|
Post by Admin on Mar 21, 2022 14:44:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 26, 2022 22:18:42 GMT
Kill more Disabled - Disbelief at chancellor’s “appalling” refusal to target support on disabled people By John Pring on 24th March 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/disbelief-at-chancellors-appalling-refusal-to-target-support-on-disabled-people/Disabled people have reacted with disbelief to the chancellor’s “cruel” decision to all-but-ignore those who rely on benefits in yesterday’s spring statement, despite the cost-of-living crisis. In his 3,500-word speech, Rishi Sunak (pictured) announced a rise in the starting threshold of national insurance and a temporary 5p per litre cut in fuel duty, as well as an extra £500 million for the Household Support Fund*, following an initial £500 million announced last September. But there was no mention in his speech of disabled people and how many of them are now struggling to survive, and no attempt to increase benefits to match the sharply rising rate of inflation. His refusal to help those on the lowest incomes came as the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said inflation was set to reach a 40-year high of almost nine per cent, while the real value of benefits was set to fall by five per cent in 2022-23. Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said yesterday: “In the face of what the OBR calls the biggest hit to household finances since comparable records began in 1956-57 he has done nothing more for those dependent on benefits, the very poorest, besides a small amount of extra cash for local authorities to dispense at their discretion. “Their benefits will rise by just 3.1 per cent for the coming financial year. Their cost of living could well rise by 10 per cent.” Meanwhile, the Treasury is failing to publish figures (PDF) showing the overall impact of the spring statement on lower, middle and higher income households, instead publishing only figures that show the impact of all spending decisions since 2019. Disabled poverty campaigner Louisa Britain said she was in “disbelief” when she realised that Sunak had failed to help those like her in poverty in his speech. She said: “I just kept looking at it, thinking, ‘how have you managed to completely and utterly not address any of the cost-of-living crises, whilst talking about it as though you have?’ “It feels like he has deliberately avoided doing anything that would actually help. “Nobody on lower incomes is going to benefit from this. I’m not going to benefit from this. “The cost-of-living crisis is horrific. There is no need for this much suffering.” She has a small monthly sum of self-employed income, and the only measure in the statement that will help her is the temporary 5p per litre cut in fuel duty, despite steep rises in the price of food, petrol and utilities, and a continuing freeze in local housing allowance rates. She says that even the Household Support Fund announcement will not help her, as she has decided that the “humiliating” process of applying for a grant – in which councils can trawl through the applicant’s bank statements, demanding explanations for individual spending decisions – would be too much of a risk to her mental health. Britain, who is compiling One In Five, an anthology of essays by people living in poverty, said: “There’s a terrifying rise in everything. We are so pressed at the moment, with everything going up and up. “Everyone I know who is disabled and raising children, or who isn’t disabled and is raising children who are, is not coping. “More than half of my friends in similar circumstances, single parenting families where disability is a massive factor, are now relying on food banks to some degree. “Everybody has at least one bill they are not paying.” She is now resorting to selling some of her clothes to try to survive financially. Britain added: “I feel genuinely frightened about how I am going to sustain these children’s futures.” Kamran Mallick, chief executive of Disability Rights UK, said the spring statement left disabled people “living on bare bones benefits such as employment and support allowance (ESA) and universal credit with nothing to cover the shortfall produced by rocketing costs of living. “These benefits are there to cover the most basic of bills. ESA is just £74.70 per week for over 25-year-olds. That falls to £59.20 for under-25s. People on universal credit are just 26p per week better off. “The impacts of mental and physical health from living on such meagre sums of money is high. “Being forced to survive on these sums is not living. It is punitive and unsustainable. The social security safety net is riven with gaping holes. “It is implausible that the chancellor truly, deeply understands the living hell which is a life lived in poverty. “On £70 a week, or less, disabled people live with not just empty bank balances, but our very souls are depleted down to the dregs.” Jumoke Abdullahi, communications and media officer for Inclusion London, said: “Rishi Sunak failing to announce any specific support for disabled people during the statement is truly appalling. “Especially given that the cost-of-living crisis will greatly impact a group of people that are already financially worse off. “Even prior to the recent rising costs of energy and other living essentials, disabled people already faced financial constraints, known as a ‘disability tax’. “The very people that have to make the impossible choices of heating or eating having their specific needs effectively left out of such an important announcement is simply not good enough. “While the money for the Household Support Fund is certainly welcome, disabled people need more.” Ellen Morrison, co-chair of the Commission on Social Security, which called in January for a “transformational” reboot of the social security system, said the spring statement was “a series of woefully inadequate sticking plasters, completely ignoring people reliant on social security”. She said: “They won’t fix a decade of austerity, an ongoing pandemic and now a cost-of-living crisis. Too many are already at breaking point, we needed real solutions today. “The rising cost of fuel, heating, food, bills, national insurance contributions and social care charging cannot be borne by those of us already ‘living’ on a pittance. “You can’t pay out more when you’ve already got nothing.” She added: “We recently published our plan for a decent social security system. “We’ve got a set of ideas that would treat people