifford, a disabled activist bringing a legal challenge over the consultation.

Clifford was in court on 31 October to argue that the DWP should disclose key documents that were relevant to her claim, backed by lawyers from Public Law Project (PLP.) Through the hearing, it was revealed that:

· The DWP had not done any employment or disability assessments of the proposals they wished to consult on before the consultation was launched.

· They did, however, undertake reviews to work out what savings may be made from the proposals before consulting. This included estimating how many Deaf and Disabled people may no longer be assessed as having limited capacity for work or work-related activity, if proposals were implemented.

· No information about potential savings or numbers impacted was provided to consultees as part of the consultation process.

Under these proposed changes to the Work Capability Assessment, thousands of people would lose £416 per month in benefits and many would be at risk of sanctions.

Ellen Clifford said: “The DWP’s revelation that they carried out absolutely no employment or disability impact assessment has confirmed my fears: this rushed and disingenuous consultation was just a smoke screen for cuts. It was never a legitimate attempt to hear the voices of Deaf and Disabled people or support them into work.

“In reality, a lot of people will struggle to pay everyday bills if these proposed changes go ahead.”

Aoife O’Reilly, the PLP lawyer acting for Clifford, said: “Ellen Clifford has maintained throughout her challenge that the true or primary motive behind the consultation was to reduce spending on disability benefits, rather than being about consulting on proposals that would help more Deaf and Disabled People to enter the workforce or access support with a view to doing so.

“The fact that lawyers for the DWP have now confirmed to the Court that no employment or disability impacts were carried out before the consultation began further supports her position that this was a money-saving exercise, disingenuously presented to some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

“We are pleased that the judge has ordered DWP to hand over more documents, which are clearly documents that her legal team should see. We are also pleased that DWP

will now reconsider whether there may be other documents it should provide to Clifford, in light of concerns expressed by the judge about how they’ve considered this so far.”

These reforms were first announced by the previous Government in November 2023 (following a consultation that ran from 5 September to 30 October), but the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced during the Budget that Labour would honour the savings that the previous government planned to make through these reforms.

The Office for Budget Responsibility also mentioned Clifford’s judicial review in its forecast, noting that it “could cause delays” to the implementation of Work Capability Assessment reforms.

Background:

Clifford first began her legal action over a year ago, after the consultation over changes was wrapped up in just eight weeks. Like many, she was concerned that it had not been possible for the Disabled people who would be directly impacted by these reforms to meaningfully respond.

The consultation claimed that reforms had been proposed to reflect that there were now better employment opportunities for some Deaf and Disabled people due to the rise in flexible and home working.

However, the consultation failed to provide any assessment of whether Deaf and Disabled people would actually benefit from the proposed increased workplace flexibility. It also did not clearly outline that many people would lose money, or start being required to meet conditions in order to receive their payments, with a risk of sanctions if they did not meet them.

Ellen Clifford said: “I am delighted the judge has agreed that DWP need to hand over these documents.”

“Withholding key documents in the context of this legal claim undermines our ability to challenge harmful and dehumanising proposals effectively. Deaf and Disabled People deserve clarity and accountability, and to be consulted in a way that is fair, especially when our livelihoods are on the line.

“For thousands of people, the stakes are very high when it comes to the Work Capability Assessment. The previous Government’s proposed reforms would push a lot of Deaf and Disabled and chronically ill people into destitution.

“This week, Rachel Reeves promised to deliver the savings promised by the previous Government when they proposed these reforms. We are now asking the Government to look beyond the savings and recognise the real people who will be harmed.

“They should not continue with reforms when those impacted were not given any meaningful opportunity to explain why they should not be implemented.”

Clifford’s claim is due to be heard at a two-day hearing on 10 and 11 December 2024 at the Royal Courts of Justice, which will be a landmark moment in the fight for disability rights and welfare support in the UK.

More info:

· Clifford’s legal team had sought disclosure of internal departmental documents evaluating the public spending, employment and disability impact of the proposals, up to 22 November 2023, being the date when the consultation was launched.

· Clifford said that these documents would demonstrate whether the Government had information in its possession that ought to have been provided to consultees, while also shedding light on what she maintains was the true or primary motive of the consultation – cutting welfare benefits – rather than supporting Deaf and Disabled People into work.

· While a High Court judge had ordered disclosure of these documents, DWP asked for a hearing to have the matter considered again. At the hearing, DWP denied that they had any further documents in their possession that were relevant and necessary for Clifford to see, as part of her claim.

· In particular, DWP said that they should not have to hand over documents relating to an audit of 300 previous WCA cases, which DWP had used to assess what savings could be expected, or any documents that it created after the consultation began on 5 September 2024.

· In a judgment delivered orally by Mr Justice Linden, shortly after hearing submissions from both parties’ legal teams, including Jenni Richards KC, representing Clifford and instructed by Public Law Project, he dismissed the DWP’s application to have the original order for disclosure set aside. Mr Justice Linden found there were no good reason not to affirm the previous order.

· He also expressed concern at how the DWP had seemed to misunderstand Clifford’s case and her disclosure application, and noted the possibility that the DWP’s evidence on what relevant documents it had in its possession may have been based on an overly narrow understanding of what Clifford’s case was actually about, including a failure to appreciate the potential relevance of analysis DWP may have done after 5 September 2023 to Clifford’s claim.

· In addition to handing over the documents Clifford had sought, DWP agreed to re-consider whether it had further documents that may fall to be disclosed, and to provide Clifford with a witness statement confirming this exercise had been properly considered, in the event that no further documents were identified.

· Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) figures show only around 3 per cent of those affected by the planned changes – 15,400 people – will move into work by 2028/29 as a result.

Apr 252024
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 25 April 2024

UK Deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations’ Coalition

 

UN Committee slams government failure to address disability rights violations

A report published yesterday by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Disabled People concludes that the UK Government has made “no significant progress” in addressing the grave and systematic violations of Deaf and Disabled people’s rights that it highlighted more than seven years ago.

Instead, the report notes areas of further regression and numerous issues of “deep concern”.

The report states that:

“The Committee finds that the State party has failed to take all appropriate measures to address grave and systematic violations of the human rights of persons with disabilities and has failed to eliminate the root causes of inequality and discrimination.”

The report is the outcome of a follow up to the Committee’s unprecedented special inquiry which in 2016 found evidence of grave and systematic violations of Deaf and Disabled People’s rights due to welfare reform and austerity measures.

The inquiry focused on three specific areas: equal chances to live and participate in the community; right to good work; and, adequate social protections and standard of living.

On publication of the 2016 report the then government dismissed its findings.

Andy Greene from the National Steering Group of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC), who triggered the special inquiry said:

“The process of evidence gathering, taking witness testimony and objective scrutiny of policy and its impact, is one that’s very difficult to ridicule or dismiss. The facts speak for themselves. As such, the inquiry vindicates the experiences of Deaf and Disabled people whose voices are too often ignored.”

John Kelly, musician and campaigner who also sits on the DPAC National Steering Group said the report is:

“…damning on the lack of this government listening to our real lived experiences as Disabled people and doing anything to support what we really need which is to live and contribute in our community as equal citizens along with our peers.”

Deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations (DDPOs) across the UK, who took part in reporting to the Committee, along with DPAC, through the UK DDPO Coalition, have welcomed the report.

Svetlana Kotova, Director of Campaigns and Justice, Inclusion London, said:

“This report is a damning verdict on the government’s track record in upholding our human rights…

“It is shocking that our country that positions itself as a world leader is yet again found to breach our rights on a systematic level.

“It is also shocking that the government has failed to listen to the UN in the past and has actively dismissed the previous recommendations….

“Inclusion London welcomes the report and urge the government and the opposition to take it seriously and develop policies on welfare reform, employment and independent living that comply with the UK’s obligations under the UNCRDP.

“The report shows that the current system is not fit for purpose and the government cannot carry on punishing Disabled people.”

Dermot Devlin, spokesperson for DPAC Northern Ireland said:

“ DPAC NI thank the UN Committee for their work and due diligence on our behalf and call on the Westminster Government to properly implement the recommendations of the 2016 inquiry and the current report.

“The absence of Government in Northern Ireland has failed Disabled people here. With the Executive now restored, bringing forward a Disability Strategy that addresses the Committee’s recommendations must be an absolute priority.”

The report documents how the UK government requested postponement of the session at which they were due to give evidence to the Committee in August.

Their request for postponement was just six days before the deadline for written evidence submissions to the inquiry was due and after many cash-strapped DDPOs had already booked their flights and accommodation to attend and give evidence.

The result was that the Committee, which is made up of Deaf ad Disabled members from around the world, had to split the oral evidence section of the inquiry into two separate sessions.

Rhian Davies, CEO for Disability Wales, said:

“The UK Government’s approach to this review has been utterly disrespectful and matches the contempt shown to Disabled people for over a decade. We deserve better and we demand better.”

Ellen Clifford, UK Coalition Co-ordinator, said;

“The government’s attitude towards the UN special inquiry is evidence that their treatment of Deaf and Disabled people is wilful and calculated. This is reflected in the damning findings of the report.

“The limitations of the inquiry process are that there are just too many deliberate rights violations to include in one report.

“However, the report validates the experiences of Deaf and Disabled people across the UK and is a much-needed counter to government rhetoric claiming they are “protecting the most vulnerable” when they are doing the exact opposite.”

The report highlights numerous areas of government policy that are not only failing Deaf and Disabled people, but that are causing serious rights violations.

Among the many areas where the Committee is “deeply concerned” are: the social care recruitment crisis follow EU withdrawal; the inadequacies of social care support provision to cover anything more than “bare subsistence”; incarceration of Disabled people “in secure psychiatric facilities due to a lack of community-based support”; “disabled people who are housebound due to inadequate support to access the community”; “abuse, mistreatment and the increasing use of restraints, restrictive practices and… unexpected deaths in the mental health care system”.

Dorothy Gould, founder of Liberation, a grass-roots organisation led by people with personal experience of mental distress/trauma, said:

“…it is an utter disgrace that many of us are forced into institutions, continue to be locked up against our will in places such as psychiatric hospitals and continue to be forcibly treated and abused, in complete breach of human rights which other citizens hold.”

The Committee’s recognition of the increasing barriers to employment have been welcomed by Deaf and Disabled trade unionists.

Natalie Amber, Co-chair, Deaf and Disabled Members Committee, Equity Trade Union, said:

“Ill-thought through cuts, particularly as a result of welfare reform, are making it impossible to work in the creative industries unless you have independent wealth.  This is directly and negatively impacting who we see on our stages and screens.”

The report acknowledges the devastating impact of previous welfare “reform” measures.

The report states that:

“The Committee is appalled by reports of “benefit deaths” referring to fatalities among disabled people in the State party, subsequent to their engagement with the process for determining eligibility for benefits…

“Testimonies have also been received regarding the minimal, unsuitable, and/or abusive responses to individuals’ mental health emergencies that are frequently precipitated by the benefits assessment procedure.”

It recommends that the UK government:

“Take comprehensive measures to ensure that persons with disabilities are adequately supported through social security payments, benefits and allowances,…  ascertain the additional costs of living with disabilities and adjusting benefit amounts accordingly to reflect these costs;”

Alison Turner, daughter-in-law of Errol Graham, who starved to death after his benefits were stopped, said:

“I am pleased that the report highlighted the need for proper review and monitoring of the deaths of benefit claimants… It shows that this government has learned nothing and cares not for its direct actions to cause harm.”

The report comes less than a week after the Prime Minister announced a new round of cuts to disability social security payments and amidst political and media rhetoric that directly contravenes the 2016 findings and recommendations by demonising disabled benefit claimants.

The report states that:

“There is a pervasive framework and rhetoric that devalues disabled people and undermines their human dignity. Reforms within social welfare benefits are premised on a notion that disabled people are undeserving and wilfully avoiding employment (“skiving off”) and defrauding the system. This has resulted in hate speech and hostility towards disabled people.”

Kamran Mallick, CEO of Disability Rights UK, said:

“Under this Government, the UK has lost its status as a nation that leads in disability rights to one that is actively attacking Disabled people.

“In just the last week we have seen an onslaught of new policy proposals and legislation which will not only harm us but also lead to avoidable deaths…

“At a time when we’re all struggling to make ends meet and cannot access the healthcare and support that we need, the Government are scapegoating Disabled people for a failing economy.

“We are not at fault for simply existing. The Government are at fault for their complete disregard for international treaties and contempt for Disabled people’s rights.”

John McArdle, spokesperson for the Black Triangle campaign in Scotland, said:

“To proceed with the plans announced by Conservative Prine Minister Sunak last Friday will definitely lead to a surge in deaths by suicide and other avoidable harm which falls short of death but is nonetheless catastrophic.

“The U.K. has abrogated the Convention on the Rights of Disabled People by its treatment of Deaf and Disabled people in the UK.”

Disabled President of the National union of Journalists (NUJ), Natasha Hirst, made a call to all journalists to reflect the evidence as reflected in the report rather than unquestioningly repeating inaccurate and harmful government rhetoric:

“There has never been a more important time for journalists and the wider media industry to tackle harmful negative rhetoric against disabled people.

“I call on journalists to take time to understand the concerns raised by the UN Committee and scrutinise why the Government is so keen to dismiss their failure to uphold disabled people’s human rights.

“Deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations have thoroughly evidenced the harm caused by policy changes and cuts to services and yet the UK Government is intent on pushing this even further.

“Disabled people’s voices need to be heard and not drowned out and demonised by people who have never experienced the sharp end of the social security system.

“As journalists, we should report ethically to hold power to account, and not be complicit in the scapegoating of disabled people.”

ENDS

 

For more information including speaking to people personally affected by issues covered in the report or to be put in touch with ‘;#anyone quoted above, contact:

Ellen Clifford, UK Coalition – 07505144371

Rensa Gaunt, Inclusion London – 07561 064227     `

Bethany Bale, Disability Rights UK – Bethany.bale@disabilityrightsuk.org

For Northern Ireland enquiries contact: Dermot Devlin – 07899 962209

For Scotland enquiries contact John McArdle – 07379 612778

For Wales enquiries contact: Megan Thomas – 07990 425823

 

Notes for Editors

  • The special inquiry was triggered under Article 6 of the Optional Protocol of the Convention on the Rights of Disabled People (CRDP). This was the first time an investigation into allegations of “grave and systematic violations” of CRDP rights had even taken place. Since then, following the precedent set by UK DDPOs, inquiries have taken place into allegations of breaches by Hungary and the EU and by the Spanish State.

 

  • The three articles of the CRDP which the special inquiry focused on are articles 19, 27 and 28.

 

  • The UK DDPO CRPD Monitoring Coalition co-ordinates written and oral evidence from UK DDPOs for examinations and inquiries by the UN Committee on the Rights of Disabled People.

 

  • The UK DDPO written submission to the inquiry can be found here: https://www.inclusionlondon.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/UK-DDPO-CRDP-Special-Inquiry-Shadow-Report-final.docx

 

  • The deadline for written submissions to the inquiry was midnight on 1 August 2023. The report states that the UK government asked for postponement on 26 July 2023.

 

  • The special inquiry oral evidence session in August which heard from UK DDPOs as well as representatives from the equality and human rights commissions of the four nations can be seen here: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1o/k1o8b7239p

 

 

  • Media reporting linked to the government’s welfare reforms plans has been found to be inaccurate and to incite hostility against disabled benefit claimants. For example: the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) ruled that it has upheld a complaint against the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) in relation to media reports that appeared to be aimed at ‘stirring up hostility’ towards disabled people claiming benefit; the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) recently upheld complaints against The Telegraph for inaccurate and misleading articles about disability benefit entitlements that gave a false impression about eligibility and the generosity of the social security system.

