Audio recording of atos medicals pilot

Having read the document, I am left wondering precisely for whose benefit the recordings are for because the caveats seem to strongly suggest it is not for the benefit of the person who is attending the medical.  For example:  “There is no real need for customers to request and use the recording of their assessment. The recordings do not form part of the Jobcentre Plus decision making process.”.  On that basis, what is the point?

If attendees want copies of recordings, they will be required to sign non-disclosure terms.  For example:  “Both the customer factsheet and the consent form the customer signs confirms that the recording is only provided for the customer’s own personal use and must not be put into the public domain.”.  Further, “...Jobcentre Plus will not accept a customer’s personal copy of the CD.  If the customer is insistent on the recording being taken into account as evidence, these will be handled on an individual basis and the customer will need to provide consent for Atos Healthcare to share this information with Jobcentre Plus”.

<edited to add this para> This is absurd.  If the medical has been properly conducted and properly recorded for the purposes of the written report (i.e. ESA85), that same information has patently already been shared with JC+.  This smacks of a tacit acceptance that the medical reports are in fact unreliable, otherwise why would there be a need for two sources of the same information?

It seems plain to me that this pilot scheme has nothing to do with assisting claimants and has everything to do with ATOS merely attempting to cover its own back (I simply laugh at any serious suggestion that recordings are for the purpose of improving the quality of the medicals).

As for the caveats (e.g. non-disclosure terms; JC+ not accepting own recordings), I’m not even sure they are legally enforceable given the existence of the DPA and the fact that a Tribunal can most certainly require the release of the recording(s) which, in turn, automatically puts it in the public domain.

If the DWP and ATOS were/are so confident of the quality of the medicals, there would be no good reason for attempting to impose such restrictions and caveats on the release of the recordings.

And finally, given the physical functions that attendees are asked to perform, how on earth is an audio-only recording meant to assist?  Surely these should be video sound AND vision recordings.

For transparency, I have a personal interest in the ATOS/WCA process.