with the dignity and respect they deserve, and ensure everyone has enough to live on. “This is the kind of transformational change we need to see.” Philip Wayland, one of the four claimants who brought a high court case against the Department for Work and Pensions for failing to offer recipients of legacy benefits the same £20-a-week increase given to people on universal credit during the pandemic, said a Conservative chancellor had yet again chosen to “compound” the economic hardship that already hits sick and disabled people the hardest. He said: “Not only is this incredibly cruel, but it is a false economy. “As people will have less disposable income to spend into the economy, and because of the unprecedented increase in energy costs, many people will simply not be able to pay their bills.” Michelle Maher, from the WOWcampaign, said it was “desperate and devastating today to receive nothing” in the spring statement. She said that benefits will rise by 3.1 per cent next month, whereas energy bills are due to rise by 54 per cent. She said disabled people had been “written out of the discourse on societal problems”. Maher said: “We need energy for wheelchairs, hospital beds, ventilators, dialysis machines, extra washing, and warmth to ease pain. “For 11 years we’ve been treated as worthless second-class citizens. “As a disabled person I count myself amongst the lucky ones. I’ve not got a child on a ventilator, or a dialysis machine. “But for pain I need heat, and I have more washing [than other people]. Basic, basic needs. “With [the price of] food, energy and goods rising, disabled people will be paying increased taxes through VAT and getting nothing. “It’s terrifying to think how this will impact the disabled community as a whole.” The Treasury had failed to comment by noon today (Thursday) on why the chancellor had ignored those disabled people struggling with the cost-of-living crisis who are not in work. *The Housing Support Fund is distributed by councils in England through small payments to help “vulnerable households” meet costs such as food, clothing, and utilities
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2022 17:46:42 GMT
EHRC ‘has become extension of government’ after dropping probe into DWP deaths By John Pring on 7th April 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/ehrc-has-become-extension-of-government-after-dropping-probe-into-dwp-deaths/The equality watchdog has been accused of failing disabled people and becoming “an extension of government”, after dropping any attempt to hold the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to account for its links to countless deaths of benefit claimants. In its new strategic plan, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has confirmed that it no longer plans to launch an inquiry into links between DWP’s work capability assessment and the deaths of claimants. It had originally promised to carry out an inquiry after being approached in April 2019 by Labour’s Debbie Abrahams, a former shadow work and pensions secretary. But the commission later decided to delay and “deprioritise” the inquiry – blaming the pandemic – and then backed away even further from the commitment by instead announcing plans to address the “systemic barriers” facing disabled claimants in the benefits system. Now, at the end of EHRC’s 2019-2022 strategy period, it has been unable to point to a single action it has taken to address those barriers. And while its previous three-year strategic plan promised to “focus on the issues affecting the most disadvantaged in society” and “tackle discriminatory decision-making in the social security system”, its new three-year strategic plan includes no such pledge. The commission promises instead to “focus our resources where we can make a real, lasting, positive difference to the lives of individuals across Britain”. In its business plan for 2022-23, several actions are aimed at promoting the rights of disabled people, but there is no reference to investigating deaths or other serious harm caused by the social security system. Mark Harrison, a member of the steering group of Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance (ROFA), said: “The EHRC is not a serious human rights defender and has certainly let down disabled benefit claimants over the last period. “Despite having a commitment to tackling discrimination in the social security system in their last strategic plan they did nothing to hold the DWP to account for benefit-related deaths of disabled people, despite overwhelming evidence of discrimination and neglect of duties of care. “Now it appears they have dropped even the commitment to focus on social security and DWP activities. “The government has over the last 12 years emasculated the EHRC by slashing funding and imposing political appointments. “They have now unilaterally decided to scrap their disability advisory committee. “While the UN has declared ‘grave and systematic violations’ of disabled people’s rights and a ‘human catastrophe’ in the UK, the EHRC has done nothing serious to address this situation. “The EHRC has lost its independence and has therefore become an extension of government. “They have lost their ability to hold their political masters to account and the confidence of disabled people and our representative organisations.” Abrahams, the MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, said: “Given the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s role as human rights monitor in the UK, with responsibility for protecting equality across nine grounds including disability, I am most concerned that they appear to have dropped any work investigating the social security system issues affecting disabled people from their three-year strategic plan. “I appreciate that there have been leadership changes at the EHRC and I look forward to meeting with the new team to clarify the EHRC’s position on this. “In particular, as I have repeatedly raised my concerns with the EHRC about the DWP’s investigation into and recording of claimant deaths that may be associated with DWP activity, and having called on the commission to independently investigate this, I will once more be seeking clarity on their position regarding an inquiry.” The publication of the commission’s new strategy came only days after DNS published a 10,000-word investigation describing how evidence stretching back more than a decade showed how DWP repeatedly ignored recommendations to improve the safety of its disability benefits