 

  • For full quotes from all DDPO and trade union representatives received please see: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-XkQNo2tXgRTQGARgtcpmF7m0qkDXJx5iuaEbstVdlo/edit?usp=sharing
Feb 132024
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Time: 6.30 – 8.30pm

Date: Monday 19 February 2024

Place: Thatcher room, Portcullis House, 1 Victoria Embankment, London SW1A 2JR

British Sign Language and Palantypist provided

Co-chairs: John McDonnell MP and Martha Foulds, Disabled People Against Cuts [DPAC]

Speakers: Martin Cavanagh, DWP President, PCS union; Ellen Clifford, DPAC and author of The War on Disabled People; Meg Thomas, Disability Wales; Andy Mitchell and Brett Sparkes, Unite the union; Paula Peters, DPAC; La Toya Grant, DPAC Deaf Group.

 

This meeting will explore how Deaf and disabled people and our allies can campaign against changes to the social security system which will punish and remove essential income from the poorest in society.

We’ve seen and experienced the cruelty of welfare reform now for over a decade. Now we are facing new government plans to shake up the disability benefits system that will unquestionably lead to further harms and avoidable deaths, to deeper and more widespread poverty and to greater inequality.

In one example of this, savings included in the November budget are linked to lowering benefits for 371,000 disabled people who are already on poverty level incomes.

Plans published in Transforming Support: the health and disability white paper in March 2023 shocked and terrified Deaf and disabled benefit claimants. These were followed by a consultation launched in early September 2023 to tighten the Work Capability Assessment. Key groups of people affected by this will be those with mobility impairments and those at risk of suicide and of harming themselves or others if forced to engage in work search activity.

The plans are justified by unevidenced government claims that Deaf and disabled people can be freed from poverty through lowering benefit payments and mandatory activity supporting them to find work. The reality for many, if not most, will be greater poverty and hardship.

The plans have also been accompanied by media attacks on disability benefit claimants. Covid made it acceptable to openly treat disabled people’s lives as dispensable. Whereas media attacks during early welfare reform inflamed hostility towards claimants in the guise of condemnation of benefit fraudsters, now those attacks are directly targeted at disability benefit claimants with accusations that the system is too generous and open debate about whether those on long-term disability benefits should be supported by the social security system at all.

We know that the majority of the public are in favour of a social security system that provides a genuine social safety net and is targeted at the most disadvantaged in society. However, too many people are unaware of what is happening or unsure how to show opposition to it.

This meeting will hear from campaigners and trade unionists about what we are doing to raise awareness and to challenge the proposed changes.

It will be a chance for Deaf and disabled people and our allies to discuss what more we can do and how to build a united resistance that demands a social security system that is fit for purpose and fair for all.

 

Please forward details about this meeting to your MP, explain it is important to you as their constituent and ask them to attend.

For those DPAC members who can come in person, reasonable travel costs can be covered. Please contact mail@dpac.uk.net for more information.

Please also share information about this meeting among your contact networks.

 

 

Oct 232023
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Many thanks to DPO Forum England for sharing the below template consultation response with us. Individuals and organisations are free to use all or parts of this as you need.

Information about the consultation including how to respond is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/work-capability-assessment-activities-and-descriptors

The deadline for the consultation is Monday 30 October 2023.

 

Consultation Response

We strongly oppose the proposed changes and believe this is a deliberate attempt to save money by risking Disabled people’s lives.

Concerns about this consultation

This consultation lasted only 8 weeks.  It proposed a huge change which will have a serious impact on thousands of people.  We did not have enough time to properly engage with our members in accessible ways.  Many of our organisations do not have the capacity to respond in such a short time.  This is why we are submitting this joint response. We find it totally unacceptable that such a short period of time is given, when the key audience are Disabled people with a range of access needs who will find it harder to respond and need more time, not less.

 

General points

We refute the government’s proposals to change the Work Capability Assessment descriptors.

 

The stated aim to “support more Disabled people into work” will not be achieved through subjecting people to greater sanctions and reducing their income. More Disabled people will be pushed into poverty, we will see more deaths and greater deterioration in health.

 

The proposals are ideological and will lead to serious consequences

The proposed changes are driven by two key elements:

A significant increase in the number of people who are economically inactive because of ill health and the desire to control welfare spending.

We believe reducing benefit payments and subjecting to conditionality to address economic inactivity is a political and ideological attack on Disabled people. It is especially true in the context of aggressive rhetoric towards Disabled people unable to work because of ill health.

 

These changes rushed through despite the proposal to abolish WCA altogether indicates to us that the primary aim is saving money on the backs of Disabled people’s lives and health.

 

The talk of employment support is misleading.  The easiest and most constructive way to help more people into work is to ensure the workplace is inclusive, Access to Work is working effectively, and provides good quality employment support to everyone on a voluntary basis.  Those of us who want to work and are able to do so will seek support if it is effective.

The growing number of people who are out of work because of ill health is a reflection of demographic changes and discrimination in the workplace. The focus needs to be on improving the workplace, not on cutting people’s finances and subjecting them to compulsion.

 

Some Disabled people will not be able to work, nor engage in any work preparation activities. This is equally true for those who just acquire impairments and those who have been claiming benefits for some time. The proposed changes will mean that thousands of Disabled people whose health conditions make it difficult or impossible to work will be forced to carry out work preparation activities without a real prospect of a job.

Thousands of people will be pushed further into deep poverty

The low capability to work related activity element, not only means the person does not have to fulfill job preparation requirements, it also means more money.  As a result of proposed changes people will lose £390 a month. It is shocking that the consultation proposal does not mention this at all.  It is also disappointing there is no clear indication of how many people will be affected.  This is crucial information and we seriously doubt the public can make informed contributions to this consultation without fully understanding the negative financial impact for future claimants.

An attempt to mirror WCA criteria with PIP now, is an attempt to deny as many people as possible transitional protection they may have if the WCA was abolished and PIP was used as a proxy to health element in UC.

Thousands of Disabled people will lose significant part of their income at a time of the cost of living crisis, where 34% of Disabled people are already materially deprived[1] and t 7 in 10 low income households with a Disabled person cannot afford the essentials and almost a half are in debt [2].

 

Manipulating evidence

The government justification for the reform is based on the research showing that 20% of people in the Support Group or on LCWA element said they would like to work at some point in the future.  The same research indicates that only 4% of those felt able to work now if the right job and the right support were available[3].

The reference to changes in the work conditions with an increase in home working is also not relevant to the cohort.  ONS data shows that home or hybrid working is much more prevalent among highly educated highly paid senior professionals.  This cohort or people are highly unlikely to even be entitled to Universal Credit.   On the other hand, the high number of people in low paid jobs are unable to work from home[4].  There is no evidence that the percentage of people working remotely is higher among Disabled workers.  Not all jobs can be done remotely and in any case remote working will still not be an option for the vast majority of Disabled UC or ESA claimants.

 

It is also striking that the only data about changes in the workplace cited in the consultation document is about an increase in home working. There is no data to show improvements in the workplace.  There is on the contrary plenty of evidence that Disabled people are overrepresented in low paid jobs[5], are paid less[6] and are subjected to discrimination[7].

The rising number of people leaving work due to ill health should also be interpreted as a sign of deep structural problems in the workplace.

 

 

Poor employment support

Under the proposed changes many more people will be subjected to conditionality.

Work coaches are not specifically trained, it is unclear how they will be able to help Disabled people to, for example, manage mental health at work.  It is also potentially dangerous to leave so many decisions on the level of conditionality to individual work coaches, as those decisions could be influenced by their knowledge or the lack of it, preconceived ideas and stereotypes.  It also reduces accountability, certainty and the ability of the claimant to challenge.  The DWP research showed that those people who wanted to engage in employment support thought that the most helpful support is when it is individualised, delivered over a substantial period of time and by Disabled people.

We believe it is important for many of us to be able to get good employment support, the support should result in getting good jobs that benefit health.  While there is evidence that work can improve health, it is only true if the job is the right kind of job and the work environment is inclusive.

The work coach will not be able to fast track people through waiting lists for medical treatment, they will not be able to put in place appropriate social care and other support.  This is why it is important that Employment programmes targeted at Disabled people need to be co-produced by Disabled people with Disabled People’s Organisations involved in their implementation.

 

The proposed approach to force support on people who are not able to work because of health conditions will lead to further deterioration in people’s health, greater pressure on the NHS and other services and will cause lost lives.  There is no evidence that sanctions work for Disabled people, there is plenty of evidence about the negative impact they have.

Employment programmes targeted at Disabled people need to be co-produced by Disabled people with Disabled Peoples Organisations involved in their implementation.

 

 

Subjecting Thousands to punitive conditionality regime

Sanctions are harmful and dangerous for Disabled people.

The work and pensions committee concluded in November 2018 that:

“Of all the evidence we received, none was more compelling than that against the imposition of conditionality and sanctions on people with a disability or health condition. It does not work. Worse, it is harmful and counterproductive.

We recommend that the Government immediately stop imposing conditionality and sanctions on anyone found to have limited capability for work, or who presents a valid doctor’s note (Fit Note) stating that they are unable to work, including those who present such a note while waiting for a Work Capability Assessment.

Instead, it should work with experts to develop a programme of voluntary employment support.”[8]

 

In December 2022 MPs were warned that the “aggressive attitude” on benefit sanctions that was taken by DWP in the coalition years of 2013 to 2015 was “back with a vengeance”[9].

The DWP’s own statistics show that more than 500,000 sanction decisions were made against universal credit claimants in the 12 months to January 2023.

In the Budget 2023 referred to strengthening and improving efficiency of the sanctions regime[10].  We are extremely concerned that changing WCA activities and especially changing non-functional criteria will lead to an increased number of Disabled people exposed to conditionality and sanctions.  Giving the huge extra costs of disability and more significant external barriers to work Disabled people face will be discriminatory and especially punitive and will lead move people further from the labor market.

 

 

Response to specific questions

Q1. What are your views on the three Mobilising options?

 

WCA activities and descriptors were designed as a proxy to understanding how difficult it would be for a person to work and take into account wider barriers a person might face.  We fundamentally disagree with activities being taken literally. Therefore we disagree with all proposed options. Difficulties with  mobilising may indicate other things, for example a level of social care support a person might need.

Difficulties with mobilising may mean that a person may need more time, extra support to move around their home.

As mentioned above, there is no evidence that greater number of Disabled people work from home.

WCA mobilising descriptor is different from PIP moving around descriptor.  They were designed for different purpose.  PIP descriptors act as a proxy to identifying extra costs of disability, when WCA descriptors are proxies to barriers to work.

The real outcome of any proposed changes is fewer people qualifying for the health element, greater number of people subjected to conditionality and greater number of people losing substantial amounts of money.  This is why we oppose those options.

 

 

Q2. What are your views on the three Absence or loss of bowel/bladder control (Continence) options?

 

We disagree with the proposed options. This activity again acts as a proxy to the level of support a person may need.  Continence can still be a problem during online meetings, it also will require time and sometimes extra support to deal with it.

The real outcome of any proposed changes is fewer people qualifying for the health element, greater number of people subjected to conditionality and greater number of people losing substantial amounts of money.  This is why we oppose those options.

 

 

Q3. What are your views on the two Coping with Social Engagement options?

Coping with social engagement is relevant in home working situations as well.  A person would need to communicate with their manager/employer in some way by having online meetings or engaging otherwise.

The real outcome of any proposed changes is fewer people qualifying for the health element, greater number of people subjected to conditionality and greater number of people losing substantial amounts of money.  This is why we oppose those options.

 

 

Q4. What are your views on the two Getting About options?

 

As stated above, there are many jobs that cannot be done online, very few Disabled individuals will be able to get those jobs.  Changes to this descriptor will mean that some people with sensory or cognitive impairments will be subjected to work preparation activities for jobs that may never exist or jobs they can never get to.

The real outcome of any proposed changes is fewer people qualifying for the health element, greater number of people subjected to conditionality and greater number of people losing substantial amounts of money.  This is why we oppose those options.

 

Q5. In addition to the above options for change, are there any other WCA activities or descriptors that you think we should be considering changes to and why?

 

We believe there is a need for a radical reform of benefits, based on the recognition of everyone’s right to an adequate standard of living and the social model of disability.  This reform must be co-produced with Disabled people and our organisations.  We do not think the current WCA is working well, but we strongly oppose any changes that would lead to people getting less money, fewer people qualifying or a greater number of people being subjected to compulsion and conditionality.

 

 

Substantial Risk

 

Q6. What are your views on how the LCWRA Substantial Risk regulations could be amended with the emphasis on what work preparation activity an individual is able to safely undertake?

 

Q7. What do you think would be the impact of these changes?

Q8. What could constitute tailored or a minimum level of work preparation activity?

Q9. What are your views on whether we should remove the LCWRA risk group and place the people in this group in LCW risk instead?

Q10. How can this group be safely supported within the LCW risk group?

 

We strongly disagree with any proposed changes to the risk criteria.  Restricting eligibility or removing it will put lives at risk.

The regulations as well as the DWP’s own WCA Health Assessment handbook is clear that this criterion only applies when there is good evidence

 

The substantial risk criteria should only be recommended if there is evidence that substantial risk to the mental or physical health of any person, by reason of some specific disease or bodily or mental disablement, would be triggered if the claimant were found not to have limited capability for work or work-related activity. 

 

The award under substantial risk cannot be made without good evidence. The only consequence of changing or removing this criterion will be that people’s health and lives will be put at risk.  This can lead to serious violations of their human rights.  The reason why 14% of people qualify under this provision is that functional activities and descriptors do not capture everyone who needs this support.

 

 

The consultation document says that removing this criterion is not to subject people to conditionality, however, if substantial risk is removed then we do not see what safeguarding will exist.  This will mean that people who have medical evidence saying taking part in work preparation activity could put their life or health at risk will be left to decisions of work coaches, who are poorly trained and do not have specific knowledge and skills to support a range of Disabled people with different impairments and needs.  Work coaches are not professional psychiatrists or psychologists, they won’t themselves be seeking evidence of possible risk.  All burden will be on claimants to negotiate the level of work related activity they can do.  This will lead to some claimants being forced to do activities that will lead to deterioration in their health.  Some people become ill at work and subjecting them to work preparation activities is completely inappropriate.

We strongly believe no one should be forced to participate in anything that could put their health or life at risk.  Needing to claim benefits to be able to meet basic needs should not be a justification for compulsion, especially where it can lead to deterioration in health.

The better approach would be to offer individualised support on a voluntary basis.

 

 

 

 

[1] O El Dessouky & C McCurdy, Costly differences: Living standards for working-age people with disabilities, Resolution Foundation, January 2023.

[2]  https://www.jrf.org.uk/blog/our-social-security-system-must-support-households-disabled-person-afford-essentials

[3] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/work-aspirations-and-support-needs-of-claimants-in-the-esa-support-group-and-universal-credit-equivalent/the-work-aspirations-and-support-needs-of-claimants-in-the-esa-support-group-and-universal-credit-equivalent

[4] ONS, https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/characteristicsofhomeworkersgreatbritain/september2022tojanuary2023#characteristics-of-homeworkers

[5] https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/tuc-7-10-disabled-workers-earn-less-ps15-hour

[6] https://www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/jobs-and-pay-monitor-disabled-workers

[7] https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/nearly-one-three-disabled-workers-surveyed-treated-unfairly-work-during-pandemic-new-tuc

[8] https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/955/95502.htm

[9] https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwps-aggressive-post-2010-attitude-to-sanctions-is-back-with-a-vengeance/

[10] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spring-budget-2023/spring-budget-2023-html

 

May 262020
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net
A picture of the front cover of the book titled: "The War on Disabled People: capitalism, welfare and the making of a human catastrophe by Ellen Clifford". Behind the text is the image of a man on crutches. The full background, including the image of the disabled man, is rendered in shades of red and black. The text is in white.
The War on Disabled People is now available to pre-order from Zed Books:
Zed are offering a discounted price but DPAC realises that the cost will still be beyond the reach of many people – not least because of the issues covered in the book.
We will be giving away a few free copies kindly donated by Zed to names pulled out of a hat on 15th June. To enter please email your name to mail@dpac.uk.net with ‘Book Draw’ in the subject line.
Very sadly the battle for accessible formats to be available is ongoing… watch this space.
Apr 042017
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

‘The Work Capability Assessment’ is a 30 minute presentation about the WCA, released by DPAC.

