cutting ESA payments during appeal

At a time of cost cutting, it would be a nonsense to introduce a policy such as this.

From what I recall, one of the primary reasons for allowing people to remain on assessment-phase ESA rate whilst appealing a WCA refusal was that, from a departmental point of view, it would make the administration of the system much simpler (notwithstanding the inevitable discrepancies that you folk highlight).

In yesterday’s House of Lords committee stage debate on Welfare Reform Bill, Lord Freud was asked about the Times article and replied -

‘The changes to the current appeal system are being taken forward in this Bill, as expressed in Clauses 99 and 100, so we will have an opportunity to discuss those in that consideration. We are, in those clauses, looking to introduce a period of reconsideration, or a reconsideration process, prior to a full appeal. We can have further discussion at that point, but regardless of what an article in a newspaper might say, clearly the practical difference, if one was to be extended in the way described, is purely a difference of conditionality, because as the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, pointed out, the actual payment rate of the assessment phase of ESA is the same as JSA. That article has put out a lot of misinformation.’

here’s link to Hansard -

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/111018-gc0001.htm#11101863000095

Forgive me if this sounds a bit dense, but does that mean the Times writer got his facts wrong?

Attached should be Chris Grayling’s response to a letter from Disability Benefits Consortium on the question of ESA and appeals.

To say that it’s not terribly revealing is almost overstating the case.

Well that makes me feel a whole lot better…

looks revealing enough to me.

...bring it into line with all other Social Security benefits…..?

on similar lines -

from hansard of monday 24 october - when asked if he would take opportunity ‘to refute press reports that he will cut the ESA of people who appeal against assessment decisions, especially in the light of the information that 40% of cases are being won on appeal’, Chris Grayling said -

‘What I expect to see as a result of the changes following Professor Harrington’s review in the summer is a significant reduction in the number of cases that go to appeal when the Department’s initial review and the reconsideration are upheld. In order to ease pressure on individuals, we have tried to ensure that there is a proper reconsideration service in Jobcentre Plus, so that they can produce new evidence at that stage and need not use the Courts Service at all.’

here’s link to hansard -

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111024/debtext/111024-0001.htm#1110247000028

This whole nonsense, like much of this government’s welfare reform, reminds me of a quote from Ernest Benn (Tony Benn’s late uncle) who said “politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy”.

here’s latest from yesterday’s hansard -

‘Dame Anne Begg: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether those awaiting the result of an appeal against a negative work capability assessment decision will be entitled to receive the assessment rate of employment and support allowance while they wait in (a) 2012-13, (b) 2013-14 and (c) future years. [77271]

Chris Grayling: We constantly review the benefit system to ensure that it is as efficient as possible. We are in the process of considering appeals—as a consequence of the provisions in the Welfare Reform Bill, including universal credit and the requirement to undertake a reconsideration before appealing. However, no decisions have yet been made.’