assessment system, leading to countless avoidable deaths of disabled claimants, and how DWP ensured that key evidence linking its actions with those deaths was not considered by independent reviews. It also shows how the cultural problems within DWP extend far beyond the assessment system, touching all aspects of its dealings with disabled people in the social security system, and how the roots of its toxic culture stretch back at least 30 years. In February, ROFA and Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) wrote to EHRC, pointing to a series of deaths and other evidence that has emerged in the last two years as the commission has repeatedly failed to act. They said in the letter that the situation “continues to deteriorate and claimants continue to die as a result of the hostile climate created by the DWP for Disabled people”. A spokesperson for the commission refused this week to say why EHRC had dropped its commitment to “the most disadvantaged in society”; failed to point to a single action it had taken over the last three years to tackle discriminatory decision-making by DWP; and would not explain why it dropped plans to hold a DWP inquiry. She also refused to say if the government had exerted any pressure on EHRC to drop the plans for a DWP inquiry, drop the “focus on the issues affecting the most disadvantaged in society”, and scrap its plans to “tackle discriminatory decision-making in the social security system” in the current strategic plan. But she said in a statement: “We are an independent body. Given our broad remit and limited resources, we need to make difficult decisions on what to prioritise, but remain committed to protecting everyone in Britain. “We consulted publicly on our strategic plan for 2022-25 and received over 800 responses. “We have set out how we responded to the feedback we received as part of the consultation on our website. “The commission will continue to look at the intersection between socio-economic disadvantage and protected characteristics, across the strategic priorities in our plan as we assess where we can most effectively use our powers to tackle discrimination and uphold equality and human rights. “As part of our new strategy we want to retain capacity to respond to issues as they arise, and will regularly review our priorities and the impact we are having.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 14, 2022 21:25:13 GMT
New coalition will shine spotlight on ‘devastating’ impact of cost-of-living crisis By John Pring on 14th April 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/new-coalition-will-shine-spotlight-on-devastating-impact-of-cost-of-living-crisis/A new coalition of disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) is aiming to shine a spotlight on the “devastating impact” of the spiralling cost of living that is “threatening disabled people’s survival”. The Disability Poverty Campaign Group (DPCG) warned this week that DPOs across the country were reporting that disability poverty was “widespread and deepening”. The coalition has been set up to address increasing levels of poverty among disabled people affected by rising food and fuel prices, and the failure of benefits to keep up with those increases. DPCG is currently led by a steering group of Disability Rights UK, Inclusion London, and Inclusion Barnet, and is open to DPOs across the UK*. Julia Modern, Inclusion London’s senior policy and stakeholder engagement manager, said the group was answering the need for a “collective voice to challenge the neglect and discrimination” disabled people were facing. She told Disability News Service (DNS): “Disability poverty has been exacerbated through years of cuts to government services. “We face discrimination in employment, and access to legal redress has become much harder due to cuts to legal aid. “Overall social security payment levels are inadequate, and ‘extra cost benefits’ – benefits designed to mitigate the extra costs of living with disability – do not reach all disabled people or meet the true level of additional costs we face. “As inflation pushes fuel and food prices higher, many disabled people’s incomes no longer cover even the basics of existence. “Added to this is a distinct lack of decent support packages provided by government and utility providers to help disabled people cope with spiralling debt.” She added: “Even before the current price increases, DPOs were speaking to members who were getting up in the middle of the night to use the washing machine on the cheaper night tariff. “With many disabled people already doing all they can to reduce costs, more advice on budgeting cannot fix the problem.” Among the evidence DPCG points to is research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), which found in its UK Poverty 2019-20 report that, if extra-costs disability benefits are disregarded, nearly half of those in poverty live in a household that includes a disabled person. In its latest UK Poverty report, JRF says that – again, if extra-costs benefits such as personal independence payment (PIP) are disregarded – 32 per cent of disabled people are living in poverty. For working-age adults, that climbs to 38 per cent, compared with 17 per cent of non-disabled working-age adults. The Trussell Trust reported in June 2021 that more than six in ten (62 per cent) working-age referrals to food banks in early 2020 were disabled people. These figures were all compiled before the onset of the current cost-of-living crisis. DPCG is also highlighting concerns about social care charges, which it says frequently reduce disabled people’s incomes to an insufficient “minimum income guarantee” level. This can be as low as £73.95 a week, “leaving some disabled people with barely anything to live on”. Modern said: “Over a decade of cuts to the resources available to local government has led to increasing pressure on social care budgets, resulting in draconian council policies on care charging. “As a result, many disabled people have to pay the meagre benefits they receive to the council to cover their essential care needs. “Systematically reducing disabled people’s income to the level of the minimum income guarantee (which has been frozen for six out of the seven previous years) is profoundly unfair.” This week, DNS is reporting how an ombudsman ruled that a disabled woman took her own life after being wrongly sent a series of invoices demanding payment of care charges she should not have had to pay (see separate story). Meanwhile, freedom of