The Work Capability Assessment (WCA) is the primary assessment for Employment and Support Allowance, the main social security payment for disabled people and those with a long term health condition. In this documentary advocates, lawyers and claimants outline the fundamental problems with the WCA, and the adverse effects it can have on claimants. They show how the WCA not only fails disabled people, but fails on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) terms; it can worsen people’s health and does not help them return to work. The WCA is carried out by private companies (initially Atos now Maximus). Although some assessments can be carried out smoothly and professionally, others are in buildings that do not have disabled access, require people in pain to sit for hours on hard chairs, and are carried out by assessors who can be rude, and even cruel.

We would like to thank everyone who volunteered their time to talk about the WCA. Some people have requested anonymity, therefore we have either a) used their voice only or b) got actors to record what they said (a lot of claimants are scared of the DWP).

It can be viewed on youtube:

and is available for viewing and download on Vimeo

The Work Capability Assessment from DPAC on Vimeo.

 

Please share this far and wide!

Feb 132017
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Unite Community (Coventry and Warwickshire Branch) along with co-sponsor UCU and supporting organisations Peoples Assembly and Coventry Recovery Centre will be screening the film I Daniel Blake.

Our aim is to raise awareness of the sanctions regime in the benefits system and to highlight the desperation and indignity that this imposes on thousands of people in Britain today.

The theatre will open at 18.00 and we advise that you be seated by 18.05 The film will start at 18.15 and lasts for 1 hour 40 minutes.

After the film there will be a question and answer session in the theatre led by the director of the film Ken Loach, which everyone watching the film is invited to. The Q&A session will last approximately 1 hour.

 

DATE AND TIME

Wed 22 February 2017

18:00 – 21:00 GMT

Add to Calendar

LOCATION

The Goldstein Lecture Theatre

Alan Berry Room

Coventry University, Jordan

Coventry

CV1 5FB

 

There are limited numbers of tickets available. To book tickets  and advise on access needs please email us at mail@dpac.uk.net

 Posted by at 19:50
Oct 312016
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Wanted - Damien Green - For Crimes Against Disabled PeopleToday Damien Green announced a consultation into the Work Capability Assessment a toxic and lethal test of disabled peoples’ ability to work. DPAC have consistently called for this to be completely scrapped as in spite of numerous attempts to reform the tick box computer tests they are still not fit for purpose. How many times do you keep trying to fix the unfixable?

It comes as no surprise either that Disability Charities welcome the changes which are being consulted on – why wouldn’t they after all there’s likely to be lots of financial pickings for them from the further misery of disabled claimants. Already Tom Pollard previously Campaign and Policy Manager for MIND has taken his thirty pieces of silver and moved to work for the DWP.

Overview and what these changes might mean

Now like Lord Freud the banker who wrote the guidelines for welfare reform for New Labour in 3 weeks and without any previous experience of our social security system Damien Green today has said “In the long run there is nothing more expensive than saying to someone, ‘Here’s a benefit you can have for the rest of your life…” Not that I’m sure what he means by that since this does not happen and disabled people face continuous repeat assessments to ensure they haven’t grown back any limbs or had a miraculous cure.

The consultation announced today places an emphasis on getting all disabled people back into work as fast as possible on the false assumption that working in a zero hours or low paid dead end jobs may somehow improve people’s health outcomes. Green seems to particularly single out forcing people with Mental Health and Musculoskeletal conditions back into work as fast as possible for as long as possible. Musculoskeletal conditions include osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia.

This is against a background of massive cuts to MH services to help those with a MH condition receive the support they need. Added to which there are caps to the Access to Work budget , social care funding has been slashed, to access train services in many cases disabled people have to book 24 or 48 hours in advance, Disabled Students’ Allowance has been cut making it more difficult if not impossible for young disabled people to gain qualifications, and people are being forced to give up work as they lose entitlement to PIP and their Motability vehicles are taken away.

Further between 2011 and 2015 the number of Jobcentres employing a full-time advisor to help disabled people navigate the support system and find employment fell by over 60 per cent from 226 to just 90, with reductions in every recorded year.

Does Damien really not understand that without the right support services in place disabled people even if they want to cannot work? Is it really too complex for politicians to grasp that support services must be available to allow disabled people to work if they want to and feel able to. Do they really not understand that for some disabled people working is not and never will be an option?

And what of employers?  of course they’re queuing up to retain and employ disabled people and all workplaces are accessible as we all know. The much lauded Disability Confident campaign resulted in a whopping 40 private firms signing up in 3 years.

But not just Damien also Jeremy Hunt, the much trusted health secretary also suggests getting people back to work had major health benefits. He is reported to say that as it cost £7bn a year to treat long-term health conditions that kept people out of work, and employment could be a part of recovery.

Duncan Selbie, chief executive of Public Health England, said “People in work generally have better health.” Something that I would have thought is obvious as people not in work often have long term health conditions or impairments which prevent them from working. Thus an utterly meaningless statement if ever I’ve heard one.

One particularly worrying statement is “No one wants a system where people are written off and forced to spend long periods of time on benefits when, actually, with the right support they could be getting back into work.” Which we feel means they plan to scrap the Support group.

This would certainly fit in with the announcement on October 1st when Damien Green announced there would be an end to repeat WCA assessments for people with permanent or progressive conditions. There was little detail on the announcement with more questions being raised that answers given (such as which conditions would be excluded from repeat assessments) The DWP promised to release guidelines to clarify exactly what this change means – to date no such clarification has appeared.

My Challenge to Damien Green and why these proposals are a crock of  ****

Dear Damien find an employer for this person. I know having to work as well as survive will help her wellbeing. Please note Damien at the moment she has no money to feed herself or her family due to the barbaric and flawed WCA assessment.

“I am writing this email as I feel desperate and alone after I had a phone call today saying I scored 0 points on my esa assessment. I don’t know where to turn or what to do.

I will start from the beginning. From being young I have had hip disabilities and went through many many operations between the ages of 12 and 19. In my early twenties I broke my left hip 4 times. Also in my early 20’s my spine started to deteriorate and to date I have had 3 emergency operations to try to correct this. During one operation I was left with that much damage and scar tissue I have loss of feeling and severe foot drop in my left foot.

Due to my hip problems I have arthritis in both hips and I am awaiting hip replacements in both hips. Due to my left femur being broken 4 times it is no longer straight meaning the hip replacement surgery will be very difficult which is why my surgeon is trying to leave it as long as possible as the surgery could end very badly.

I have suffered with chronic pain all my life but have always worked until earlier this year when I had my contract ended by work as I was no longer fit to do my job due to my disabilities. This is when I started claiming ESA.

Recently I have had major changes to my health leaving me doubly incontinent. I have to self catheterise twice daily. I am experiencing that much pain I am taking copious amounts of medication including morphine every 3 hours. My mobility is very restricted and my partner has had to give up work to care for me. I can’t cook, clean, go to the shop. My emotional and mental health is suffering terribly and I am on anti depressant medication.

I attended my ESA assessment last week and the decision maker telephoned me today telling me that I had not scored any points at all during the assessment and my benefits have been stopped.

Because my partner has come out of work our tax credits claim was ended and we have had to re apply meaning we are not receiving any money from tax credits at the moment. The only money we had support us and our two children was the ESA payments of £72 per week and £36 per week child benefit.

When the advisor phoned me with the news today I broke down in the phone. I feel as though I am on the verge of a nervous breakdown. I can not go to work as I am too unwell. I spend a lot of my time feeling sleepy and not with it due to my medication, I can not control my bowels, I am in constant severe pain, my mobility is limited, my bladder does not empty itself so I have to self catheterise, I have short term memory loss and confusion due to medication, the list is endless. As the rent is now not being paid and with our previous arrears which I was paying off before this I am terrified my kids are going to lose their home. I can’t put food in the cupboards, gas and electric on. I feel hopeless and desperate.

I don’t know how this works. I have always worked I am not trying to get anything under false pretences. If I could work I would. I have lost my independence and I feel that the DWP are taking away my dignity along with it by making me beg to be able to live.

I am unsure why I have sent you this email but I don’t know where to turn. I am so sorry if this makes no sense. ”
What you can do

Write or email Damien to let him know what you think

ministers@dwp.gsi.gov.uk or Caxton House, 12, Tothill Street, London,SW1H

also please respond to the consulation

Full consultation here

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/work-health-and-disability-improving-lives

take part in consultation here

https://consultations.dh.gov.uk/workandhealth/consult/

 

 

 

 Posted by at 18:51
Jun 132015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Ref: ESA50 forms

13.06.15

Dear Maximus,

DPAC has become aware of a number of serious issues in relation to the ESA50 form.  In fact, the evidence received seems so extreme as to be almost unbelievable but a pattern has started to emerge.

For example, this month, a benefit claimant has been refused ESA (and a mandatory reconsideration upheld the decision), based on an assessment, but also based on an ESA50 form which 2 years earlier contributed to the same decision. But 2 years ago, the ESA decision was found to be flawed and overturned by a tribunal. Still, the same ESA50 form was used again this time by Maximus and the claimant has for a second time appealed the decision. But of course, this time, he has had to wait for the Mandatory Reconsideration outcome on no income before being allowed to lodge an appeal.

Another claimant was awarded ESA 2 years ago on the basis of the ESA50 he submitted, and was not required to undergo a face to face Work Capability Assesssment. But this month he has been asked to attend a WCA with Maximus without having to submit a new ESA50.  So assuming that Maximus is again using the same earlier ESA50 form to assess his capability for work, it should lead to the same conclusion that a face to face WCA is not needed to decide that he is entitled to ESA.

This does not make sense, and disabled people deserve much better than this.

While Maximus has shown itself to be fairly accomodating and prepared to accept more recent ESA50s and a reasonable deadline for completing the form when requested by claimants, that is just not good enough. Claimants should not have to argue their individual case in order that Maximus fulfill their contractual requirement for the issuing of ESA50 forms, nor should they have to negotiate a deadline for completing and submitting the form when DWP has decided that 4 weeks are necessary to do so.

The WCA is desperately flawed and badly failing many claimants, as shown by the recent story of a woman who was found fit for work although she has Parkinsons disease and a brain tumour, https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-parkinsons-brain-tumour-ruled-5822041, which is why DPAC has repeatedly called for it to be scrapped, but in the meantime claimants deserve to be treated fairly, consistently and lawfully in their dealings with Maximus.

DWP’s argument for reassessing claimants endlessly is that medical conditions can vary, which makes the re-use of a 2 year old form unjustifiable, and this has been criticised by tribunals which have had to decide on these cases.  Likewise, claimants who are given less than 4 weeks to complete their ESA50 forms are placed at a substantial disavantage compared to claimants who benefited from 4 weeks to do so.

DPAC is demanding that Maximus and DWP ensure that every claimant is issued with an ESA50 before each WCA and is given 4 weeks to submit it. DPAC is also demanding that Maximus require claimants to attend a face to face Work Capability Assessment only after consideration of a recent or up-to-date ESA50

Anything less would be unacceptable and probably unlawful.

We look forward to your comments,

Yours sincerely

Disabled People against Cuts (DPAC)

 Posted by at 15:41

Mar 172015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

This is a repost as we’ve been made aware that DWP are sending out a new crop of letters to those in the ESA support group

We ‘ve had increasing numbers of emails from those in the ESA support group facing constant harassment from local job centres. Harassment takes the form of letters and phone calls ‘inviting’ people to work focused interviews, chats with job coaches or other ‘helpers’. Another type of ‘invite’ suggests that the job centre need to check you’re getting the right amount of benefit they advise you to take in bank statements and other documents. Often these letters and phone calls wrongly state that your benefits are at risk if you do not attend. All such interviews are voluntary according to the regulations, not mandatory. Its sounds like a scam warning from some dodgy company doesnt it, but this is the DWP Job Centre, supposedly public servants, causing anxiety and misery.

We have reproduced two template letters to use if these scams happen to you -with thanks to John Slater

Your Name

Address 1

Address 2

County

Post Code

Name JCP Manager

Address 1

Address 2

County Post Code

Date

Ref: NINO

Dear JCP Manager   I received your letter of <insert date> stating that you have arranged a work‐focused interview for me on <insert date> at <insert time> without my knowledge or consent.

The DWP is aware that I have been placed in the Support Group for Employment and Support Allowance and therefore exempt from activity of this nature. S.19 of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 specifically forbids the Secretary of State from imposing any work‐related requirements on anyone allocated to the support group.

This letter has caused me considerable distress and has exacerbated my illness. Should the DWP persist in sending me further letters of a similar nature I can only conclude that it does so knowing that it will cause me alarm or distress. Such actions are a criminal offence under section 2 of the protection from Harassment Act 1997 and I retain the right to make a criminal complaint to the police.

As the DWP is acting contrary to the Welfare Reform Act 2012 please regard this letter as notification to cease and desist all such activities immediately.

I will not be attending the work‐focused interview and in doing so I will not be placing my entitlement to ESA at risk. Any suggestion by the DWP to the contrary will be considered harassment.

I remind the DWP that I will continue to comply with all lawful requirements in respect of my ongoing claim for ESA.

Yours sincerely

A. N. Other

Your Name

Address 1

Address 2

County

Post Code

Name JCP Manager

Address 1

Address 2

County Post Code

Date

Ref: NINO

Dear JCP Manager

I received your letter of <insert date> stating that you have arranged an interview for, without my knowledge or consent, on <insert date> at <insert time> because my circumstances may have changed and the DWP need to ensure my payments are correct.

The DWP is aware that I have been placed in the Support Group for Employment and Support Allowance and therefore exempt from any work‐related activity. S.19 of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 specifically forbids the Secretary of State from imposing any work‐related requirements on anyone allocated to the support group.  It also makes no provision for people allocated to the Support Group to be summoned to attend random benefit interviews.

On the .GOV website the DWP states:

You’ll then be placed in 1 of 2 groups if you’re entitled to ESA:

work‐related activity group, where you’ll have regular interviews with an adviser

support group, where you don’t have interviews

In fact the DWP has the Benefit Centre network that contains benefit integrity centres and performance measurement to undertake this type of review by appropriately qualified officers. Therefore, this interview appears to be incompatible with the DWP own processes.

In respect of payments the DWP knows that I am in the Support Group and the amount I am in receipt of. Therefore, it can easily determine if this amount is correct without recourse to a face to face review.

To the best of my knowledge my circumstances have not changed. If the DWP has evidence to the contrary please address them to me in writing as I find the benefit system far too complex and distressing to deal with on the telephone or face to face. I also rely on extensive support from other people when dealing with the DWP.

This letter has caused me considerable distress and has exacerbated my illness. Given that the proposed review is incompatible with the DWP own business processes and published guidance I can only assume that its purpose is to cause me alarm or distress.  Should the DWP persist in sending me further letters of a similar nature I can only conclude that it does so with the same intent. Such actions are a criminal offence under section 2 of the protection from Harassment Act 1997 and I retain the right to make a criminal complaint to the police.

Please regard this letter as notification to cease and desist all such activities immediately.

I will not be attending the interview and in doing so I will not be placing my entitlement to ESA at risk. Any suggestion by the DWP to the contrary will be considered harassment.

I remind the DWP that I will continue to comply with all lawful requirements in respect of my ongoing claim for ESA.

Yours sincerely

A. N. Other

Templates can also be downloaded at the links below

Correct Detail or Support Invite Reply Template (1)

WFI reply template

 Posted by at 19:20
Mar 042015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

From 1st March Maximus took over the contract for carrying out the notorious Work Capability Assessment.

Disabled campaigners and our supporters are clear that simply altering the provider will fail to correct the gross injustice that the WCA represents. This is an assessment that seeks to redefine who is and is not disabled in order to push the most disadvantaged members of society off benefits while lining the pockets of the private sector with public money.

