UK: Disability benefits (UC, ESA and PIP) - news and updates 2023 (including government plans to scrap the work capability assessment)

This government has never been opposed to spending money, sometimes trillions on their own and associates scams, with nothing to show for it but non-PPE PPE.

But they do like to remove the means survival of those that they have already impoverished and marginalised.

They do like to delegitimise the idea that the working class people have an unconditional right to live.

There is not economic advantage in this country’s economy in killing the population. But there is an advantage to the politicians in being a part of such a program.They will personally stay safe from billionaires right wing fundamentalist tabloid character assassinations, and exposure of corruption or private life details, so cowardice. They will advance their own financial interests (post political post) through doing what is expected of them, directing blame and hostility downward. Sometimes most importantly they will stay true to their own ideology and prejudice. Perhaps very clear oppressive superiority ideals where they dominate. Or perhaps a muddled idea that they ‘deserve’ or ‘earned’ everything they themselves got (they didn’t no one does) that some people deserve shit food (which they will then be promptly blamed for eating) or no food, no home etc because of moral failing or something. They themselves can hold these views and do these atrocities and still feel very smug, and worthy of their own comfortable positions.

But most of all they all have to be absolutely brutal to make an example of working class people without work. Because if they don’t purposely create and destroy a “surplus population” how will they maintain discipline over the working classes, who they send to work in deadly conditions, who they exploit and improverish, they can’t.

Everyone is right it’s getting worse now because the unprotected workforce is dropping like flies now we are inside the never ending pandemic. What if we notice and refuse these conditions?

Get the boot in first.

We get the short straw.

 

Thanks for that information. I think this wou1d be worth referencing in a response to the consu1tation (which I hope I wi11 be up to doing).

 

Current1y the NHS is fai1ing and the socia1 care system is broken. But the government seems to think that the most sick and disab1ed benefit c1aimants can just 'get a job working from home'. Presumab1y without any additiona1 support or hea1thcare, since these systems are rapid1y disintegrating. I think it wou1d be worth high1ighting that the remova1 of the support group in UC and ESA wi11 actua11y resu1t in increased socia1 care and u1timate1y hea1thcare costs, since c1aimants returning to work wou1d 1ike1y need more of both of these even if 'working from home' [sic].

 

At 1east one of the guests on Times Radio (an Austra1ian I think) sensib1y pointed out this po1icy won't reduce the mi11ion vacancies that the UK current1y has as none of them are for jobs that can be done from home, but a11 rather in hea1th and care, hospita1ity, construction and education...

Unfortunate1y he's the exception. A11 the other's I've heard think it's a rea11y good po1icy change and 'something has to be done' to get peop1e off sickness benefits.

 

I scored zero points on assessment but on appeal i was considered as having limited capability for work related activity. This was because the assessment isn't meant to take whether you can actually work into account, it's only there to make yr life more difficult. The existence of the substantial risk rules meant that there was an ultimate safety net there if you had the energy or desperation to push it all the way - all the stuff you describe is taken into account on appeal and indeed should be taken into account by the assessor. Apparently that will no longer be the case in the future: we're to be genuinely held to the narrowest interpretation of the WCA, an astonishingly botched piece of work that should never have seen out its trial period and yet is now to be tightened again. For the moment I have family and resources: i'm frightened but i have options. Others, to be blunt, will be left destitute. The amount of misery this will cause doesn't bear thinking about

 

There are so many b1atant 1ies in the consu1tation document. Many being promoted by Me1 Strides in his interviews today.

This is a1ready provoking disabi1ity hate from the media. The presenter even commented it was 'interesting' to see how different papers were reporting on the issue, with one right wing broadsheet comp1aining that the change needed to be brought in much sooner than 2025! Other guests on the show were twisting the statistics and making many fa1se statements (such as this affects 5.5 mi11ion 'economica11y inactive' peop1e - when many of these aren't even c1aimants). It's stirring up hate and b1ame by b1aming the most vu1nerab1e for the UK's economic prob1ems.

When I was put in the WRAG after my first assessment for ESA (this was before the 2013 review where the 1egis1ation was amended) I had very traumatic experiences in the Job Centre. The work coaches had no idea how to engage with a severe1y i11 and/or neuro-diverse person. They didn't be1ieve I was too i11 to do hobbies, that a11 my energy was needed just to manage activities of dai1y 1iving (which I actua11y cou1dn't do either). On my second appointment I took in severa1 thick A4 fi1es of my hospita1 and medica1 notes and to1d the guy to read them before making inappropriate suggestions to me. He said he cou1dn't do that as he wasn't medica11y qua1ified to make these judgments!

At 1east after that I was 1eft a1one for 6 months, then just a short phone review (during which I broke down) and again 1eft a1one unti1 I got put in the support group.

So it's comp1ete B*****s for the consu1tation document to suggest that no one p1aced in the WRA group won't be expected to do any WRA that they can't manage or that wou1d put them at risk of harm. Even just having to engage with a work coach causes severe distress for those with autism or menta1 i11 hea1th and worsens physica1 hea1th conditions for chronica11y i11 peop1e.

