× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Work capability issues and ESA  →  Thread

news this morning

 1 2 > 

ClairemHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, SC Law, Harrow

Send message

Total Posts: 1221

Joined: 13 April 2016

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37526324

a small step back in the right direction, but bet there’s a catch in it somewhere…

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

In a sense this is massive news - its more or less a tentpole of IDS’s whole philosophy that everyone is to be constantly and arbitrarily re-assessed to stop them “languishing on benefits”. For Green to come out and say doing that is completely pointless in a decent subset of cases is absolutely right and good for claimants. We will just have to wait and see what actually materialises.

BBC News is however going on the benefits naughty step for the claim that “£109.30” is the maximum amount of weekly ESA. 

Terry Craven
forum member

Benefit Advice & Appeals Service, Liverpool Veterans

Send message

Total Posts: 39

Joined: 19 January 2015

ClairemHodgson - 01 October 2016 06:41 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37526324

a small step back in the right direction, but bet there’s a catch in it somewhere…

Also in Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/01/i-tell-theresa-may-working-lives-review-modern-employment-zero-hours-flexibility?INTCMP=dis_231472

My concern is that chronic condition is not defined. We should push the DWP for a schedule of these. We can then fit our clients with long term conditions, into it, where possible. I am not convinced ATOS, MAXIMUS etc. will adhere to these regulations or guidance.

 

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3773

Joined: 14 April 2010

Uphill Struggle
forum member

Community Advice Team, Falkirk Council

Send message

Total Posts: 23

Joined: 18 November 2013

I must be honest, the cynic in me thinks this is not being done out of kindness, more likely another way to reduce costs paid to Maximus.

Then we’ll end up with DWP ‘forgetting’ about claimant’s conditions and pulling them in for another assessment anyway.

Would be easier, of course, if enhanced daily living acted as a passport like high rate care did with incap.

bigbill
forum member

Dumfries Welfare Rights

Send message

Total Posts: 127

Joined: 24 June 2010

It’s just a smoke screen to distract away from the ESA cuts happening next April.

Terry Craven
forum member

Benefit Advice & Appeals Service, Liverpool Veterans

Send message

Total Posts: 39

Joined: 19 January 2015

One possibility is that the new “rules” will only apply if claimant is in the support group. Thus leaving more resources to move WRAG onto JSA.

Jon (CANY)
forum member

Welfare benefits - Craven CAB, North Yorkshire

Send message

Total Posts: 1362

Joined: 16 June 2010

Terry Craven - 02 October 2016 09:15 AM

One possibility is that the new “rules” will only apply if claimant is in the support group. Thus leaving more resources to move WRAG onto JSA.

I’d guess it will be a subset of the Support group. Anyway, it could be unfair if someone in the Work group with a degenerative condition was never scheduled for reassessment, as they might easily miss out on ever moving up into the SG.

From the Guardian piece, Iain Duncan Smith ‘told the Today programme he completely agreed with the changes:
“We worked to change this process, it was one we inherited and it just functioned badly on this area,”..

Oh if only we’d known that every time IDS talked about not wanting people to be “parked”, “trapped”, or “written off”, he was actually working behind the scenes to try and change the policy of constant re-assessment which he had inherited. It’s just a shame that during his 6 years as Work and Pensions secretary, he never realised that he could do what Mr Green has done, and simply annouce a different policy which would then be put it into effect.

I don’t think this will even require any new regulation will it? The department just sets reassessment as it sees fit, it’s probably just a software issue.

Dan_Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2262

Joined: 15 October 2012

I’ve said it elsewhere and I’ll say it here… Damian Green has found a politically expedient way to take some of theweight off Maximus which is still struggling to keep up with it’s workload. Nothing more, nothing less.

Don’t cheer too loud, you’ll only encourage hm.

 

Benny Fitzpatrick
forum member

Welfare Rights Officer, Southway Housing Trust, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 627

Joined: 2 June 2015

It’s a step in the right direction. However, why not end the re-assessment of PIP claimants with chronic or degenerative conditions too? Just as pointless and cruel as ESA re-assessments.

fran.elkington
forum member

ECIl - Information & Advice

Send message

Total Posts: 7

Joined: 5 July 2010

Hopefully this is good news but it really should apply to PIP as well.