Maximus, a company with a history of disability discrimination and improper practices, will be paid more than double what Atos was for the contract. Meanwhile very little will have changed: Maximus will be using the same buildings, many of which are not accessible to disabled people, assessment staff will still not necessarily have any knowledge of the conditions they are evaluating, and, most significantly, the fundamental flaws of the assessment which tests functionality as opposed to employability will continue.

The only way to ensure a fair and just social security system is to scrap the Work Capability Assessment and bring benefit tests back within the public sector.

Mark Serwotka, General Secretary, PCS Union
John McDonnell MP
Paula Peters, National Steering Committee, Disabled People Against Cuts
Ellen Clifford, Inclusion London
Jane Aitchison, PCS, Joint National Secretary Unite the Resistance
Katy Clark MP
Ian Hodson, National President, Bakers Food and Allied Workers Union
Mick Carney, National President, Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association
Sean McGovern, TUC GC Councillor for Disabled Members
Siobhan Endead, National Officer for Equalities, Unite the Union
Linda Burnip, Disabled People against Cuts
Debbie Jolly, Disabled People against Cuts
Andy Greene, Disabled People against Cuts
Roger Lewis, Disabled People against Cuts
Anita Bellows, Disabled People against Cuts
Bob Ellard, Disabled People against Cuts
Denise McKenna, Mental Health Resistance Network
Jane Bence, New Approach
John McArdle, Co-Founder Black Triangle Campaign (Edinburgh)
David Churchley, Co-Founder Black Triangle (Glasgow)
Dr Stephen Carty GP,  Member and Medical Adviser Black Triangle
Steven Preece, Welfare Weekly Editor
Johnny Void, Johnny Void blog
Carole Ford, WOWcampaign
Laura Stringhetti, WOWcampaign
Michelle Maher, WOWcampaign
Ian Jones, WOWcampaign
Frances Kelly, CarerWatch
Rick Burgess, NewApproach
Eleanor Lisney, Sisters of Frida
Mark Harrison, Equal Lives
Sarah Hatch, South East London People’s Assembly
Amanda Nelson, South East London People’s Assembly
Pat Onions, Pat’s Petition
Anne Pridmore, Being the Boss

 Posted by at 20:47
Feb 252015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Reposted from the brilliant Kate Belgrave https://www.katebelgrave.com/ with thanks

Readers of this site will remember that a couple of weeks ago, I posted questions about people’s right to record and film face-to-face assessments as they go through the work capability assessments that are to be run by Maximus.

I wanted to know if Maximus will allow people to record their face-to-face assessments on their phones or any recording gear that they have – from the pointwhen Maximus takes over the grisly WCA process. I also had other questions, which I put to Maximus last week. I’ve listed these questions below, along with the answers (perhaps I should say “answers”) I got back (had to lean on Maximus’ US office for a response in the first instance, but got one of sorts in the end).

Needless to say, the entire exercise was a complete waste of time. You’ll see below that the responses give us five-eighths of fuck all as far as concrete information, timelines and/or actual process detail is concerned. No surprise there, of course – but I thought I’d post the responses anyway, because I think there is merit in highlighting the PR guff and detail-free twattery that Maximus has decided to specialise in when it comes to this contract. There’s also a dismissive aspect to a lot of the language, which you might find illuminating – a sort of “we’ll do things at our pace and you lot can wait” – air which nettled me badly. It should get on your nerves, too.

This sort of thing, for example:

Change cannot occur overnight”

[We] will take forward this and other ideas to the Department for their consideration”

I am unable to comment on such speculation,” when I raised a perfectly valid point about Maximus’ view of the future of the ESA Support Group.

Sue Marsh actually got in touch with me after the press office did to say that I could speak with her, because my questions “come under her job,” but that attempt at overture got right up my nose, as well. For one thing – if Sue Marsh is the person who is best placed to answer questions in the sort of details required, then the Maximus press office should go to her for those answers before responding to whoever asked them. It’s not my job to sweep together Maximus’ various outputs on its own assessment processes as and when those outputs drop out of different holes, or to wait around for the responses that Maximus feels it has best finessed. For another thing – I can’t see myself responding well to any aspect of the many-pronged charm offensive that Maximus has launched in its sorry and very costly attempt to sculpt and polish the WCA turd. Let’s face it – any company that comes out with a phrase like “more touch, more communication,” apparently in all seriousness, should not be encouraged to contribute further to any dialogue on any topic, or to remain involved in any process where people require something better than bullshit. It’s my view that in a general sense, any company that speaks lines like “more touch, more communication,” needs a smack in the soft parts right there.

Anyway.

Here are the sorts of responses you get if you ask Maximus questions about recording face-to-face assessments, or about support for people with mental health conditions as they go through WCAs, or whether or not Maximus would bid for contracts to “provide” work-focused activity for people in the ESA support groupif people in SG are ever pushed into such activity. I just want to give you a feel for the sort of Jog On contempt that those who ask for actual details about processes are treated with.

Opening response from Maximus:

We are firmly focussed on managing a stable transition for next week. Naturally when we are up and running we will want to introduce innovative changes to the customer experience but they have to be done with DWP consent and change cannot occur overnight.”

Well – that’s a Fuck Off if I ever heard one (and I’ve heard plenty of them). I think it’s the “Naturally” that makes me want to punch the screen when I re-read that effort. May I say that I’ve had enough of the phrase “Customer experience” as well. People who must go through the work capability assessment are not “customers.” They’re not wafting around a pick and mix display, or selecting iphones from a catalogue. They’re sick and disabled people who must endure an outsourced assessment process at the hands of voracious private companies that are in turn hired by governments which are absolutely intent on selling the idea that everyone on a benefit is a scrounger. There’s no customer choice or shopping around going on here. The government is the customer – not the people who the assessment process is inflicted on.

Ho hum. Here are the questions and answers, then. Short and not particularly sweet, etc:

Recording face-to-face assessments:

My question:

Re: the recording and filming of WCA face-to-face assessments. Will Maximus permit the audio recording and filming of WCA face-to-face assessments? If so, how will assessment recordings operate? Will people be able to record and film their assessments using their own recorders and cameras? This is an important point for people going through WCAs – without a recorded file of their assessment, there is little transparency of the face to face aspect of the process in particular. The DWP and Atos were challenged by lawyers on this point and forced to change protocol.”

Maximus response:

In respect of recordings we are studying this and will take forward this and other ideas to the Department for their consideration. We agree there are merits to this change, but there are other considerations as well, including the potential for the customer to be potentially constrained because some people are shy when being recorded. We want to ensure customers feel as comfortable through this process as possible, so all of these factors must be considered.”

Right. As it happens, a simple Yes or No would have sufficed here. Maximus could instruct its assessors that from of the start of the contract, people can record and film their assessments on their own recording gear if they want to, or bring someone along to do that (as I’ve said before, I’ll do it anyway. The hell with it). When Atos was in charge of this shambles, people had to ask for a change of appointment until they could get one with an assessor who was prepared to be recorded and where the dual recorders that Atos and the DWP insisted on were available. As for “the potential for the customer to be potentially constrained because some people are shy when being recorded” – I would have thought the answer to that one was simple. People – sorry, “Customers” – don’t have to record their assessments if they don’t want their assessments recorded. Naturally.

I can’t believe we’re still talking about this after all these years. Surely there is a limit to the number of times that the DWP and its providers can arse about on this subject? I’m also unclear on the basics here. Can people still ask for a recording to be made on official equipment? Does Maximus have enough equipment to meet demand?

Next up was:

My question: assessments for mental health claimants:

I asked: “What protocols and guidance will Maximus have in place for assessments for people with mental health conditions? Atos came in for considerable criticism regarding its failure to accurately assess ESA claimants with mental health conditions. Could we discuss the structures that Maximus will have in place and the training that assessors who conduct assessments for mental health claimants will have?”

Maximus response:

With regard to assessing claimants with MH conditions we have established a Customer Representative Group with MH charities on this. One of the group activities will be to review training materials so that they better reflect MH issues. We are also review the use and numbers of MH champions in the business as well as employing OTs who often have extensive experience at supporting people with MH issues in work and life.”

You can understand why I found this underwhelming – ie barely worth reading. I suppose that I was hoping for something a little more robust and detailed than plans for reviews, and more chat and roundtables with, presumably, the usual charities. I wrote extensively on Atos’ evasiveness on the work and effectiveness of these so-called Mental Function Champions (and found at the time that Atos didn’t report to the DWP on the performance or otherwise of those “champions.”) Just a little history on the sorts of shenanigans you can get on this topic: In 2012, Mark Hoban told parliament that “we have introduced a mental health champion in every single assessment centre throughout the country.” Actually, he hadn’t. The DWP told me that 60 mental function champions were in place and that they largely worked a phone advice line. A group of us had to work for months to get Atos and the DWP to agree to a meeting about the WCA and these “champions” with charity workers from a couple of small, independent mental health charities – ie the kind of organisations that weren’t generally invited to roundtables or to share their views on the DWP and Atos with the DWP and Atos. The whole thing was a total pile and to this day I speak with people who have mental health conditions and talk about suicide when discussing their next WCA. Why people can’t simply be assessed by their own GPs and support teams is beyond me (and that goes for all sick and disabled people who need benefits. The WCA isn’t required at all – unless, of course, your aim is to push the idea that work for all is great and that people who receive benefits shouldn’t).

Moving on:

My question: the future of the ESA Support Group:

I asked: “There have been reports of people placed in the ESA Support Groupreceiving letters from jobcentres calling them to work-focused interviews. Would Maximus consider bidding for any contract to provide welfare-to-work or work programme-type schemes if the government decides that people in the Support Group should engage in work-focused activity?”

Maximus response:

The company simply said that it was unable to comment on such speculation.

To which I say – Bollocks. I asked a perfectly legitimate question about Maximus’ view of the future of the Support Group. As Benefits and Work explains: “the ESA support group is for claimants who the DWP consider to have such severe health problems that there is no current prospect of their being able to undertake work or work-related activities.” So. Either Maximus respects the idea of the integrity of a support group which exists for people who are exempt from work and work-focused activity, or it doesn’t. If it does respect that idea, it won’t consider bidding for any future contracts for work-focused activity for people in the Support Group, if that is a line that the government decides to pursue. Which the government will. It already has. The DWP already sends letters to people in the support group asking them to attended work-focused interviews. Simple as that really.

Anyway – that’s Maximus. Not a lot of joy there. Perhaps I will try putting these questions to them again during next week’s day of #scrapWCA action. Details of activities here.

Follow Kate on twitter : @hangbitch

Feb 212015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Logos for DPAC, Black Triangle, Mental Health Resistance Network, New Approach,  and UK Uncut

London Demo

Acts for the London Demo

Find your nearest protest

Protest on Social Media

Pictures and video to share

Join the Thunderclap

Balham ~ Bournemouth ~ Bradford ~ Brighton ~ Bristol ~ Cardiff ~ Croydon ~ Dundee ~ Ealing ~ Edinburgh ~ Glasgow ~ Gloucester ~ Hull ~ Huddersfield ~ Inverness ~ Ipswich ~ Leeds ~ Leicester ~ Lincoln ~ Manchester ~ Norwich ~ Portsmouth ~ Plymouth ~ Reading ~ Sheffield ~ Stockton-on-Tees ~ Sunderland ~ Toronto ~ Truro ~ Wrexham and Maximus HQ in central London.


See this great promo vid by @MarquisLeDain

See Paula Peter’s interview about the Day of Action in the famous Artist Taxi Driver, Chunky Mark’s Cab


The London Protest

Roll Up!, Roll Up! Roll Up!

Mark the return of the WCA (Work Capability Assessment) by attending

Maximarse: Same Circus, Different Clowns

Monday 2nd March @ 1pm,
Maximus HQ, 29 Queen Anne’s Gate, London SW1H.

Visit the Facebook Event Page

Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, Same Circus, Different Clowns version 5

While Atos may have left the ring, the WCA – The Greatest Sham on Earth, continues to amaze, astound and confound all who come across it. This flawed ‘functional assessment’ continues to baffle medical science, ignore centuries of barriers, fly in the face of irrefutable evidence, dismiss the experience of millions of disabled people; and most importantly of all – impoverish hundreds of thousands of people, in the pursuit of ‘reducing welfare’ costs in the name of austerity.

So far, almost 4.8 million (yes, you read it correctly) WCA’s have been carried out, with many disabled people forced on to schemes like the Work Programme, where only 26 000 have found any kind of paid employment. Meanwhile, support streams which actually support disabled people to find and stay in work, such as DLA (Disability Living Allowance) , Access to Work  & ILF (Independent Living Fund)  continue to be decimated by cuts or abolished altogether.

Ringmaster Iain Duncan Smith presides over the farce of a 3 ringed circus of the Department for Work and Pensions, Atos now Maximarse & Work Programme Providers. All are making disabled people perform meaningless tricks for the entertainment of politicians and the Daily Mail reading public, and this will continue to wreak havoc in the lives of millions of British people. Countless suicides have been blamed on DWP cuts to benefits, and not just by disabled people, but by coroners, journalists and MPs . The DWP itself is investigating up to 60 deaths, to establish their links to benefit cuts.

As part of the National Day of Action against Maximus, DPAC says ‘Scrap the WCA – No to Maximus’ and invites you to attend our tongue-in-cheek homage to the ridiculousness that the WCA is.

We will hold an inclusive circus event, bring acts and activities to entertain you and get involved in. Alternatively, you can join the 25+ towns and cities across the UK.

(Back to top of page)


Acts and entertainments for the London Demo

Roll Up!, Roll Up! Roll Up!

Gasp with awe and be inspired by our glorious & fandabulicious arts and entertainments for your delectation and delight!

Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, Same Circus, Different Clowns version 6

As introduced by our very own MC, the one and only  …… Rockin’ Paddy

(And if you’re all good boys and girls and ask him very very nicely, he might sing “Battle of Whitehall” for you too!)

Disabled people know all about having to jump through hoops, but we can still be wowed and mesmerised by the elegance, control and sheer beauty of the display by hoop artist ………. Alice Rose

 And now, from the sublime to the amazing, a display of fire antics that will have your jaw on the floor, we present you ……… Eddie “FireSmile” Grant

As musical interlude, to allow you to gain your composure, we present the Kilburn Unemployed Worker’s Group Choir presenting the inaugural public performance of their original composition “David Cameron is a W******

Back from their tour of the great cities of Paris, Berlin, Rome, Madrid, New York, and Los Angeles, we can present to you in all their glory, for one day only, their unforgettable, astounding, awe inspiring, performance of Work Related Activity……. Yes you can believe it, they really are here…………….

the DPAC Synchronised Box-Lifting Display Team!!!!!!!

No display of the circus arts would be complete without an act that will set your heart pounding and your bum-cheeks on the very edge of their seat, watch aghast as those zany disabled people attempt a spectacle that you will not believe ……..

The MILK CARTON RELAY RACE  !!!!!

Fed up with having just a face? Ever wanted to look like a tiger ? a clown ? or a wombat ?

We can help you – visit our face painting artiste ……

the Great Zelda!!!!

(Back to top of page)


Find Your Nearest Protest

Protest

Location

Time(s)

Events Page

Balham

Irene House, 218 Balham High Road, Balham, London, SW12 9BX

10.30 am – 12noon

https://facebook.com/events/921882261178305/

Bournemouth

Bournemouth Assessment Centre, Tamarisk House, 1 Cotlands Road, Bournemouth, BH1 3BG

1:30pm – 2:30pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1439972619627216/

Bradford

Bradford City Centre, Wool exchange buildings, 22 Bank Street, Bradford, BD1 1PR

8.30 am to 10.30 am

https://www.facebook.com/events/1589908967913041/

Brighton

West Lees House, 21-35 Dyke Road, Brighton, BN1 3GD, (North End of the Clock Tower, Next to Old Job Centre.)

1pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1542104427509/

Bristol

Medical Assessment Centre, Government Buildings. Flowers Hill, Brislington, Bristol, BS4 5LA

Cardiff

Run by DAN Cmyru

Block 2, Government Buildings, St Agnes Road, Gabalfa, Cardiff, CF14 4YJ.

1 -4 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1541199339470550/

Croydon

Stephenson House, 2 Cherry Orchard Road, Croydon, CR0 6BA

10 am – 6pm.

https://www.facebook.com/events/641182419342826/

Dundee

Run by Scottish Unemployed Workers Network

Meet outside Boots

1pm

For futher details, contact SUWN at admin@scottishunemployedworkers.net

Ealing

Medical Assessment Centre/Ealing Job Centre

86-92 Uxbridge Road

West Ealing London W13 8RA

9 am -10.30 am

https://www.facebook.com/events/876381712418630/

Edinburgh

Argyle House, 3 Lady Lawson Street, Edinburgh, EH3 9SJ

1pm-3pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/334127460115256/

Glasgow

Corunna House, 29 Cadogan Street, Glasgow, G2 7RD

12.30 -2.30 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1429430507348206/

Gloucester

Job Centre Plus, Cedar House, Spa Road, Gloucester, GL1 1XL


11am – 4pm

https://www/facebook.com/events/881341618589011/

Huddersfield

Huddersfield Jobcentre Plus Castle House, Market Street, Huddersfield, HD1 2NE

11am to 12.30pm

 

Hull

Job Centre Plus, Hill Britannia House, 2 Ferensway, Hull HU2 8NF

(Organised by Hull People’s Assembly)

1pm to 2 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1508382406051019/

Ipswich

Medical Assessment Centre, St. Felix House, Silent Street, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP1 1TF.

1 pm to 4 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1513102252288548/

Leeds

Leeds Briggate LS1 6NP (meet near the Bodyshop)

12 noon until 2 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/369677073211238/

Leicester

1st Floor, Rytland Centre, Halford Street, Leicester, LE1 1TQ

1pm – 3.30 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/522105471264765/

Lincoln

Medical Assessment Centre, Viking House, 98 Newland

1 pm to 3.30 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events178533808358604/

London Central Maximus HQ

Maximus HQ Level 1, Queen Anne’s Gate, London, SW1H 9BU

1 – 5 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/771842739517758/

Manchester

Albert Bridge House, Bridge Street, Manchester, M60 9AT

12 noon until 4 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/346833825508275/

Norwich

St Mary’s House, Duke St, Norwich. NR3 1QA

1pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/790624161029820/

Portsmouth

Medical Assessment Centre, Wingfield House, 316-334 Commercial Road, Portsmouth PO1 4TA

1 pm until 5 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1609767919257826/

Plymouth

Argosy house, longfield road, plympton, plymouth, PL6 8LS

12 noon until 3 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/951081494902471/

Reading

St Mary’s Butts, Reading, RG1 2LG

11 am – 1 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1404292959867177/

Sheffield

Medical Assessment Centre, 1 Hartshead Square, Sheffield, S1 2FD.

1- 3 pm (meet first at 12.30 pm at City centre)

https://facebook.com/events/1526799147602672/

Stockton-on-Tees

Thornoby Assessment Centre, 2nd Floor, Christine House, Sorbonne Close, Thornoby, Stockton-On-Tees

12 noon – 1pm

 

https://www/facebook.com/events/387893081383780/

Sunderland

Sunderland Job Centre, 60-66 John Street, Sunderland, Tyne and Wear SR1 1QT

11 am-1pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/780811318671686/

Toronto

Office of Maximus Canada
56 Aberfoyle Crescent, at Islington Subway Station. More info here

11 am EST

4pm UK time

https://www.facebook.com/events/140258373338318/

Truro

Pydar House, Pydar Street, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 2XD (the current WCA Assessment Centre) After a while spent there protest will move on to  Truro City Centre  outside the JobCentre Plus

12 noon until 2 pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/1002956276384446/

Wrexham

Medical Assessment Centre, Ty Maelor, 15-17 Grosvenor Road, Wrexham LL11 1BW

1pm – 3pm

https://www.facebook.com/events/519696384836975/

(Back to top of page)


Social Media

If you can’t make it to one of the demos – Join us on twitter to protest online

Send your own tweets using the hashtags #ScrapWCA and #Maximarse or use our tweetlist :

Don’t forget to keep an eye on the DPAC Twitter Account @dis_ppl_protest for updates, pictures and live video feeds from the Day of Action

(Back to top of page)


Pictures and Video to share

Video

Promotion Video for the protest by award winning animator Hannah Maines

Artwork

You can download any of these images (Just right-click on the image and select “Save Image As…” or “Save Picture As…..”) to share over Twitter and Facebook or print out to use at the protests around the country

Cartoon Maximus - Same Circus - Different Clowns by Phil Evans

Cartoon Maximus – Same Circus – Different Clowns by Phil Evans

…. and some of Brian Hilton’s magnificent artwork :

Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, Same Circus, Different Clowns version 6Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, Same Circus, Different Clowns version 5Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, Same Circus, Different Clowns version 4IMG_3552Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, number 2. Same Circus, Different Clowns version 2Brian Hilton Artwork for the Maximus Day of action, number 1. Same Circus, Different Clowns

(Back to top of page)


How to Join the Thunderclap for the Maximus Day of Action

 

Go to the Link: https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/21931-maximus-day-of-action?locale=en (Either by clicking on the link above or copying and pasting it into your browser)

On the Thunderclap webpage, the picture below shows the webpage you should see, after clicking the link above

Image of the Thunderclap screen for the Maximus Day of action

To support with Facebook. Click on the red area with the text “support with FACEBOOK” and then see part 1 below

To support with Twitter. Click on the red area with the text “support with TWITTER” and then see part 2 below

Notes:

i). You can join with Twitter and Facebook, if you have accounts with both, it doesn’t have to be one or the other.

ii). Instructions for supporting with tumblr are not given here as this is not generally used.

1 Support with Facebook

If you have clicked on “support with Facebook” in the screen above, you should now see a screen like this.

Image of the Thunderclap Facebook signup screen

The centre of the screen shows what will appear when the thunderclap happens at noon on the day of action. This is what will appear on your facebook page (you don’t have to be using facebook at the time, or even logged in, but it won’t matter if you are).

If you want, you can add your own message to appear when the thunderclap goes off (but you don’t have to do this), just type your message in the grey area which has the text “Make It your own! Add a custom message”

Complete the process of Joining the thunderclap on Facebook, click where it says “+ Add My Support” in the box in red at the bottom of the screen.

You will then get an acknowledgement message to say that you have joined, and that’s it, you’re done!

2. Support with Twitter

If you have clicked on “support with Twitter” in the screen above, you should now see a screen like this:

Screenshot from 2015-02-17 06:43:01

The centre of the screen shows what will appear when the thunderclap happens at noon on the day of action. This is what will appear as a tweet that you have sent (you don’t have to be using twitter at the time, or even logged in, but it won’t matter if you are).

If you want, you can change the tweet message that appears when the thunderclap goes off (but you don’t have to do this), just type your message in the grey area under the text “Make It your own! Add a custom message”

To proceed with Joining the thunderclap on Twitter, click where it says “+ Add My Support” in the box in red at the bottom of the screen.

You will then see a screen which says “Authorise Thunderclap to use your account” (shown below).

Screenshot from 2015-02-17 06:43:24

Click on the “Authorize app” in blue on the left hand side of the screen.

You will then get an acknowledgement message to say that you have joined, and that’s it, you’re done!

(Back to top of page)


 Posted by at 23:55
Feb 152015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Reblogged from Kate Belgrave, with thanks.

This fits in nicely with David Cameron’s “let’s smack a few more people on benefits around and not talk about corporate tax-dodging theme:”

Here is a letter received very recently from a DWP “work coach” by Sean* (name changed), a Northamptonshire man who I’ve known and written about for several years. He has Asperger’s and severe depression.

Here is a letter received very recently from a DWP “work coach” by Sean* (name changed), a Northamptonshire man who I’ve known and written about for several years. He has Asperger’s and severe depression.

Sean finds day-to-day life very difficult to handle (he struggles to leave his house a lot of the time). He actually finds day-to-day life so challenging that even Atos agreed that he shouldn’t have to work. After a face-to-face assessment for his WCA about two years ago (I attended that assessment with him), Atos placed him in the support group for Employment and Support Allowance. As many of you will know, people in the ESA support group are neither required to work, nor to look for work. That’s the whole point of the support group. It’s an acknowledgement (a grudging one, I suspect) by the system as we have it that some people simply aren’t in a position take a job. From Benefits and Work: “the ESA support group is for claimants who the DWP consider to have such severe health problems that there is no current prospect of their being able to undertake work or work-related activities.” Once you’re in the support group, that should be the end of that, at least until your next assessment.

But here is this letter all the same. Disturbing reports of other people in the ESA support group getting letters like this, or calls to attend work-focused interviews, now abound. Sean received this letter out of nowhere and it scared the hell out of him. I imagine that scaring the hell out of him was at least in part the point of the exercise. The DWP doesn’t like people with mental health conditions to feel too secure.

And they don’t. As you can read for yourself, this DWP letter calls Sean to an interview this week to talk about “returning to work” or “starting a new job,” how to “find the right job” and how Sean’s benefits might be affected if he did go to work (even though the government’s assessor has said that he can’t). Even more incredibly, the invitation calls Sean to a group information session. This suggests to me that whoever sent it never read Sean’s file, or even glanced at it. A group session? Sean finds groups of people so challenging that he can barely bring himself to leave the house a lot of the time. He said he couldn’t handle the idea of travelling across town to sit in a room with complete strangers to discuss very personal details.

That is one of the many reasons why the letter is crass in the extreme. There’s a flimsy attempt in it to acknowledge that Sean is not actually obliged to attend the meeting (“not attending will not affect your [benefit] payment,” etc), but the real message is loud and clear.

It was certainly loud and clear as far as Sean was concerned. The message he took from it was that even when the government’s own notoriously harsh medical assessors have agreed that a person can’t work, the government is very much of the opinion that the person can work – and should be pushed to work, more to the point. “Your attendance at this session is voluntary….we nevertheless would like you to consider attending this session,” the letter reads. The threat here is discernible. If anyone who has paid me over the years said “you don’t have to attend this meeting, but I’d like you to,” I’d know exactly what they meant. Sean’s wife Maggie* (named changed) told me the threat became even more explicit when she rang the DWP to say that Sean would not attend the meeting (Maggie makes a lot calls on Sean’s behalf, because he doesn’t like to talk with officials, or on the phone. Maggie herself has a severe mental health condition. She has a schizophrenia diagnoses and has spent a lot of time in hospital). Maggie said that when she called, the DWP said it would note Sean’s non-attendance “this time”- the implication being that he would be asked to attend again. Maggie said she told the DWP that Sean would never attend such a session. She said that the DWP told her not to say Never. Ahem. Neither Sean nor Maggie think they’ve heard the last of this. I doubt they have either.

I have been thinking about all of this as Cameron has tried to divert us from stories about his tax-dodging mates with stories about people with drug problems who are on benefits. It’s all very interesting, you know. I have long believed that this government and others like it want to eliminate all disability benefits. They want people to believe that everyone can work and always work if they’re given enough of a shove. I think this government particularly wants everyone to believe that people with mental health problems are dragging the chain on purpose – that all anyone with a condition like severe depression needs is a nice cup of tea and a gentle (and then less gentle) kick in the pants to get going. The fact that someone with a severe mental health condition receives the sort of letter you see above tells you everything you need to know about the direction we’re travelling in. Atos was hired to ram home the entirely baseless theory that a lot of sick and disabled people on benefits were fit for work. The next stage will be about ramming home the entirely baseless theory that all sick and disabled people on benefits are fit for work.

I’d expect a government that wanted to push that idea would hire an aggressive and voracious welfare-to-work scheme provider to assess people’s fitness for work from this point on – you know, a company that exist to push the welfare-to-work concept (rather than the welfare-because-people-need-it concept) in exchange for heaps of public dosh. Oh wait. It has.


DPAC are investigating instances where people in the support group are being sent letters by the DWP

We are asking people to contact us if you are in the ESA Support Group and have been contacted by your Jobcentre to attend an interview, or group training session. Please email us at mail@dpac.uk.net and we will get back to you.

We will never disclose your name or personal information without your permission, but we may use your case (after your name and all personal details have been securely removed) to campaign against this. If you say no to this, we will not use the information in any way, and your information will still help us to understand what is happening.


 

 Posted by at 17:29
Jan 192015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Reblogged from Johnny Void, with the usual thanks

Centre for Health and Disability Assessments - The logo likely to be used on the paperwork for the Work Capability Assessment

The logo likely to be used on the paperwork for the Work Capability Assessment

Maximus – the US based firm brought in to replace Atos to carry out benefit assessments – will hide their corporate identity behind a hastily erected front company in an attempt to avoid damage to their brand The Guardian revealed yesterday.

According to the paper, the company will not use its logo on letters sent to claimants facing the notorious Work Capability Assessment, instead using a neutral name such as “The Centre for Health and Disability Assessment”.  In fact this company has been up and running since June 2014, suspiciously several months before it was announced that Maximus would be taking over the contract from Atos.  The Guardian should probably have known this, because they are currently running an advertisement for a Social Media Manager for the new company on the recruitment part of their website.

The company was established by senior Maximus directors Leslie Wolf and William Smith and is based in the their offices in East Sussex..  Already they are using this fake ID to recruit Functional Assessors and other staff to work on the new contract with the DWP as they desperately attempt to find enough healthcare professionals who are nasty enough to take on the role.

The suffering caused by the Work Capability Assessment is well documented with an ever growing list of tragic deaths linked to the process.  Despite this Maximus claim that the press coverage of Atos and their shambolic handling of the assessments has been “unjustifiably negative” and that in future people should blame the government if they don’t like what Maximus does.   This incidentally was exactly the same line Atos used when they whined about people complaining about them.  The idea that it is perfectly possible to hold governments responsible for the shitty things they do, and equally condemn the vile shitbags who profit from them, never seems to have occurred to this mercenary bunch of vultures.

It looks like Maximus are also using the same medical recruitment firm that Atos used to hire staff.  Any healthcare professional considering working for these bastards should remember the words of a former Atos disability analyst:

“The job was making me sick …. It’s against my principles to treat people with long term illnesses in such a disgusting way, so I had to give it up.

“People go into those interviews and talk openly to you because you are a nurse and they trust you.

“Then your skills are used against them, to take away their benefits and destroy their lives.

“I can’t be a part of that.”

Join the Day of Action Against Maximus called by Disabled People Against Cuts on March 2nd.

Maximus Day of Action 2nd March A5 leaflet front and back 06

 Posted by at 23:56
Jan 122015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Shown below is a video clip of Shadow Minister for Disabled People Kate Green speaking at the SERTUC disabled workers’ network meeting 30 October 2014, filmed and passed to us by Kate Belgrave

In this clip Kate is saying (from 1.23 in the video)  “We are going to make sure that the work capability assessment is returned to its original purpose of being the first step in the process to diagnose and identify what sort of support somebody who could work at some point would need to have in order to enable them work, and so we will give every single person who goes through the work capability assessment, at the end of their assessment, a statement of how their condition or impairment impacts on their capacity to work. That will refocus the assessment into the right mindset, how to situate (? unclear) your capability for work. It will also, we hope, empower the individual, because that statement will be yours to take to your employer or your work programme provider or training provider and say ‘this is is what I have to contend with. How can we work together to build the support that I need.'”