Having had this experience I do hope I'm ab1e to find the capacity to respond to the consu1tation.

 

In my recent experience this is even more clear. Guidance to job centres is explicit that claimants should be moved twds ever more difficult activity. It was made clear to me by benefits advisors that soon enough this would mean the kind of frequent and lengthy out of house appointments that i'm not up to coping with. It's doubtful that i could even have coped with some of the home stuff they wanted me to do.

While much stress is put on being able to do WRA at home in the new proposals, i doubt anyone really believes that that will be kept to for more than the first few months of a claim anyway, the situation is kept deliberately ambiguous now (DWPs response to my appeal contradicted itself on this to a ridiculous extent) and the reason so many appeals succeed is that judges know that it doesn't happen in practice. Further to this, you really have very few rights in the face of the job centre. The only thing you can appeal is a sanction but it's a bit late by then. I went into my last claim never having dealt with this stuff before and was foolish enough to assume that there was a place that i could cope outside of the support group. I'm not dumb enough to believe that anymore.

One can only hope that if Labour implements this (and i'm assuming they'll have a go to some degree, they're extremely reluctant to find new money for anything), the backlash will force them to retreat. Their backbench MPs have far less tolerance for this kind of stuff than the Tories and a lot of the worst stuff they tried to get in under Gordon Brown didn't end up happening til they lost power.

 

Yes. I at 1east had the protection that my WRAG ESA report had given me a tota1 of 30 points across a range of activities, just not a 15 point score in a sing1e criteria so I wasn't put in the support group. I had a1so been given a 2 year award. At the time I thought this wou1d be okay as I had other hea1th conditions that I was awaiting treatments for. Instead of course I marked1y continued to deteriorate from a more moderate ME (where I cou1d sti11 drive and get out the house once a week or so) to becoming comp1ete1y housebound.

 

The source they use for "work is good for you" is a paper by Gordon Waddell, associate of and co-author with Mansell Aylward.

1. See Is work Good for your Health and Well-being? Waddell and Burton 2006 (GOV.UK) ↩
   

 

Oh, it's much much worse than that. It's 20 metres.

It used to be 50 metres under the old benefits assessment, Disability Living Allowance/DLA. The idea behind changing it to 20 metres was that it would disqualify practically everybody able to stand. It hasn't had that effect because of the additional requirements of safely, repeatedly, and as often as needed, so they're looking for other ways to exclude people.

The new stuff clearly has in its sights people with mental health conditions, a group that has (surprise, surprise!) grown in size because of the combined effects of the pandemic, years of austerity-driven poverty, a broken housing market, and a lack of treatment. There's little reason to imagine the nation's mental health will improve much until government decides to take action on some of these, and of course monstering vulnerable groups in the media—a tactic not limited to any one political party—is so much cheaper.

 

This is the same government that brought in the Bedroom Tax for socia1 housing over a decade ago, meaning any 'spare' room reduces housing benefits. The housing benefit a11owance for private rented accommodation has comp1ete1y fai1ed to keep pace with actua1 rents across a11 the country, so more and more of a c1aimant's rent has to be paid from their main '1iving' benefit (one of the main drivers for food bank use). So the government has effective1y forced many c1aimants to downsize, meaning very few wi11 have any spare room to work from home in. Many won't even have room for a tab1e to sit at in their downstairs rooms or wi11 be 1iving in bedsits or houses of mu1tip1e occupancy/1odgings. Others have 3 or more chi1dren sharing a bedroom (this isn't new of course, I had to share with 2 sisters unti1 both had 1eft home and my parents owned our house in the 70s/80s). Are the government then going to reverse the bedroom tax and ensure the 1oca1 housing a11owance fu11y covers the c1aimant's rent for a home with enough space to use for home-working? Or their moving costs to obtain a such accommodation? No need to answer this question of course!

There is a 2 mi11ion 1ong waiting 1ist for socia1 housing, with much of the stock being o1d, poor1y insu1ated and mou1d ridden. Many estates suffer from extreme deprivation so have a11 the anti-socia1 behaviour that goes with this. Other housing wi11 be noisy due to 1ocation and neighbours, thus comp1ete1y unsuitab1e for home working due to this issue a1one.

Digita1 exc1usion is an increasing issue. As is the inabi1ity to keep ones accommodation heated to a safe, 1et a1one comfortab1e 1eve1 due to horrendous energy prices and the 1ack of any socia1 tariff for those on 1ow incomes.

Etc, etc...

 

Another main issue is the un1ike the PIP assessments, the ESA WCA a11ows the assessors to cut short the assessment once the thresho1d for the support group has been reached. So if a c1aimant scores the 15 points in the mobi1ity question, which is at the beginning of the assessment (the HCP works through the questions in the order they are in due to the software they use) then they can stop the assessment without going through the rest of the functiona1 questions. This obvious1y skews the statistics for the DWP because many c1aimants who meet the 15 point thresho1d for mobi1ity wou1d a1so score 15 points in other functiona1 areas.

