× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

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

The politics of ESA

Stevegale
forum member

Torbay Disability Information Service, Torbay NHS Care Trust

Send message

Total Posts: 342

Joined: 29 June 2010

Rightsnet reports Steve Webb’s comments from the LD conference….‘but if someone hasn’t done the assessment properly there is much more of a safety valve now to say hang on this assessment says no problem but I have got all these reports from the medics’

and also…‘The way Chris put it, is the contribution of the Atos judgment to the decision will be a smaller part. And that has got to help.’

Yeah, and it will help suppress the JSA figures at a politically sensitive time.  All completely coincidental of course.

benefitsadviser
forum member

Sunderland West Advice Project

Send message

Total Posts: 1003

Joined: 22 June 2010

If the department accept now that Atos must have a smaller say in the decision making process does this mean that they acknowledge that : a) the WCA is completely flawed and/or : b) Atos arent doing their job properly.
As a UK taxpayer (got me Daily Mail head on here!) I would like this medical company thoroughly audited and investigated with regard to them being fit for purpose. They are quick enough to sanction claimants for supposed transgressions so why not Atos?

Gareth Morgan
forum member

CEO, Ferret, Cardiff

Send message

Total Posts: 2004

Joined: 16 June 2010

Is this any different to what Chris Grayling said back in May?  Then he said that the WCA had been downgraded in the decision making process.

Dolge
forum member

Senior adviser - Wirral Welfare Rights Unit, Birkenhead

Send message

Total Posts: 49

Joined: 16 June 2010

There is an apparent danger here in the sole focus on the (very real) problems with ATOS. I think the Lib Dem resolution fell for this and a lot of the big disability organisations are doing so. The real problem is the completely unbalanced and unreasonable nature of the work capability assessment.

The Harrington Review was widely touted as the way forward but it was essentially only procedural in focus. And just as it was reporting the WCA itself was considerably tightened, with little opposition or reporting, from 31.3.11 which rather proves my point. Medical assessors can be made as competent as you like, decision makers can be as flexible as you like but if the test itself is wrong, that isn’t going to take us far. And the test of course has been set by politicians - of all three parties - who will be quite happy to have ATOS take the brickbats.

The underlying problem is that the WCA just isn’t what it purports to be - a test of limited capability for work - but a medicalised grading of degrees of disability using a very crude functionalised approach and driven by the requirement to reduce expenditure. Most medical conditions and disabilities of any significance - likely to be certified by a GP for instance - cause limited capacity for work. Most people who fail the WCA have in fact, on any reasonable view, limited capability for work.

But then this isn’t really about finding the optimum solution to assessing health and disability and we are all going to be very disappointed if we expect that. To borrow a phrase from the US Republicans, it’s about class war, robbing the poor to help the rich. Quite nakedly so in the case of CESA time limiting from next April.

Richard Atkinson

Stevegale
forum member

Torbay Disability Information Service, Torbay NHS Care Trust

Send message

Total Posts: 342

Joined: 29 June 2010

I too agree with Richard.

One of the most cynical elements of the process is the fact that many people will cycle between ESA and JSA (particularly those that do not access/cannot access apropriate advice). The net effect of failing to ‘qualify’ for ESA, claiming JSA and returning to ESA is quite simply a reduction in benefit to the order of £26 - £32 a week. 

The ESA(C) cuts are another budget cut of course and have no policy objective other than to reduce the bill.  Such a cut might be justified had ESA(C) come from general taxation, but of course it comes from our contributions.

In my personal view, politicians have conspired to undermine OUR social security system with a barrage of stories about ‘scroungers’ and the national debt.

Ken Butler
forum member

Disability Rights UK

Send message

Total Posts: 231

Joined: 16 June 2010

The Disability Benefits Consortium (DBC) has produced a ‘myth buster’ highlighting five myths about incapacity benefit and employment and support allowance used by the Government and the media.

The ‘myth buster’ rebuts that:

most people claiming incapacity benefits are faking it;

people get sickness benefits just by visiting their GP;

as contributory jobseeker’s allowance is time-limited to six months it is right that contributory ESA should also be time limited;

only people with other means of support will be affected by the time-limit to ESA; and

most people in the work related activity group should be able to find a job within a year.

The DBC myth buster is available @ http://www.disabilityalliance.org/dbcmythbuster.htm

nevip
forum member

Welfare rights adviser - Sefton Council, Liverpool

Send message

Total Posts: 3137

Joined: 16 June 2010

Tony

Do you know the source of this nonsense?

Altered Chaos
forum member

Operations & Advice Manager - Citizens Advice Taunton

Send message

Total Posts: 427

Joined: 28 June 2010

nevip - 27 September 2011 11:53 AM

Tony

Do you know the source of this nonsense?

I don’t know either but first saw this about 3 years ago - it is disgraceful

Jon (CANY)
forum member

Welfare benefits - Craven CAB, North Yorkshire

Send message

Total Posts: 1362

Joined: 16 June 2010

It’s a viral thing that has been adapted as it drifted across several countries before reaching the UK. It isn’t the result of a deeply-thought plot by one specific group, it is an emanation of the general antipathy that has been fostered against immigrants by the prevailing political and media wind. There is quite a good briefing for UK MPs on its provenance and veracity here.