Our very serious questions to Kate Green are:

  1. Will this be the policy of any incoming Labour Government?
  2. There is no recognition in this statements that people in the Support Group are not able to work, as judged by the already harsh WCA regime, do you really mean that the support group no longer has any meaning?
  3. When you say “everybody going through a Work Capability Assessment”, do you mean this to include (among others):
    1. Claimants with terminal conditions who do not have long left to live
    2. Claimants with severe mental health conditions who are at risk of suicide, or harming themselves or others
    3. Claimants with severe learning difficulties or cognitive impairments
    4. Claimants with high support needs, who will no longer receive ILF funding?
  4. Does Labour intend that the support group will no longer exist for people judged unable to work?

We are extremely concerned about this statement and we call on Kate Green to clarify what these words mean and respond to our questions listed above.

We will publish in full her response on this blog

 

 Posted by at 11:16
Jan 092015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Join The Day Of Action Against Maximus

Maximus Day of Action 2nd March A5 leaflet front and back 06

You can download this A5 leaflet to print, share, tweet and put on facebook here or just the front page here  and you can find more information on the Facebook Event Page


 

A national day of action has been called on March 2nd 2015 against Maximus, the company set to take over from Atos running the despised Work Capability Assessments (WCAs) for sickness and disability benefits.

These crude and callous assessments have been used to strip benefits from hundreds of thousands of sick and disabled people after a quick computer based test ruled them ‘fit for work’.  A growing number of suicides have been directly linked to this stressful regime, whilst charities, medical staff and claimants themselves have warned of the desperate consequences for those left with no money at all by the system.

In a huge embarrassment for the DWP, the previous contractor Atos were chased out of the Work Capability Assessments after a sustained and militant campaign carried out by disabled people, benefit claimants and supporters.  In a panicky effort to save these vicious assessments Iain Duncan Smith hired US private healthcare company Maximus to take over from Atos this coming April.

This is not the only lucrative contract the Tories have awarded this company.  Maximus are also involved in helping to privatise the NHS, running the Fit for Work occupational health service designed to bully and harass people on sick leave into going back to work.  Maximus also run the notorious Work Programme in some parts of the UK, meaning that disabled people found fit for work by Maximus may then find themselves sent on workfare by Maximus.  There is no greater enemy to the lives of sick and disabled people in the UK today than this multi-national poverty profiteer who even are prepared to run welfare-to-work style schemes for the brutal Saudi Arabian government.

Maximus have boasted they will not face protests due to their involvement in the Work Capability Asessments and have even stooped as low as hiring one prominent former disability campaigner on a huge salary in an effort to quell protests against their activities.  We urgently need to show them how wrong they are and call for all disabled people, benefit claimants and supporters to organise against this vicious bunch of profiteering thugs.

Please organise in your local area and spread the word.

Maximus are likely to use the same assessment centres as Atos whilst a list of their premises which provide (privatised) healthcare services can be found below, and a list of Maximus offices where they provide welfare-to-work services can be found below that.

In Central London protesters will gather outside Maximus HQ on  at 1pm or 1.30pm. Level 1 Quuen Anne’s Gate, London SW1H 9BU, just round the corner from the DWP.

Look out for online action to be called on the same day.


 

List of Maximus Health programme Locations

Manchester

12 Edward Court, Altrincham Business Park | Altrincham, WA14 5GL
Tel: 0845 894 1664

Birmingham

2 Home Farm Courtyard, Meriden Road | Berkswell, CV7 7BG
Tel: 0845 504 0230

London (City)

Boston House, 63-64 New Broad Street | London, EC2M 1JJ
Tel: 0845 504 0200

London Bridge

3rd Floor, 115 Southwark Bridge Road | London, SE1 0AX
Tel: 0845 504 0202

HML Transport (Derby)

41 Brunel Parkway, Pride Park | Derby, DE24 8HR
Tel: 0845 504 0280

 

Employment and Works programmes

London Branches

Ilford

1st Floor, Newbury House, 890-900 Eastern Ave | Newbury Park, Illford, Essex, IG2 7HY
Phone: 0203 551 7595 | Fax: 0208 599 5218 | ilford@maximusuk.co.uk

Camden

2nd Floor, Bedford House, 125-133 Camden High St | London, NW1 7JR
Phone: 0203 551 7477 | Fax: 0203 551 7480 | camden@maximusuk.co.uk

Ealing

2nd Floor, 84 Uxbridge Rd | Ealing, London, W13 8RA
Phone: 0203 551 7488 | Fax: 0203 551 7495 | ealing@maximusuk.co.uk

Hammersmith and Kensington

Brook House, 235 -239 Shepherds Bush Rd | Hammersmith, London, W6 7AN
Phone: 0203 551 7499 | Fax: 0203 551 7500| hammersmith@maximusuk.co.uk

Hillingdon (Hayes)

914-918 Uxbridge Rd | Hayes, Middlesex, London, UB4 0RW
Phone: 0203 551 7525 | Fax: 0203 551 7526 | hillingdon@maximusuk.co.uk

Islington

2nd Floor, Unit 7, Blenheim Court, 62 Brewery Rd | Islington, London, N7 9NY
Phone: 0203 551 7535 | Fax: 0203 551 7540 | islington@maximusuk.co.uk

Peckham

Ground Floor, 218-222 Rye Lane | Peckham, London, SE15 4NL
Phone: 0203 5517565 | Fax: 0207 6351794 | peckham@maximusuk.co.uk

Romford

3rd Floor, Lambourne House, 7 Western Rd | Romford, Essex, RM1 3LD
Phone: 01708 629208 | Fax: 01708 629212 | romford@maximusuk.co.uk

Walthamstow

Landmark House, Uplands Business Park, Blackhorse Lane | London, E17 5QJ
Phone: 02035 517575 | Fax: 02085 275301 | walthamstow@maximusuk.co.uk


List of Maximus Work Programme Locations

London Branches

Ilford

1st Floor, Newbury House, 890-900 Eastern Ave | Newbury Park, Illford, Essex, IG2 7HY
Phone: 0203 551 7595 | Fax: 0208 599 5218 | ilford@maximusuk.co.uk

Camden

2nd Floor, Bedford House, 125-133 Camden High St | London, NW1 7JR
Phone: 0203 551 7477 | Fax: 0203 551 7480 | camden@maximusuk.co.uk

Ealing

2nd Floor, 84 Uxbridge Rd | Ealing, London, W13 8RA
Phone: 0203 551 7488 | Fax: 0203 551 7495 | ealing@maximusuk.co.uk

Hammersmith and Kensington

Brook House, 235 -239 Shepherds Bush Rd | Hammersmith, London, W6 7AN
Phone: 0203 551 7499 | Fax: 0203 551 7500| hammersmith@maximusuk.co.uk

Hillingdon (Hayes)

914-918 Uxbridge Rd | Hayes, Middlesex, London, UB4 0RW
Phone: 0203 551 7525 | Fax: 0203 551 7526 | hillingdon@maximusuk.co.uk

Islington

2nd Floor, Unit 7, Blenheim Court, 62 Brewery Rd | Islington, London, N7 9NY
Phone: 0203 551 7535 | Fax: 0203 551 7540 | islington@maximusuk.co.uk

Peckham

Ground Floor, 218-222 Rye Lane | Peckham, London, SE15 4NL
Phone: 0203 5517565 | Fax: 0207 6351794 | peckham@maximusuk.co.uk

Romford

3rd Floor, Lambourne House, 7 Western Rd | Romford, Essex, RM1 3LD
Phone: 01708 629208 | Fax: 01708 629212 | romford@maximusuk.co.uk

Walthamstow

Landmark House, Uplands Business Park, Blackhorse Lane | London, E17 5QJ
Phone: 02035 517575 | Fax: 02085 275301 | walthamstow@maximusuk.co.uk

South East Branches

Aldershot

Suite 1, 3rd Floor, Victoria House, Victoria Road | Aldershot, GU11 1DB
Phone: 01252 352354 | aldershot@maximusuk.co.uk

Aylesbury

Ground Floor, Walker House, George St | Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, HP20 2HU
Phone: 01296 699870 | Fax: 01296 699871 | aylesbury@maximusuk.co.uk

Banbury

Suite A, Castle Link, 39 North Bar St | Banbury, OX16 0TH
Phone: 01295 675135 | Fax: 01295 675136 | banbury@maximusuk.co.uk

Bracknell

1st Floor, Unit 7, Bracknell Beeches, Old Bracknell Lane West | Bracknell, RG12 7BW
Phone: 01344 859150 | Fax: 01344 304632 | bracknell@maximusuk.co.uk

Burgess Hill

2nd Floor, Greenacre Court, Market Place | Bracknell, RH15 9DS
Phone: 01444 810280 | burgesshill@maximusuk.co.uk

Chichester

1st Floor, Friar’s House, 52A East St | Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1JG
Phone: 01243 850905 | Fax: 01243 785491 | chichester@maximusuk.co.uk

Dartford

Third Floor, West Hill House, West Hill | Dartford, Kent, DA1 2EU
Phone: 01322 352565 | Fax: 01322 293690 | dartford@maximusuk.co.uk

Eastleigh

Suite B, 2nd Floor, Smith Bradbeer House, High St | Eastleigh, Hampshire, SO50 5LG
Phone: 02380 658600 | Fax: 02380 650259 | eastleigh@maximusuk.co.uk

Guildford

4th Floor Dominion House, Woodbridge Rd | Guildford, Surrey, GU1 4PU
Phone: 01483 550 990 | Fax: 01483 457 151 | guildford@maximusuk.co.uk

High Wycombe

2nd Floor, Suite C, The Apollo Centre, Desborough Rd | High Wycombe, HP11 2QW
Phone: 01494 958414 | Fax: 01494 958415 | highwycombe@maximusuk.co.uk

Horsham

2nd Floor, South Suite, Sanford House, Medwin Walk | Sussex, RH12 1AG
Phone: 01403 800160 | Fax: 01403 230408 | horsham@maximusuk.co.uk

Milton Keynes

2nd Floor East, Elder House, 502 Elder Gate | Milton Keynes, MK9 1LR
Phone: 01908 711800 | Fax: 01908 711801 | miltonkeynes@maximusuk.co.uk

Oxford

1st Floor, Suite 3, Threeways House, George St | Oxford, OX1 2BJ
Phone: 01865 364364 | Fax: 01865 364365 | oxford@maximusuk.co.uk

Reading

Ground and 1st Floor, Summit House, 49-51 Greyfriars Rd | Reading, RG1 1PA
Phone: 01189 099189 | Fax: 01189 099191 | reading@maximusuk.co.uk

Slough

1st Floor, South Suite, Wellington House, 20 Queensmere, High Street | Slough, Berkshire, SL1 1DB
Phone: 01753 569500 | Fax: 01392 330195 | slough@maximusuk.co.uk

Southampton

2nd Floor, Podium Unit, Dukes Keep, Marsh Lane | Southampton, SO14 3EX
Phone: 02380 658585 | Fax: 02380 336480 | southampton@maximusuk.co.uk

 Posted by at 14:12
Jan 032015
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Different forms of Government Propaganda began and ended the year. We saw delays, backlogs, more cuts, more campaigns and direct actions. We reproduce some of the DPAC actions, research and call outs from 2014. Highlights included the Westminster Abbey Occupation against the closure of ILF as part of the #saveilf campaign, lowlights included the court case that arrived at the decision that Penning had taken appropriate process into account by saying that ILF users could be entitled to less under local authorities. Chaos with the DWP, PIP, ESA was compounded by misinformation, dodgy stats , backlogs and increasing sanctions. The brilliant Hammersmith and Fulham Coalition against Cuts achieved the abolition of ‘care’ charges by their local authority-proving it can be done. Esther McVey was awarded Scrooge of the year. DPAC was threatened with legal action for our support of the Anthony Kletzander campaign -in response we increased the campaign, and the relationship in the propaganda against disabled people between the DWP and the Mail was finally exposed

News that the UNCRPD Committee had initiated its first ever inquiry into grave and systematic violations of the UN Convention against the UK identified how far our disability rights and independent living had been eroded by the Coalition-although the Mail didnt seem to like it much

Our constant court cases against the DWP continued, and we have more lined up for this year too- yes, we could be talking to you Motability!

We look forward to 2015 and a change in the regime that has seen the poor grow poorer, while the richest grew richer. A year in which we launch Who2vote4? and the DPAC revenge tour. We will continue to fight for #saveilf with an event on 6th Jan at the House of Commons and an online twitter event.

For an excellent review of the fight against cuts from 2010-2014 please download From Cuts to Resistance and if you want a count down to the election , then the DPAC downloadable calender can help

Here’s to a better year in 2015 with thanks to all our members and supporters. Keep up with news in 2015 by subscribing to posts through our website www.dpac.uk.net or follow us on twitter @Dis_ppl_protest

Some selected actions of DPAC in 2014

January saw the posting of a call for those who were waiting for PIP due to backlogs. This post has received over 40,000 views,shares and many comments. The situation has now been described as a backlog that , at the current rate , could take 42 years to clear. For those claiming ‘reforms’ are working have a look to see that they are not: https://dpac.uk.net/2014/01/have-you-waited-months-for-a-pip-assessment/ and let’s not forget the backlog in ESA either-in short complete chaos for disabled people.

In ‘Austerity Street: the real impacts’ we reproduced some of the stories we had received from those left without cash and homes via sanctions, delays and backlogs. This was in response to Love Production’s poverty porn , Benefits Street, part of the media’s continued demonization regime -the campaign incorporated a twitter fest against the format of biased programming. We supported our partners in Canada Sudbury Coalition Against Poverty (SCAP) and Ontario Coalition Aginst Poverty (OCAP). In an international campaign against increasing homelessness. Austerity is global. We supported Boycott workfare against CAPITA cashing in on poverty.

Through the excellent work of Nick Dilworth we exposed more BBC media double dealing and the fact that they weren’t publicizing the 88% success rates of those claiming ESA and asked ‘Are the DWP failing apart at every level? When a freedom of information response incorrectly claimed that PIP was subjected to sanctions. In another they claimed that the cap would be cut for those without children, both were incorrect. With Inclusion London we campaigned against the Care Act’s exclusion of ‘independent living’ and DPAC also  joined Hands off London Transport against ticket office closures, as well as regional Rail protests

February We joined  the many direct actions against the removal of legal aid. Raquel Rolnik ‘s report on the bedroom tax is published and recommends immediate suspension of the bedroom tax. The Government’s response is to accuse her of giving sacrifices to Marx and telling her to ‘sort out her own country’. We republish the excellent ‘Why the rise of UKIP is dangerous for disabled people’ and receive the usual abuse from Kippers proving the point. DPAC, Black Triangle and Wow publish a joint statement on Atos exit strategy , calling again for an end to the WCA. We expose how 9 out of 10 sanctions are dismissed when challenged

March More direct actions against proposed cuts in legal aid for judicial review.We publish ‘Punching Holes in Austerity’ an insightful analysis of DPAC and direct actions. DPAC supports #stopchanges2A2W against punitive changes in Access to Work. We publish an update on Anthony Kletzander and questions for HSE in Ireland with ENIL , a story of human rights abuse in Dublin, Ireland, a stand that we would later find invoked a threat of legal action against one of our co-founders.

DPAC joins protests against DWP and ATOS country wide. Protests that were reminiscent of the very first DPAC protests against Atos carried out by DPAC from 2011 onwards, culminating in the 2012 DPAC Atos games that saw Atos tarnished forever. DPAC leads direct actions and online protests against the despised disability Con-fident, leading to the highest number of tweets and retweets ever, exposing the scheme as no more than a Government gloss while they were cutting access to work and removing the means for disabled people to work. We produce a critical analysis of Pennings impact assessment regarding ILF. We reproduce the piece by John Pring asking ‘Where was your MP during the Wow Debate’

April The brilliant Ellen Clifford travels to Canada to embark on a successful speaking tour with raise the rates. We hold a well attended DPAC Grassroots Fightback conference. DPAC, Inclusion London, Equal Lives and the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People promote the #saveilf postcard campaignTop Corrie stars support the postcard campaign to #saveilf.  DPAC supports Lifeworks and protests against cuts to mental health support. DPAC gives its response to Labour on reform of WCA

 May DPAC releases its research documents for download. DPAC and ILF users block the DWP in protest. We learn that disabled students allowances are now under threat of cuts. DPAC publishes a powerful piece by one of our readers that sums up many peoples’ feelings: ‘I’ll never forgive or forget what this Government has done to me and thousands of others‘. We pay homage to the strength of Quiet Riot, celebrate the #dpactour and the success of the Freedom Riders.