information requests submitted by campaigners have been showing how tens of thousands of disabled people across the country are having debt collection action taken against them every year by their local authorities over unpaid care charges. Rising energy prices are also having a significant impact on disability poverty. The disability charity Scope warned in 2019 – even before the current cost-of-living crisis – that the average disabled person faced extra costs of £583 a month. Energy charges make up a “significant proportion” of these extra costs, said DPCG. Many disabled people need to use heating more often, need electricity to recharge their mobility equipment or run medical devices, and need to use equipment such as washing machines more often. In March, even before the latest fuel price increases, one DPO advice worker told Inclusion London: “Pretty much all clients who contact us are needing help with fuel costs. Numbers have increased dramatically.” DPCG’s first target is energy costs, and it plans to seek meetings with the government, mayors, councils, the energy regulator Ofgem, and energy companies, to push for “targeted support” for disabled people faced with sharply rising fuel bills. Modern said the government had provided no targeted support for disabled people in the measures it announced this year to help households with energy bills. She also pointed to the government’s decision to remove the right to the Warm Home Discount from 290,000 claimants of disability living allowance and PIP. She said: “Rather than helping us survive the spike in energy prices, the government is removing the only support that is currently delivered to disabled people for our higher energy costs. “Coming on top of the existing appalling level of poverty among disabled people, the current increases in prices are threatening disabled people’s survival.” DPOs that have already signed up to DPCG include Action on Disability Kensington and Chelsea, Cheshire Disabled People’s Panel, Choices and Rights Disability Coalition, Chronic Illness Inclusion, Disability Positive, The Disability Union, Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People, Harrow Association of Disabled People, #MEaction, Merton CIL, and WinVisible. They are now calling for other DPOs to join the campaign group*. All the group’s members are DPOs, and all decisions will be made by disabled-led organisations, but DPCG is also attracting support from non-member allies such as The Food Foundation, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and The Trussell Trust.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 28, 2022 21:02:24 GMT
Trio of disabled women say EHRC has failed them and other families over benefit deaths By John Pring on 28th April 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/trio-of-disabled-women-say-ehrc-has-failed-them-and-other-families-over-benefit-deaths/Three disabled women who lost relatives because of the actions of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have accused the equality watchdog of failing them and countless other families. They spoke out this week after the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) refused to follow through on plans for an inquiry into multiple deaths linked to DWP’s failings. The commission has instead announced plans for a voluntary agreement with DWP that will commit the department to follow an action plan aimed at “resolving issues for DWP customers”. The details of the so-called section 23 agreement are not likely to be released until the summer but will require DWP to “improve its treatment of disabled benefit claimants” and not breach its duties under the Equality Act. In a letter to the Commons work and pensions committee, published this week, the commission said it was negotiating an agreement with DWP that will ensure it complies with its obligations under the Equality Act’s public sector equality duty. It said it was “confident the Commission and DWP will together develop an action plan that can provide further positive improvements to the experiences of people with mental health and learning difficulties in the social security system”. But despite EHRC’s apparent confidence that an agreement would be signed, DWP insisted this week that it “complies with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010 and has not identified any systemic unlawful action”, and that it “has not reached or entered into a legal agreement with the EHRC”. Chloe Smith, the minister for disabled people, said DWP had been “corresponding with” EHRC about its duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010 since March 2021. The EHRC announcement is further proof that the commission has abandoned any plans to hold an inquiry into deaths linked to DWP’s disability benefits assessment system. It had originally promised to carry out an inquiry after being approached in April 2019 by Labour’s Debbie Abrahams, a former shadow work and pensions secretary. But the commission later decided to delay and “deprioritise” the inquiry – blaming the pandemic – and then backed away even further from the commitment by instead announcing plans to address the “systemic barriers” facing disabled claimants in the benefits system. The proposed section 23 agreement – if it happens – appears to be the only result of that work. Now three disabled women who have campaigned for justice for relatives whose deaths were linked to DWP’s actions have criticised EHRC for dropping its plans for an inquiry. Alison Burton, Imogen Day and Joy Dove told Disability News Service (DNS) this week that the commission had failed them and other families. Alison Burton is the daughter-in-law of Errol Graham, who starved to death after DWP wrongly stopped his employment and support allowance (ESA), leaving him without any income. She said the section 23 agreement was another bit of pressure on DWP but was “nowhere near enough”. She said it showed the continuing issues around trusting both DWP and EHRC, after it backed out of its promise to hold an inquiry. She said: “They will never be able to restore public trust without that inquiry. “That’s the only way DWP are going to be able to wipe the slate clear and build for a better future. “There will always be questions and mistrust with that department until they clear the skeletons out of the closet. “The public inquiry is the only thing that will even go an inch towards restoring the damage that has been caused.” An inquest in January 2021 uncovered 28 separate problems with the