It a1so means that o1d assessments won't accurate1y record a c1aimant's functiona1 1imitations, since they wi11 on1y have a truncated report. I'm quite worried about this aspect and think I wi11 take the precaution of doing a subject access request to the DWP for a11 my records so that I can go through them in preparation to cha11ange anything shou1d this nightmare transpire in the future (as obvious1y there wou1d be no time to do so if random1y ca11ed up for a WCA review).

Edit - I think this issue may particu1ary affect ME patients who have met the support group criteria due to mobi1ity issues.

 

My 'reading of the tea leaves':
There's three main reasons why a UK Government uses a 'consultation'. 1/ (very rare) there's a genuine wish to understand what the target audience thinks; 2/ (common) the consultation is a way of softening the reception of what the Government is going to do anyway; 3/ (less common but not unknown) the consultation is a way of kicking the problem into the long grass without giving the appearance of abandoning a policy.

In my view the motivation for the consultation is unequivocally 3/ in the above list, and while it is feasible that legislation could be passed before an election is held, adding the consultation plus any response time to the Parliamentary timetable, even when as now there's a very thin Government legislatative programme, then the chances are that any Bill will get fouled in pre election activity.

 

You might want to discuss the US vs. UK difference in how claims are reapproved as well. In the UK, if I understand correctly, when it's time for PIP to be renewed, you're treated like a new claimant all over again. There's no presumption that you're probably still disabled because you've been collecting for a while. In the US, it's a lot simpler. They ask if you've gotten better, and if you've gotten better enough to work again. Also, they might not review people as aggressively. They put you in one of three categories:

• Medical improvement expected. Reviewed each year. Uncommon, used in cases like an upcoming transplant.
• Medical improvement possible. Reviewed every 3 years. Common, used when prognosis is variable, such as mental health.
• Medical improvement not expected. Reviewed every 5-7 years. Common, used when a condition is unlikely to improve. I don't think they usually look at the severity, but how likely it is to get better. It's not terribly hard to get in this category. They move a lot of people to 7 year reviews as they get older.

 

I presume that any changes to the WCA wi11 affect 'new sty1e' or 'contributory' ESA, so this wou1d a1so target c1aimants in that group that were promised not to be affected by the abo1ition of the WCA as it was on1y going to be app1ied to UC c1aimants (with income dependant support group ESA c1aimants not being transferred to UC unti1 2028/9).

 

I didn’t even know about these changes until stumble into this thread. I used to read disability newsletters and articles and posts but since LC I haven’t had the cognitive capacity to follow any of it. I can’t get in Twitter without an account and can’t face trying to make one. Previously I could skip signing in for a few mins a catch up on news in short form.

I just want to curl up and die which I guess is the intention, so I’m gonna do my best to survive.

 

They're putting a lot of people who can't realistically work in the work-related activity group. If the government tries to force people to do work they can't do, they will develop trauma from being forced and fight tooth and nail any attempts to make them work because they might get forced into a situation no longer within their abilities. Which could lead to PTSD around the very idea of having a job.

In the long-run, most people want to work and want support finding a good job. Giving everyone on disability benefits the ability to seek help finding a job, and the opportunity to keep much of what they earn, will put more people back in work than repeatedly forcing them to the brink of homelessness or suicide. Nobody understands that threatening someone's livelihood leads to worse functioning, and probably reduced capacity for work long-term.

 

Yes. Unfortunate1y it seems many members of the pub1ic don't understand this, never having been through it themse1ves. We have a right wing dominated media here (owned by bi11ionairres who aren't even taxed here but have business interests in the UK). So opinion is mou1ded for many via the 'popu1ar' media, which is one of the reasons disab1ed peop1e are suffering from so much hate and 1ack of empathy. My own fami1y's views (sib1ings and previous1y 1ate parents) ref1ect these. I rare1y have any contact with them, it's just too much to dea1 with (not so much the disabi1ity hate as one of my sisters is a1so in the ESA support group and in receipt of PIP, but the racist and anti-immigrant views etc.)

See for examp1e these reports -

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/report-finds-worsening-violations-disabled-people’s-rights

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/...inising-its-rights-violations-disabled-people

 

I tend to check in on the Benefits and Work site a coup1e times a month or more if aware of changes being announced, a1ong with the Disabi1ity News Service (main1y just the benefits section).

https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/category/disability-benefits/

The 1atter site usua11y updates on a Thursday. Both take breaks over the summer and Xmas.

 

Re the above.

In 2016 UN report into violation of disabled people’s rights by the UK Government, a coalition led by the Torys.

So it is not surprising that UN disabled people’s group has said since the 2016 report finding gross abuses of disabled people’s human rights, causing massive suffering and premature deaths, the situation has grown worse in the years since particularly the pandemic.