June The Independent Living Fund’s Birthday protest happens in June with lots of action outside the DWP. We see JSA benefit sanctions sky rocket under the coalition Government. More actions happen to fight the bedroom tax.

We publish a piece by Angela 28 on how ‘care’ support has been threatened and why that threatens independent living and rights– legal representation was found for many people, but we were aware that this was happening to many more people through emails to dpac mail. Unlike some organisations we attempt to challenge these instances and reject the rhetoric that there is more ‘choice and control’ for disabled people.

At the end of June DPAC with UKUNCUT, and Occupy carry out a daring occupation of Westminster Abbey , after months of planning to highlight the #saveilf campaign. There were 3 police to every protester , and while we had no support from the dear old church , messages of support and publicity poured in

 July We publish a joint statement in response to the Work and Pensions Committee on the WCA from DPAC, Black Triangle, the Mental Health Resistance Network, Pats petition, Wow and New Approach in which we again say the WCA should be scrapped.

An ILF user makes a plea to Disability Rights UK (DRUK) on ILF after he was denied the right to speak at their independent living conference. DRUK did not feel the need to offer any response.  In Disability Rights UK : independent Living or new visions in Neo-Liberalism we ask why the DRUK ‘independent living ‘ conference was sponsored by an organisation running institutions, segregated schooling and ‘hospitals for those with mental health issues. We also launched a highly successful twitter campaign asking the same questions, again DRUK did not feel they owed disabled people any response to this outrage.

DPAC highlights more chaos at the DWP on appeals and sanctions. John McDonnell launches an Early Day Motion to #saveilf. Positive updates and actions on the WCA court case regarding mental health claimants by the Mental Health Resistance Network. We ask that people write to IDS to raise issues happening regarding mental health.

August Rethink calls people with mental health issues a ‘disease burden’ Mental Health Resistance Network respond to the outrage. We call for a stop to discrimination for those transferring from DLA to PIP who do not get backdated paymentsDPAC continues to support anti-fracking protests with Reclaim the power.

We republish the excellent Nick Dilworth’s piece on how the media are ignoring what’s happening to disabled people https://dpac.uk.net/2014/08/a-national-scandal-4-million-people-face-chaos-in-this-country-and-are-ignored-by-the-media/

ILF user John Kelly speaks to BBC on the impacts of the potential loss of ILF. We ask what happens when ILF funds are not ring fenced to local authorities

September sees a national day of Protest against sanctions, bedroom tax and benefit caps.

The fantastic Brian Hilton produces a set of pics for party conference season on #saveilf. DPAC crash the Tory Party Conference via a successful tweet attack and in person. We do the same to Labour.

We publish The Great Farago: UKIP sleight of hand and receive more abuse from Kippers, Richard Howitt Labour MEP quotes the piece and receives even more abuse.

New short film launched with the Daily Mirror on ILF.

The first inkling that the DWP are wrongly asking those in the ESA support group to attend work focused interviews comes to our notice.

DPAC is threatened with legal action for supporting Anthony Kletzander and publicising the abuse of his human rights in Ireland, our response is to publish an interview with Anthony’s parents  on the injustice Anthony and his family have endured.

October We reblog the excellent Johnny Void piece on the boss of Maximus https://dpac.uk.net/2014/10/meet-richard-a-montoni-the-five-million-dollar-maximus-boss-here-to-fleece-the-uks-benefits-system/.

We publish an open letter to Freud who declared that disabled people can work for less than minimum wage. DPAC and Occupy pay another visit to the DWP Caxton House building for ‘Freud must go!’ protest

In Secrets and Lies :maximus the new leader of the inhumans we ask why Disability Rights UK have agreed to a) be part of the Maximus testing process on the WCA and b) why they’ve teamed up with Unum and other insurance companies to develop a TV program showing how much better off disabled people will be if they take out private insurance- with user-led disability organisations like these we dont need enemies.

ILF users return to court to challenge the DWP on ILF. A successful #saveilf vigil happens with road blocks, many messages of support and some great pics.

Welfare assistance fund is next under threat of closure. Campaign to save it is launched.

November The Final Litchfield Review shows that the WCA should be scrapped.

One of our favourite reports of the year : IDS is chased around a building to drown out shouts of murderer at Ipswich- congratulations to the local dpac group for that one!

We ask people to come forward to launch a legal challenge on cuts to the disabled student allowance

£86 million goes missing from Pudsley’s children in need account BBC to blame for mislaying -complainants are actually advised to write to Pudsley via his BBC email

DWP increase attacks on disabled benefit recipients with claims they can harress them off benefits. We put out an urgent call-out https://dpac.uk.net/2014/11/urgent-people-awaiting-wca-assessments-particularly-in-birmingham-please-read/

Work Providers A4E are exposed again in relation to ESA and workfare. The Rev Paul Nicolson wins in court against council tax. Class War’s continuing protests against ‘poor doors’ get to the authorities who make arrests- and Boris is burnt. Meanwhile DPAC discovers Motability’s sneaky backdoor changes to individuals needing to be in work to qualify for support https://dpac.uk.net/2014/11/motability-and-the-deserving-and-undeserving-charity-not-rights/

December ILF users lose court case on ILF but its not over.

DPAC launches an Open letter to Ed, Kate and Rachel on ILF– we’re still waiting for a response

Hammersmith and Fulham abolish home ‘care’ charges, showing it can be done. Congratulations for a great campaign to the excellent Kevin Caulfield and Debbie Domb and all at Hammersmith and Fulham Coalition against Cuts

Esther McVey is named scrooge of the year, which we though was a little too kind to the creature

Unsurprisingly the Work and Pensions report slammed the Government ‘mismanagament of Access to Work – the stop the changes to Access to Work campaign continues.

Questions are asked on the Government costs in fighting against disabled peoples’equality

The link between the DWP and the Mail propaganda is finally nailed and exposed as the DWP is caught out https://dpac.uk.net/2014/12/dwp-caught-giving-disability-propaganda-to-daily-mail/

Nov 292014
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Dr Litchfield has produced the 5th and final Statutory WCA Review. This Review is by far the most interesting and revealing.

  • Lichfield says WCA not fit for purpose

  • WCA Test shown not to be accurate

  • Different ESA Objectives incompatible with each other

  • Mandatory Reconsiderations Not effective say DWP staff.

  • ESA payments should continue during Mandatory Reconsideration

  • Problems with the Assessment Backlog

  • Too many 16-24 year olds being written off by ESA

  • Use of regulation 35 is successful

  • WCA must be scrapped.

OVERVIEW

According to Dr Litchfield, the WCA has exhausted its usefulness, but it should not be replaced immediately as it needs to be ‘embedded’ first to give time for a new system of assessment to be devised. After 5 years of recommendations, mainly aimed at improving the ‘claimant journey’ rather than the test accuracy, Dr Litchfield does not believe the current test can be improved further, but nor does he believe that it fulfills its intended purpose, which was to determine benefit eligibility on the basis of capability for work. ‘There must be clarity of purpose – determining benefit eligibility and supporting employment outcomes may not be compatible objectives’. It was however the basis on which the WCA was introduced.

WCA EVIDENCE BASED REVIEW

There is also a long technical section devoted to the WCA Evidence Based Review. This review has its limitations which are well explained by Dr Litchfield, but it also highlights a very important point: when compared with another means of testing capability for work, the WCA performed much better than the alternative test which was proposed. But when it comes to assessing lack of capability for work, the WCA performance is well below average. ‘When measuring the specificity of the two assessments, the WCA performed better, scoring 87% in comparison to 63% for the 19-activity AA. However, when considering sensitivity, the AA was found to perform better, scoring 72% in comparison to 44%. High specificity would indicate a good capacity to identify those who are able to work while high sensitivity would reflect a good capacity to identify those with limited capability for work’. What this means is that the WCA is good at identifying people fit for work, but ineffective (44%) at identifying people who cannot work. Considering the consequences of being found fit for work when somebody is not, the conservative approach (which in this case does not mean the Tory approach) would have been to allow a few people fit for work to claim ESA rather than to deprive people unable to work of any income. This was not the approach taken, with the all too familiar consequences, and Dr Litchfield does not comment on this.

MANDATORY RECONSIDERATIONS

There is also a section on Mandatory Reconsiderations. Not much can be said about these as DWP has not produced any figures, statistics or indications of how MRs are performing, although they were introduced over a year ago, but it seems that ‘half DWP staff of dispute resolution Decision Makers perceived the process to be effective, with even fewer original Decision Makers sharing the view’. In other terms, less than 50 % of DWP staff perceive the process to be effective which is very worrying. DWP staff as a whole seem to have a better perception of the WCA process than claimants, and the fact that less than half of DWP staff perceive the Mandatory Reconsideration process to be effective would indicate an even lower level of satisfaction among claimants.

In addition, it seems that most DWP staff dealing with Mandatory Reconsiderations are the same people who previously dealt with the now abolished Social Fund. It is all credit to DWP not to have made these staff redundant, but what it means is DWP ‘dispute resolution teams’ dealing with Mandatory Reconsiderations are not ‘located in the areas that they serve, case files have to be requested from other offices and posted across the UK using secure postal services’. Which means more delays, and which may partly or entirely account for DWPs failure to produce any figures on waiting times, but anecdoctal evidence shows that some claimants have waited more than 6 months for their Mandatory Reconsideration outcome, without income. Dr Litchfield does highlight this issue with Mandatory Reconsiderations, although it is outside his terms of reference, by saying “Claiming JSA while undergoing mandatory reconsideration can also be problematic, as people can be informed by Jobcentre staff that they are too unwell to start a claim. This can in turn leave people without support at a time when they need it most. Given a JSA payment is the same as the ESA assessment rate, the DWP should explore whether the ESA assessment payment could be continued through mandatoryreconsideration as it is through the appeals process.” This point was raised by the W&P Committee for DWP to consider, but in the Government’s latest response to the Committee published yesterday, this recommendation was rejected, and it is not part of Dr Litchfield’s recommendations as this is outside the scope of his review.

TWITTER

It is impossible to ignore the WCA reviewers spending time on social media to analyse the perceptions of the WCA on Twitter. The findings were that ‘On average, around 11% were categorised as ‘negative’, compared to only 3% ‘positive’. The remaining 86% were recorded as neutral’. Only 11% negative? For Dr Litchfield, the main reason for these negative perceptions of the WCA process is ‘The regular changes to the assessment would certainly appear to influence negative perceptions. Not only do they keep the WCA in the public eye but each change may reinforce the view that the assessment is flawed’. Another point he makes is that ‘Any assessment should not only be fair but be perceived to be fair’, but for Dr Litchfield, the issue seems to be with failures to communicate properly about the process or the outcomes rather than with inherent flaws to the test or to the environment within which the test is performed.

TRENDS OVER TIME

Dr Litchfield then looks at the trends over time and highlights from October 2013 a substantial increase in the number of claimants placed in the Support Group, which he partly explains by the backlog and the way it was cleared. ‘This spike is likely to be a feature of the way in which the WCA backlog was addressed by the Department and the Provider’. This confirms what had always been suspected until now, that in order to clear the backlog, DWP and Atos prioritised the worst cases which could be cleared through paper based reviews, because it is much quicker, leading to a disproportionate number of claimants being placed in the Support Group.

But this is not enough to explain the spike and anomalies which show a deviation from the initial intent of the WCA, namely the disproportionate number of young people (16-24) with mental health conditions being placed in the Support Group with sometimes a very short prognosis (a word Dr Litchfield intends to have banned from the WCA terminology). Looking closer at this trend, it seems that the main reason for it is the very widespread use of Regulation 35 (2) (b). ‘The main driver for the increase appears to be the use of Regulation 35 (2) (b), where an individual is considered to constitute a substantial risk of harm’. Also contrary to what was highlighted in the last review, there is also now a close concordance between the recommendations of HCP and Decision Makers in the application of Regulation 35 (2) (b) and ‘86% were attributed to risk of harm resulting from an identified mental health condition’. Dr Litchfield could not find any reasons behind the more widespread application of Regulation 35 (2) (b) and is asking DWP to investigate as a matter of urgency whether it is correctly applied. It is a shame that Dr Litchfield does not push the logic further by wondering why HP and Decision Makers are using this regulation more widely with this specific group, and that he did not look at the broader environment, but again that was not part of his brief. Dr Litchfield repeatedly uses the expression ‘unintended consequences’ in relation to changes applied to the WCA process over time. One limitation of this approach is that it ignores the impact of other changes outside the WCA process which could have made the WRAG a ‘toxic group’.

CONCLUSIONS

To conclude, although Dr Litchfield no longer thinks the test is fit for purpose, he recommends giving the WCA a period of stability because ‘it is by no means perfect but there is no better replacement that can be pulled off the shelf’. After 4 reviews saying that it was the right test, this is a poor consolation. There has been a glaring omission in all these reviews, but as it was not part of the Reviewer’s terms of reference, this is not surprising.

Ultimately, the raison d’être of the WCA was to determine which claimants were fit for work, and the litmus test is the number of people found fit for work who have actually found a job. That has never been monitored by DWP and the only figures available are for ESA claimants with a short prognosis forced onto the Work Programme, with dismal results. That no alternative can be ‘pulled off the shelf’ is no justification for keeping a test which is unable to distinguish between claimants fit and unfit for work, which leaves them without income for lengthy periods, and which punishes people for being sick or disabled. Dr Litchfield’s last review confirms what claimants going through the process have been saying all along. The test has been improved as much as it could be, but it has not been made more accurate at identifying which claimants are fit or unfit to work.


We say:  The WCA should be scrapped and should be scrapped now.

 Posted by at 21:29
Nov 142014
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Benefits and Work website yesterday published an email sent by Labour which explains their proposals to improve WCA.

It is a summary of previously announced proposals but we thought we would take this opportunity to restate, perhaps in even more strident terms our position with respect to Labour’s WCA Proposals.

We have done this many times of course, both on the blog and in direct communication with Labour but nothing ever seems to sink in.

Labours proposals are:

1. We will start by transforming the way the WCA is designed to make it more effective at helping disabled people into work. With Labour, disabled people would receive a copy of the assessor’s report of how their health condition may affect their ability to work, and information about the support that is available in their local area to help them – a first vital step towards a more integrated system of support.

2. Secondly, we would continue to produce an independent review of the WCA, and ask the Office for Disability Issues to support an independent scrutiny group of disabled people to work together with the independent reviewer to assess whether the test is being conducted in a fair and transparent way. We will commit to responding to the recommendations of this report.

3. Finally, a Labour government will go further in ensuring that the assessments get it right first time. We would make sure that in the new system there would be clear penalties for poor performance by assessors, measured both on the number of times decisions are overturned by DWP decision makers, and the number of times they are overturned on appeal.

These changes are falling very short of being crucial.

First they are very vague, and do not address the very high number of ESA overturned decisions by tribunals or even by DWP own reconsideration process (before mandatory reconsiderations were introduced).

The reviews that Labour is committed to produce have been discredited. Professor Harrington, by deciding to talk about his misgivings about moving IB claimants onto ESA only, after he lost his lucrative job for DWP when he could have spoken up before, Dr Litchfield because he devised the Mental health descriptors and was very unlikely to challenge them later in his review.

What disabled people have been waiting for, is a sign from Labour frontbench that disabled people have been unfairly targeted by cuts, but also mistreated, bullied, abused and driven to suicide.

They are still waiting.

One Labour backbencher suggested that one way to improve things very quickly was to pause the reassessments. This suggestion from Sheila Gilmore is welcome and it is surprising that it was not followed up by Rachel Reeves or Kate Green.