personal independence payment system that helped cause the death of Philippa Day in October 2019. Her sister Imogen told DNS this week that EHRC had failed those who have been left bereaved by DWP’s actions. She said: “An independent inquiry is necessary to prevent further deaths and acts of serious harm. “Without an inquiry it is clear that more failings will continue to be made.” Joy Dove’s daughter, Jodey Whiting, took her own life in February 2017, 15 days after she had her ESA wrongly stopped for missing a work capability assessment. Dove said this week that EHRC’s failure to carry out an inquiry was “not good enough”. She said: “We need an inquiry to get to the truth about the failings. “Having an inquiry is the right thing to do so all the families can get some peace.” Abrahams has also spoken out, telling the Mirror that although the section 23 agreement was “a step forward” it was “just not good enough” and there needed to be “a full independent transparent inquiry looking at the scale of the deaths, the responsibility round the culture of the organisation, and the policies that contributed to it”. A DWP spokesperson said in a statement: “We are committed to providing a compassionate and responsive service to all our customers, and are constantly improving our processes to deliver consistently reliable and high quality standards. “We have not so far identified any systemic unlawful action by the department. “We will continue to work collaboratively towards our shared goals with the commission, addressing their concerns and delivering for our customers.” He declined to say if this statement meant there was no guarantee that DWP would sign a section 23 agreement. An EHRC spokesperson had not responded to DWP’s statement by noon today (Thursday). But the commission told DNS earlier: “Entering into a section 23 agreement with the Department for Work and Pensions is the most effective, direct and targeted means of redress to deal with the systemic barriers disabled claimants face in the benefits system. “A section 23 agreement will ensure swift and meaningful change and is a more appropriate use of our specific powers. “This legally-binding action plan is focused on swiftly resolving issues for DWP customers, while avoiding lengthy investigations and offering the bereaved families the justice they deserve.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 28, 2022 21:03:23 GMT
Government’s ‘criminal’ plans for care charging ‘will crush disabled people under debts’ By John Pring on 28th April 2022 Category: Independent Living www.disabilitynewsservice.com/governments-criminal-plans-for-care-charging-will-crush-disabled-people-under-debts/Devastated disabled campaigners have vowed to continue their fight against care charges, after parliament ignored their concerns and passed a government bill that will fail to protect most working-age disabled people from the “catastrophic” costs of their care. The House of Lords this week voted against* the latest attempt to persuade ministers to change their health and care bill so that no-one in England under the age of 40 would have to pay for their care and support. The Labour amendment would also have made further changes to “regressive” government reforms which the party says will “strongly favour the better off and would bring almost nothing to the worst off”. The reforms will introduce an “extortionate” lifetime cap of £86,000 on how much anyone pays for social care, but it will not count financial contributions made by local authorities. Labour’s health and social care spokesperson Baroness [Margaret] Wheeler said this week that “even the government’s own impact assessment admits that only 10 per cent of working-age disabled adult care users will benefit, that one in five older people will not see the benefits of the cap, and that poorer care users are much more likely to die before they reach the cap than others with the same care needs”. The crossbench disabled peer Baroness [Jane] Campbell (pictured), who has led parliamentary attempts to ease the burden of care charges on working-age disabled people, told Disability News Service yesterday (Wednesday) that the proposals in the bill were “criminal” and “will continue to push disabled people of all ages into greater poverty and dependency”. She said the new legislation will provide a situation for working-age disabled people that will be “so much worse than that which I experienced in my younger life”. She had told fellow peers: “If the government’s proposals go through tonight, young disabled people will never participate in society as equal citizens, and those totally reliant on benefits will suffer even more financially.” She said evidence showed that investing in social care to support disabled people “improves their health, enhances their independence and reduces demand on welfare benefits”. And she said that without government action, disabled people would “be simply crushed by their rising debts”. Baroness Campbell said: “Four million disabled people in the UK are living in poverty and are particularly hard hit by the rising cost of living. “Without some easing, they will remain trapped in poverty.” The disabled Liberal Democrat peer Baroness [Sal] Brinton said: “How many more times must we say that it is still a disgrace that younger adults with disabilities – who we know are more likely to be asset- and savings-poor, likely to need care and support for much longer, and so will accrue much higher levels of costs than the elderly – will use the same arrangements as older people? “Those older people will use personal care for much less time and will have had decades of income- and asset-building behind them. “The proposals from the government are just not fit for purpose and must be reviewed for this group of younger adults in particular.” The former Tory pensions minister Baroness [Ros] Altmann said she would not vote against the government but could not support its proposals. She said: “I put on record that I agree with everything that has been said about the government’s changes to the social care cap. “I believe that the measures are regressive… they may be better than the current system, but they are not a solution and are not satisfactory. “We will end up having to revisit the support for social care.” The junior health and social care minister Lord Kamall insisted that the government’s plans were “fair and affordable”, were “designed to end the pain of unpredictable care costs by capping the amount anyone would need to pay at £86,000” and would be a “vast improvement” on the existing system. He said that a pilot scheme would allow the government to “tweak the system to address any shortcomings”. And he said the Labour amendment would have led to “fundamental unfairness” and made the reforms “unaffordable” and would have forced the government to make “savings” elsewhere. After the debate, Baroness Campbell paid tribute to the disabled people’s organisation (DPO) Inclusion London and the disability charity Mencap, which “brilliantly pulled out all the stops” to lobby peers over the reforms. But she said that other DPOs and disability charities “must do more” if charging is ever to be “seriously challenged” and must “be far more vocal on the issue with parliamentarians and produce much better campaign material”. She said: “It’s up to all the campaigning organisations to demonstrate the evidence that charging for social care support is counter-productive, whereas investment reaps rewards in health, personal independence, financial productivity and general well-being.” She now plans to concentrate on her work as a member of the Lords adult social care committee, which is holding an inquiry into adult social care. She said: “I’m really hoping that organisations and individuals experienced in this world will send in some good evidence of what works and what doesn’t and back it up with serious data.” Svetlana Kotova, director of campaigns and justice for Inclusion London, said: “We are extremely disappointed that the government pushed through its reforms, ignoring so many voices, including the voices of disabled people. “Those reforms will not protect the vast majority of disabled people from catastrophic care costs; moreover, many will have to live for years trapped in poverty, choosing between heating and eating while paying for care. “With the rising cost of living, the problem will only grow. “The reforms will not bring extra money to the system, so while paying for care many of us will continue experiencing cuts to support and fewer opportunities to have choice, control and independence. “Social care charging is a tax on disability and we will not give up our fight against it. “We are calling on all disabled people to join our campaign to Scrap Care Charges.” *The motion was lost by 196 votes to 160
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 28, 2022 21:04:21 GMT
Regulator pressure forces DWP to admit: One million ESA claimants will lose out under UC By John Pring on 28th April 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/regulator-pressure-forces-dwp-to-admit-one-million-esa-claimants-will-lose-out-under-uc/The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has bowed to pressure from a regulator and finally published figures proving that at least one million disabled people will eventually be left worse off through the move to universal credit. Disability News Service (DNS) has been trying since October 2019 to secure updated figures that would show how many disabled people would lose out in the move to the new working-age, income-related benefit system. On 31 March, the information commissioner ruled against DWP’s attempt to brand DNS “vexatious” for trying to secure the figures. Now, less than a month later, ministers have published a report that includes the figures DNS has been trying to obtain for nearly three years. Ministers such as Justin Tomlinson, the former minister for disabled people, and work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey have repeatedly claimed that around one million disabled households will receive a higher entitlement under universal credit (UC) than they would have received under their previous “legacy” benefits. But every time they repeated the figure, they failed to say how many disabled households were expected to receive a lower entitlement under UC. The most recent DWP equality impact assessment, published in November 2011, suggested that the number of disabled households gaining financially from UC would be at least matched by the number losing out, with disabled people who were out of work particularly likely to lose out. This week’s report confirms that assessment, and it concludes that just as many claimants of employment and support allowance (ESA) – the out-of-work disability benefit – will eventually lose out as will gain from the move across to UC once its rollout is complete. DWP also confirmed this week that about 2.6 million households who currently still remain on legacy benefits such as ESA, jobseeker’s allowance and tax credits will be claiming UC instead – or will have left the benefits system – by the end of 2024. Many will have to claim UC when their circumstances change – through a process known as natural migration – while others may choose to make the move themselves (voluntary migration) if they believe they will be better off by doing so. But hundreds of thousands of other claimants will have to be “managed” onto UC by DWP. This final group will be eligible for “transitional protection”, which means that those who would otherwise lose out financially to UC will receive the same cash amount they previously received under legacy benefits. But any subsequent increase in UC, apart from the childcare element – including at the start of every financial year in April, when a claimant’s benefits would otherwise have increased by the rate of inflation – will lead to a reduction in this transitional protection by the same amount. The transitional protection could even end altogether with certain changes of circumstances. This “erosion” of transitional protection is likely to be particularly significant next year because of the current high rate of inflation. It means that – assuming inflation stays above zero – all those receiving transitional protection will eventually be left worse off than if they had remained on their legacy benefits. This week’s figures show that of about 1.2 million remaining ESA claimants in April 2022, an estimated 600,000 will be better off on UC, but about 500,000 will eventually be worse off, despite any transitional protection they receive. Those among the 500,000 who will initially benefit from transitional protection will eventually lose all that extra support, and all of them will be left worse off under UC within the first year, because of inflation. The DWP report says that among claimants likely to lose out in the move to UC are those currently receiving ESA, severe disability premium and enhanced disability premium. It also shows that, once