Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
Work and Pensions Select Committee open meeting on migration to ESA in Burnley on Monday 7th March
The Work and Pensions Committee plans to hold an open meeting on Monday 7 March in Burnley.
The Committee says that -
‘The purpose of the meeting is to hear the views of the public on the migration of people currently claiming incapacity benefit to the new Employment and Support Allowance. The process is being piloted in the Burnley area. The Committee is particularly keen to hear the views of people who have been through the assessment process.’
For more information see -
Guardian reports that WCA was ‘widely condemned’ at the public meeting yesterday -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2011/mar/07/work-capability-assessment-criticism
I think that care needs to be taken. There are several different issues and they are in danger of becoming entangled in the mind of the public and the press. First, there are the political motivations of the government and the propaganda espoused by it and its cheerleaders in the press. That is a whole topic in itself and in the wider benefit context has been thrashed around in these forums many times and I don’t propose to go there here.
Second, there is the competence of the EMP’s and their attentiveness and courtesy to claimants, or lack of it. Many claimants quite rightly feel as though the EMP was not listening, was brusque, if not downright rude, and was rushing them through the medical. Some have said that the EMP concentrated on the wrong thing, i.e. physical problems where there were only mental ones. The ‘process’ is part of the wider problem of a lack of genuine empathy and serial incompetence from some EMP’s allied to the ridiculous and over simplistic software driving the assessment. These are structural problems which can be remedied with proper resources, better systems and improved training.
Third, there is a fundamental lack of understanding by claimants about just what the process of assessment entails and the way information is gathered. This is not the fault of claimants as no-one (until they get to an advice agency) has bothered to tell them. The end of the assessment leaves them often bewildered, upset and angry and the later decision notice informing them they have scored no points often feels like nothing more than the coup de grace.
It should be clearly explained to claimants at the outset that the EMP is going to, and should, not just ask direct questions about functionality but also contextual questions about getting to the assessment and shopping, etc, as these are often indicators that can support or contradict claimants’ statements as to functionality. These are legitimate evidence gathering questions. When I explain this to clients when they come and see me for the appeal they understand perfectly well. The time has come for the Department and Medical Services to stop treating claimants like idiots.
Fourth, there is the medical report and its findings. If I had £1 for every time a client has said to me “he put down the opposite of what I said. He said I could walk 200 yards when I told him I could only walk 50” then I’d have a few bob. Claimants just do not understand that EMP’s are not there to simply record what they say but to carry out their own assessment and to record their own findings. Again, that is not claimants fault because, quite simply, no-one has bothered to tell them. Then there is the claimant’s description of a typical day and the factual inaccuracies often contained there. Claimants’ accusations that the EMP just wasn’t listening: things like “he said I walk the dog but I don’t even have a (choose your own expletive) dog”: “he said I walk around a supermarket when actually I sit in the car and my wife walks around” are simply inexcusable and will go to re-enforce claimants’ perceptions that the government just wants everyone off benefit.
These kinds of fault lines and basic errors further contribute to claimants’ sense of humiliation and feelings of being made out to be a liar. By the time claimants who challenge these decisions have further evidence they have submitted ignored and have to go through the whole process again at tribunal their sense of humiliation is often complete. This, with a nod to discussions elsewhere, is where representation is invaluable. By the time claimants get to see a competent adviser they start to relax and feel that someone is finally listening to them. Having the process explained to them also comes as a relief as they then begin to learn not to take it personally. Having someone who believes in them, who can ‘take the weight off’ by preparing the case and gathering further evidence can (and I say this without hyperbole) give them back some self belief and cannot be measured by costs analysis. And, that assistance must be carried through to actual representation at the hearing. We have all known clients who have gone into blind panic when, as the hearing approaches, they somehow get to thinking that we were not going to be there on the day.
But, I digress slightly. We hear so much waffle from government ministers and senior civil servants about “customer focused this” and “user friendly that” that it starts to give me a headache. As long as the foundations of the benefit system rest on moral assumptions rooted in the nineteenth century, its structure driven by financial imperatives that rule over all others and its delivery managed by an impersonal bureaucracy where claimants are often seen as nothing more than nuisances or inconveniences then nothing much will change. Real change will only come when these issues are addressed at a political level with seismic shifts in political attitudes and value judgements, where claimants are not judged but listened to, where ethical considerations are given equal parity with financial ones and where claimants are treated like grown ups, given proper information about procedures and processes which at present merely churn them up and spit them out leaving them feeling like outcasts.
Its not just the WCA that seems flawed. The procedure afterwards is also a joke. I have lost count of the number of times a client has received the customary letter informing them they are not entitled to ESA following the medical 7-8 weeks after the actual WCA. It seems to take forever to inform the clients that their entitlement ended weeks and weeks ago and then have the temerity to say an overpayment has occurred.
One of my clients Housing Benefit has been judged an overpayment of £900 as she failed to notify the council of a change of circumstances ref non entitlement of ESA. The DWP continued to pay ESA for 10 weeks as an oversight and didnt inform the client of the result of the WCA until 10 weeks later. They now want 10 weeks ESA repaid and HB +CT want their money back.
Having to put in a 3 month JSA backdate citing official error ref client not being informed that she wasnt entitled to ESA. Idiots.
And the Guardian continues to highlight the flaws in the current thinking and approach, with this article -
The coalition came into government with a firm belief that an army of shirkers was bleeding the state dry with fake disabilities. That much has always been clear from Cameron’s rhetoric: the benefits system, he says, has created a benefits culture. The Tories want to end this culture once and for all; in the case of the disability living allowance, by reassessing claimants. The last government introduced the work capability assessment for new claimants; the difference now is that all claimants have to be assessed.
In Burnley, the trial of the WCA has just ended. Its weaknesses are many and varied, but in a nutshell, the system is that you chuck as many people as you can into the deep end and whoever floats long enough to take you to tribunal, well, congratulations. Think of a 16th-century witchcraft trial, take away the transparency and public approval, and you have it about right.
As good as the article is and as accurate, reading down through the comments that follow is quite a depressing experience…
It’s the tests that deceive, not the people claiming benefits