The focus on disabled people working, contributing to the economy shows that Labour, like the Tories only see people as economical variables, not people who deserve to live a decent life.

Lastly, if you still have some illusions, sanctioning disabled people wasn’t introduced by the Tories, it began under the last Labour Government.

These WCA Proposals from Labour are “figleaf policies”, intended only to do the barest minimum needed to avoid embarrassment for Labour. It hasn’t worked.  

So here it is again, our response to Labour on WCA (maybe this time it will sink in):-

Are you taking the Piss?

The WCA DOESN’T WORK

The WCA is a cause of stress and hardship to disabled people, it is inaccurate, causes harm, and it DOESN’T EVEN GET DISABLED PEOPLE INTO WORK.

The WCA has caused people to commit suicide and your WCA will continue to cause people to commit suicide.

You are still planning to use LIMA, a computer program to MAKE CATASTROPHICALLY WRONG DECISIONS, TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

You are still planning to bully people who CAN NOT WORK with repeat assessments.

Will you stop mandatory consideration? If so how are you going to handle the flood of appeals from wrong decisions? If not, you are no better than the Tories.

More “Harrington” Reviews of the WCA? Don’t make us laugh.

YOU ARE STILL INTENDING TO USE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS WHO DON’T CARE ABOUT DISABLED PEOPLE BUT DO CARE ABOUT PROFITS

and after all that, after the fear, the misery, the anxiety, the hardship and the suicides, your WCA won’t get disabled people into work because THERE ARE NO JOBS AVAILABLE for us.

EMPLOYERS CAN’T BE BOTHERED WITH US, DONT YOU GET THAT?

And when a job is available, we can’t get there because WE DON’T HAVE ACCESS TO TRANSPORT,

DPAC’s response to Labour’s WCA proposals in a nutshell:

SCRAP THE WCA & ESA and Scrap Sanctions for all.

Then come up with something much much better that addresses our real needs, not Daily Mail headlines.

Has it sunk in yet?

 Posted by at 15:44
Oct 302014
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

So finally released is the official news that Maximus take over from the toxic brand of Atos for £500 million. Already there are comparisons with Russell Crow characters, but there’s also an overlooked Maximus who might be more fitting as a parody or comparison. This Maximus comes from the U.S Marvel comics

Maximus was briefly the leader of the Inhumans while his brother, Black Bolt, went into exile, daring not to use his dangerous voice. Maximus believed that the Inhumans were the greater form of life on Earth and he set out to rule them and to destroy humankind to retake the planet.
More on Marvel.com: https://marvel.com/universe/Maximus#ixzz3Hd6bb9Bl

Leader of the inhumans seems much more fitting than the hero reduced to slavery and seeking revenge- can we compare Black Bolt to Atos going into exile too? No, not really, as Maximus are using Atos staff and equipment to continue with the inhuman Work Capability Assessments (WCA), and of course Atos have a whole host of other multi-million Government contracts including PIP-yet another planned disaster, shared with Capita, leaving disabled people stuck on a waiting list for up to a year without any financial support whatsoever. In June 2014 MacMillan identified that those diagnosed with cancer were waiting at least six months for the initial assessment rather than being fast tracked properly, as was the case under the Disability living Allowance.

We can be sure that this didn’t and doesn’t just apply to those with cancer,but those with other terminal illness’ too. The Work and Pensions Committee rightly condemned this, but then we hear nothing more than empty silence. New Labour say it will take 42 years to clear the PIP backlog. But they don’t tell us what they will do about it, which with an election year fast approaching is yet another lost opportunity for the rusty New Labour machinery.

From one toxic brand to another?

Its worth a quick recap on Atos and the WCA contracts. The Atos process contributed to deaths, the Atos process contributed to worsening mental health, Atos’ so called ‘healthcare professionals were ‘trained’ over a period of days, Atos got reports wrong frequently, Atos were subject to TV exposures, the Atos process was condemned internationally, Atos were closely linked Unum insurance sharing the same CEO, Atos declared people fit for work when they were in comas or days before they died. Atos pulled out of their contract saying that those nasty disabled people were being nasty to their staff- a claim which , true to form, they could provide no evidence for.

Atos became a toxic brand long before the hyped ‘pull-out’. Atos were targeted from 2011 onwards by DPAC with protests outside their shiny London headquarters and elsewhere. Atos tried to shut down web sites that said ‘bad’ things about them. In 2012 their sponsorship of the Olympic games ( along with a set of other dubious multi-nationals) led to a 7 day protest by DPAC, a protest that saw angry protesters outside Atos centres across the UK. It was then that national media, often silenced by their owners vested interests broke through. We saw from the first time a trickle of freelancers with a social conscience edge in the Atos issue under the Olympics rubric. We saw the beginnings of a snow ball affect which Atos’ public image never recovered from. Atos were known not as the IT company, but the company that carried out those bogus Work Capability Assessments.

From bad to worse
So what changes with Maximus? First let Maximus be in no doubt that they will get the same treatment as Atos did-disabled people will continue protest and civil disobedience- a name change doesn’t mean a thing. This company knew exactly what they were taking on-but money talks louder than conscience . As already mentioned Maximus take the infrastructure of Atos, its staff , its IT , its tick box assessments. Atos are still gaining. Second, Maximus take private contracts ( paid with public money) to help dismantle what’s left of our ( or anyone else’s) welfare state to force those ‘that can’ on to private insurance scams that may or may not pay out-Unum and co are also laughing all the way to their bankster friends. .

What’s different? Well, Maximus seem worse than Atos- yes you read that correctly. They have a string of law suits in their homeland the good old US of A. In 2014 they said

“We expect that demand for our core health and human services offerings will continue to increase over the next few years, driven by new legislation, austerity measures and increasing caseloads, as governments strive to deliver more services with fewer resources. Legislation, such as the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the United States as well as other health and welfare reform initiatives abroad, has created increased demand for our services, a trend we expect to continue over the next several years.”

‘Core health and human services offerings’:?. It seems these ‘offerings’ have proved a bit of an expensive minefield. But these days such things are written off to risk if the profits out weigh the pay-offs companies will do what the hell they like. In 2007 Maximus settled a Medicaide card fraud with the Federal Government paying $30.5 million. In 2012 they paid $50,000 in a disability discrimination case. In 2013 it was reported that Maximus has been engaging in ‘improper billing advice’ concerning $3.5 million cost to tax payers (sounds familiar-except here our state dont appear to do much about such things).There’s more, but you get the picture. Final add is that Maximus also like to give lots of money to right wing politicians-ah it gets even clearer.

Looks like we should expect the worst and looks like our unelected Government have managed to surpass themselves, again. The drain on the so-called public purse- that’s tax payers money- is set to rocket again. But beyond financial concerns are what happens now with the WCA? What happens to the backlog? And what happens to disabled people- the news doesn’t look good, as many commentators on social media have already pointed out. However, several things have been missed on social media

All in it together?
While Disability Rights UK (DRUK) were one of the first to get the notice of Maximus taking over from Atos out on their website, they failed to mention how they will be ‘helping’ Maximus. This information is not on their web site. It can be found elsewhere on the Department of Work and Pensions website :

“On top of recruiting additional healthcare professionals, MAXIMUS also plans to make further improvements to people’s experience of an assessment and will seek to continually improve the service they offer. It will increase the number of specialists who conduct assessments, including experts in mental health. They will also spend more time with people before their assessment to fully explain the process and provide Disability Awareness training for all staff through Disability Rights UK”.

Didn’t Atos claim similar things too? There are some who might say DRUK is what is needed. We should ask those people how a so-called user-led disabled peoples’ organisation can, with any integrity, involve themselves in this at all. Its no secret that like Maximus themselves, DRUK would know about the WCA, the Government lies that surround it, the misery caused by it, and why it all chimes together to remove welfare/state support from disabled people-It marks a purposeful intention to further open -up the market for private insurers – is this a mistake on the DWP’s own Government site?

Sadly, we think not. In the latest release DRUK say that they’ve been in discussions with Maximus and no work has yet been agreed- shouldn’t they be categorically denying the association outright?

Yet, DRUK are already ‘in bed’ with big corporations and private insurance companies. After their prior foray with Capita, DRUK now appear to have joined the game of pushing private disability insurance too. They are partnering with 17 big insurance companies to show the difference insurance would make, instead of fighting for the rights of disabled people. That is disabled people who by DRUK’s own admission occupy one of the largest groups in poverty, a poverty level that has been systematically widened and worsened because of this Government’s pursuit of removing welfare.

A few months ago DRUK publicised a new television program calling for disabled volunteers: Seven Families. Seven families will take the same number of families and show the benefits of purchasing private disability insurance. Its not about pushing products says the Income Protection Task Force (?) blurb-its about raising awareness-not since the Guardian published the much criticised info ads for Unum have we seen this sort of ‘stupid public’ approach. Once again , you wont find this on the DRUK web-site it’s been removed. But DRUK’s strap-line of breaking the link between poverty and disability just took on a new meaning

More importantly, under the WCA contract Atos were paid per assessment. Under the PIP contract Atos and Capita are paid a lump sum not depending on the number of assessments- the planned backlog becomes clearer. But what of the Maximus contract -are they paid by assessment or paid a lump sum? What is obvious is that the rounds of assessments and reassessments will continue to persecute disabled people. At intervals they might get a pittance of support, they might need to wait longer for a mandatory reconsideration ( brought in in Oct 2013 to make the process even more difficult and knock people out of the system). The best bet is to forget that you’ve paid state national insurance for all of your working life and go see Unum- and if 99% of disabled people cant afford it tough, because even your own so called disability organisations are telling you this is now the only way.

We want answers and we call on New Labour’s Rachael Reeves and Kate Green to provide them-what will they do with Maximus? What will they do with mandatory reconsideration? What will they do for disabled people? Oh and why should we a) trust them b) vote for them?

For now as The Void suggests: ‘Maximus are the new Atos: destroy Maximus’ and everyone and every organisation involved in or supporting this inhuman regime of the corrupt WCA, until its scrapped completely!

Oct 092014
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

It is disheartening to read Labour’s press release, “Labour Pledge New ‘Work Support Programme’ For Disabled Benefit Claimants”

That the DWP is wasting a lot of money, we already know that, although how the £8bn have been calculated is not explained by Labour. But the implication that some people should not be claiming disability benefits is the sign that the use of selective statistics for political purpose is not the prerogative of the Coalition. Like the following figures show, these variations happened under the Coalition and Labour.

What is shown here is the difference, month by month in the number of ESA +IB claimants, with the total in bold

What is shown here is the difference, month by month in the number of ESA +IB claimants, with the total in bold

But what is really disheartening is that Labour knows that:

  • The Work Capability Assessment is in the state of virtual collapse
  • There is a backlog of 700,000 ESA claimants in the Assessment phase

Which means that any figures produced between the beginning of the collapse of the WCA around July 2013 and now are likely to be untypical and should not be relied on.

Added to that, Labour is aware of the outcomes of the Evidence Based Review of the WCA, where it was identified that around 83% deemed fit for work would need “on average, two or three” adjustments; 50% would need flexible working hours; and 24% would need a support worker, and the panel recognised that these people were unlikely to get the support they needed. Where was Labour when this needed to be highlighted? Where was Labour when activists have repeatedly shown that very sick or even dying people were being found fit for work? That Labour is now using a very atypical figure to show that some people claiming disability benefits don’t deserve them is shameful. It is disabled people who have been short changed all these years, and it is disabled people who have been doing the job the opposition party should have done.

Extract from the Report by the Social Security Advisory Committee under Section 174(1) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 and the statement withdrawing the proposed regulations by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (March 2005):

“We would think it better that the Department should run the risk of possibly paying a few “undeserving” cases, rather than risking the virtual certainty of denying benefit to a few genuine cases.”


Here are some of the things we’ve said previously about the WCA, and we still stand by them:

“The WCA presumes that there are too many people on disability benefits because disabled people are too lazy or too comfortable living on benefits to work. It is founded in the idea that disabled people need to be harassed and hounded out of their comfortable life into finding work under the threat of loss of benefits.No one is comfortable living on benefits. Disabled people are no more lazy that the rest of the population. The real reason that there are so many people on benefits is that society does not include disabled people.We do not have the same access to education, transport, housing and jobs. Social attitudes ensure that disabled people in the workplace are seen as a problem, rather than an equal opportunity.And there are large numbers of disabled people who simply can not work. Why should they be harassed? Why should they be hounded?. Why should they have to live in fear?.We know, and this report confirms, that many people have wrongly been found “fit for work” when they can’t work. We also know and the UK courts have confirmed WCA discriminates against claimants with mental health impairments.

The Work and Pensions Committee report recommends “improvements” to make the system more workable and less harmful. This is pointless, because it would not make the WCA any less wrong or any more useful

We call once again on Labour to commit to scrapping the WCA and to address the real problems that disabled people on benefits face in society. ”

read more here – https://dpac.uk.net/2014/07/response-to-the-work-and-pensions-committee-report-into-wca-joint-statement-by-bt-dpac-mhrn-and-newapproach/

“Labour should realise that disabled people are deeply distrustful of any Labour reform of a Work Capability Assessment system, which Labour introduced in the Welfare Act of 2007 with the stated aim of removing 1 million claimants from the benefit system [3].Our position has been and will be that the Work Capability Assessment is deeply flawed in its basic concept, not just in terms of the details of its delivery, and inclusion in the workplace for disabled people cannot simply be achieved by a ‘back to work’ test.A comprehensive and strategic plan of action is developed with disabled people and our organisations to tackle the discrimination and exclusion disabled people face in work and employment including: increasing quality and range of personalised support available to disabled people, strengthening disabled employees rights and tackling employer discrimination and poor practiceEconomic productivity must not be the only measure of people’s worth and value, volunteering offers as much value to society as paid employment. While we recognise that volunteering can offer additional skills, it should not be the default option for disabled people because of our exclusion from paid workThere must be policy and media recognition that there will always be disabled people who are unable or too ill to work. These individuals must be supported by a publically funded system. They should not be penalised or demonised as they are currently.

For true inclusion in the workplace for disabled people a wider approach is necessary including but not limited to:

• Will Labour commit to the restoration of Disabled Student’s Allowance,
• Will Labour commit to the restoration of the Independent Living Fund,
• Will Labour commit to the extension of Access to Work (AtW) to include unpaid voluntary positions,
• Will Labour commit to the reversal of the reduction of people who currently receive DLA, but will not receive PIP and also lose their Motability access,
• Will Labour commit to the reinstatement of the requirement for councils to produce equality schemes on employment and access
• Will Labour commit to the provision of accessible transport.
• Will Labour commit to the reinstatement of “day one” protection from unfair dismissal in employment law
• Will Labour commit to the provision of Employment Tribunals enforcing mandatory organisation-wide measures on preventing disability discrimination
• Will Labour commit to the provision that all government contracts, at a national, regional and local level, are only awarded to companies that are fulfilling measurable equality targets for the employment of disabled people

These currently are some of the barriers to inclusion in the workplace for disabled people, and they will not be fixed by simply amending the WCA. The issue must be seen within the context of the wider interconnected system of barriers in place. It must be seen in terms of what a large majority of disabled people have already identified as key problems.

In terms of inclusion we also need from Labour, a recognition that for many disabled people to be able to work there has to be a nationally transportable social care system with a guarantee that people would keep the same levels of funding wherever they needed to move to work.

We need recognition that there is an onus on government and employers to fully accept the spirit of the Equality Act 2010 [4] with its requirement to the opening of work opportunity to disabled people. Without this, no “fit for work test” aimed at cutting disability benefits will make any impact whatsoever on the numbers of disabled people who can attain and sustain employment.

We also need from Labour a stronger recognition that there are many disabled people who cannot enter the work place and should not have to live in fear of being pressured into doing so.”

Read more here: https://dpac.uk.net/2014/04/dpac-response-to-how-labour-would-reform-the-work-capability-assessment/

 Posted by at 18:29