the rollout of UC has been completed in 2024, about one million claimants will have lost out compared to the benefits they would have received if UC had not been introduced and they had received ESA instead – once any transitional protections have eroded – while about one million will have gained. This suggests that when ministers repeatedly claimed that about one million disabled households would receive a higher entitlement under UC than they would have received under the previous “legacy” benefits system, they knew that many would also lose out, but chose not to disclose that information. This suggests that ministers such as Therese Coffey and Justin Tomlinson repeatedly misled parliament. A DWP spokesperson refused to say why it had taken so long to produce new figures showing how many disabled claimants will lose out from the move to UC, rather than just the number who will gain. He also refused to say why ministers had misled parliament by only stating that a million disabled households would gain financially from the move to UC. Asked what ministers’ message was to the hundreds of thousands of disabled people who are already facing a cost-of-living crisis and will lose out even more through the UC managed migration process, he refused to comment. Instead, he pointed to a DWP press release, in which Coffey said: “Over five million people are already supported by universal credit. “It is a dynamic system which adjusts as people earn more or indeed less, and simplifies our safety net for those who cannot work. “Parliament voted to end the complex web of six legacy benefits in 2012, and as this work approaches its conclusion we are fully transitioning to a modern benefit, suited to the 21st century.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 4, 2022 9:04:39 GMT
EHRC lets the DWP off the hook over claimant deaths PUBLISHED: 29 APRIL 2022 www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/ehrc-lets-the-dwp-off-the-hook-over-claimant-deathsThe Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has gone back on its promise to investigate the role of the DWP in the deaths of vulnerable claimants, effectively letting the DWP entirely off the hook. Instead it is now only asking the DWP to come up with some new policies in relation to claimants with mental health issues and learning difficulties. As far back as 2019 the EHRC said that it would mount an investigation into claimant deaths. But it then used the pandemic as an excuse not to begin work. Now, however, the Commission has said only that it intends to enter into a Section 23 agreement under the Equality Act 2006 which will oblige the DWP “to commit them to an action plan to meet the needs of customers with mental health impairments and learning disabilities.” The EHRC claim that: “This legally-binding action plan is focused on resolving issues for DWP customers, and offers a fast, effective means of redress, and helps to avoid lengthy investigations.” In a statement unlikely to inspire confidence in disabled claimants, Chief Executive of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Marcial Boo, said: “The EHRC is committed to stamping out discrimination against all disabled people, including those with mental health conditions and learning disabilities whose needs can be overlooked. “Government bodies often deliver essential services to vulnerable people. They must meet high standards and make reasonable adjustments for those who need them. The EHRC will hold them to account if they do not. “This agreement with DWP will build on the improvements already taking place for disabled benefits claimants. We are pleased that officials are working cooperatively with us to address our concerns, and we expect the binding legal agreement to be in place shortly. We will monitor its delivery.” Sadly, the EHRC does not give any details of the “improvements already taking place for disabled benefits claimants”. Most claimants would probably argue that, unless you live in Scotland, they are completely non-existent. The reality is that the DWP is vastly bigger and better funded than the EHRC. It will run rings round the Commission in the drawing up of an agreement which is likely to be little more than a list non-measurable and non-actionable good intentions. The details of the action plan will not be available until the summer of 2022, at the earliest. You can read more on the EHRC website.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 6, 2022 21:25:06 GMT
Why has EHRC broken promise to investigate DWP’s role in deaths of benefit claimants? voxpoliticalonline.com/2022/05/06/why-has-ehrc-broken-promise-to-investigate-dwps-role-in-deaths-of-benefit-claimants/The Equality and Human Rights Commission has u-turned on a promise to investigate the role played by the Department for Work and Pensions in the deaths of vulnerable benefit claimants, it’s being reported. Instead the EHRC are now asking the DWP to create new policies in relation to claimants with mental health issues and learning difficulties. Apparently the commission is using the Covid-19 pandemic as an excuse. This Site forced the DWP to publish figures showing that thousands of people had died of unexplained causes after being thrown off benefits by that government department and I am deeply concerned by this failure to scrutinise whether the government caused these deaths. And how many more people have died since I exposed those deaths seven years ago? I shall be writing to the EHRC today, seeking a meaningful explanation for this u-turn. UPDATE: Here’s what I have written to the EHRC: “I was the writer who forced the DWP to admit that thousands of people have died after being thrown off benefits – for no established reason. I am deeply concerned that the EHRC has decided not to investigate the DWP’s role in the deaths of claimants and is choosing only to seek an agreement to better protect claimants – similar to other undertakings that the DWP has ignored in the past, causing more deaths. The DWP will never respect the human rights, or indeed the lives, of claimants unless it is forced to do so. I am writing to you to seek an explanation for your decision that I can publish to my readers. How will you defend this indefensible decision?” Let’s see what response – if any – I receive. Source: EHRC Breaks Promise To Investigate DWP Role In Deaths – The poor side of life
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 20, 2022 0:21:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 23, 2022 20:30:39 GMT