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3773

Joined: 14 April 2010

Written statement today from Damian Green:

... This change will apply to people who have already been placed in the ESA Support Group or UC Limited Capability for Work and Work Related Activity categories following a WCA and who have the most severe health conditions and disabilities (defined as claimants with severe, lifelong, often progressive and incurable conditions, with minimally fluctuating care needs, who are unlikely to ever be able to move closer to the labour market and into work). The IT changes needed are expected to be completed by the end of 2017. In the meantime, we will be working to ensure these people are not reassessed unnecessarily.

Over the coming months we will work with key stakeholders, including disabled people, disability charities, our health assessment provider, the Centre for Health and Disability Assessments, medical professionals and others to develop a set of criteria, set out in guidance, to switch off reassessments for those that are eligible.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2016-10-10/HCWS174/

1964
forum member

Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit

Send message

Total Posts: 1711

Joined: 16 June 2010

Bet you anything all mental health related conditions will be excluded.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

1964 - 11 October 2016 08:40 AM

Bet you anything all mental health related conditions will be excluded.

Tricky one isn’t it? Both schizophrenia and bi-polar at its most extreme are effectively life-time diagnoses and can be very limiting, but on the other hand, I do know of people I’ve worked with in the past who have been stabilised and who have gone on to hold down jobs.

OTOH, I remember getting a call out of the blue a couple of years back from a previous client of mine who had bi-polar diagnosis and who I hadn;t seen or heard from for more than ~10 years (how she tracked me down, i have no idea as I’d changed jobs about 6 times since).

Anyway, since we’d appealed and won her DLA, she’d been settled in community and taking care of her son but was absolutely terrified about the impending transition to PIP. Even from speaking on the phone, it was apparent that the thought of her life being turned upside down again was causing her terrific anxiety and distress to the point I was worried she might be relapsing again.

Mike Hughes
forum member

Senior welfare rights officer - Salford City Council Welfare Rights Service

Send message

Total Posts: 3138

Joined: 17 June 2010

The ultimate dilemma for a government ideologically driven to reduce government. On the one hand you can privatise stuff. On the other hand the stuff you’re privatising involves real people and they keep asking for transparency and accountability and they themselves will keep challenging decisions and that of course costs more money than you planned for. Ideologically you don’t believe in either of those transparency and accountability things. Your only true beliefs are that you’re absolutely right and that the power of the market will always win out, especially when you intervene 😊. The constant answer to such dilemmas is the use of financial penalties but of course that puts you on a collision course with the very people who are supposed to be helping you shrink government and drive down costs.

Add into this heady concerns that the comparatively few in house staff who remain to administrate this nonsense can make a very loud and dangerous noise about how bad this is for them and, probably worst of the lot, that a large private company can make very loud noises about how unfriendly the government is towards private business and where you end up is… something like this. No real logic to it at all. Does sensory impairment get “better”? Does learning difficulty? And so on…

Safeguarding in the world of the DWP/JCP is really about protecting their staff and avoiding liability rather than vulnerability and actual safeguarding.

Interesting aside Paul.

Myself and a small number of other GMWRAG members have had issues with clients with MH problems identifying us as people they would want to speak to about their issue. We have been identified by them browsing Rightsnet and finding posts of interest that coincide with their own and then Googling that person. In my case I was found on here on an ESA thread by a couple of people who were considerably “out of area” (by about 200 miles!) who then confirmed I was still where they thought I was by locating minutes of GMWRAG meetings. Lost a couple of Friday afternoons to long and quite disturbing calls on that front. The minutes have been locked down but beyond that I suspect a client can always find you if they want to and have the know how.

Elliot Kent
forum member

Shelter

Send message

Total Posts: 3117

Joined: 14 July 2014

The IT changes needed are expected to be completed by the end of 2017./

How is this a 15 month IT project? Is that a typo?