Fit for Work - ‘Severely neglected’ man found dead, three months after DWP assessment By John Pring on 19th May 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/severely-neglected-man-found-dead-three-months-after-dwp-assessment/The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) failed to alert GPs and social services to the “very extensive” difficulties a disabled man was facing, three months before he died in conditions of severe self-neglect. A safeguarding review of the death of Mr A, from Leeds, concluded that a healthcare assessor working for a DWP contractor was probably the last person to see him alive, other than his disabled wife. The face-to-face benefits assessment was carried out so Mr A could be transferred from long-term incapacity benefit to employment and support allowance (ESA). The assessment report was passed on to DWP, and he was placed in the ESA support group, but no attempt was made to contact his local GP or Leeds City Council, to inform them about the substantial problems he was facing. It is just the latest evidence of years of failings by DWP to prioritise the safety of benefit claimants, with ministers repeatedly declaring that the department does not have a legal duty to “safeguard” its claimants. When Mr A’s death was reported by his wife, his body was found in his bed “surrounded by piles of household waste, his body severely neglected, emaciated and decomposed”. Paramedics who attended the property in the early hours of 12 March 2017 found “hoarded materials, accumulated waste, evidence of rodent infestation and animal faeces” from the couple’s dogs and chinchillas. Mr A had died sometime in the previous 48 hours, having spoken to a friend on the phone two days earlier. The face-to-face assessment in November 2016 is believed to have taken place in an assessment centre in Leeds and the review said it revealed that Mr A “stayed in bed all day and every day because of severe pain, leg swelling and mobility difficulties, had dizziness and poor balance and muscle wasting in his upper and lower limbs”. But neither DWP nor its assessment contractor* alerted his GP or Leeds City Council’s adult social care department to his substantial and urgent support needs. The safeguarding review described the face-to-face assessment, and DWP’s failure to alert other agencies, as a “significant factor”. It says the assessment “appears to be the last time anyone saw Mr A before his death three-and-a-half months later”. Mr A and his wife lived in an adapted bungalow. He had been in severe pain and poor health for many years, and the couple’s relationship had become increasingly difficult, with each of them occupying different rooms and communicating by mobile phone. She brought food to his room, as well as bottles and puppy pads for toileting, which he placed in plastic bags by his bed after using them. The squalid conditions in the adapted bungalow, and the “chaos” she was living in, impacted the health of his wife, who herself had obsessive compulsive disorder and other impairments. She later described her husband as “manipulative, argumentative and violent” but she also made excuses for him. The safeguarding adults review was not published until January 2020, and this is believed to be the first time its contents have been reported publicly. The review made a series of recommendations, including a call for DWP to strengthen information-sharing with GPs “and referral pathways to other agencies such as Adult Social Care when DWP or their agents identify potential care and support needs and/or circumstances in which safeguarding action may be necessary”. Other public bodies were criticised by the review for failing to take action to safeguard the couple, including the city council, the local NHS, police and fire and rescue service, Leeds Safeguarding Adults Board, and Leeds Federated Housing Association. But the review said the housing association was the only organisation that had identified significant potential risk in Mr and Mrs A’s situation, and “made persistent efforts to engage others in supporting Mr and Mrs A but appeared to meet an impasse at every turn”. The review pointed out that Mr and Mrs A made “very clear and successful attempts” to “remain off the radar”. But it also said: “It is hard not to conclude overall that agencies simply did not worry enough to prompt them seeking to learn more about Mr and Mrs A and the conditions in which they were living or to take timely action.” It added: “The absence of Adult Social Care involvement was a major factor in this situation remaining under the radar. “It must be questioned why there were no referrals to Adult Social Care from health agencies, in the light of their knowledge of the Mr and Mrs A’s health conditions and the difficulties they posed. “Equally, why there was no referral to Adult Social Care from either [the assessment company] or DWP in the light of the medical assessment in November 2016, which identified the circumstances in which Mr A in particular was living.” Five organisations told the review that they had brought in changes as a result of the case, but there was no mention in the report of any such changes made by DWP. Leeds City Council refused to comment on its own failings and how DWP had responded to the recommendation made by the review, and it also refused to answer questions about the face-to-face assessment and DWP’s role in Mr A’s death. DWP declined to answer questions about the safeguarding review, its own failings, what action it had taken in response to the review’s recommendation, and whether it had carried out its own review into the death of Mr A. It claimed that because “safeguarding adult reviews are anonymised to protect the individuals involved” it would “not be appropriate to divulge any further detail on this specific case”. But a DWP spokesperson said in a statement: “While the department does not have a statutory duty of care or safeguarding duty, we can help direct our claimants to the most appropriate body to meet their needs. “More than 30 advanced customer support senior leaders (ACSSLs) have been appointed across Great Britain… to reach across local communities, underpinning our relationships with other organisations that provide support to our customers. “We are always looking to maximise our opportunities in our interactions with customers to signpost vulnerable claimants towards support. “We want to ensure that chances to flag concerns to agencies with statutory safeguarding responsibilities are not missed. “The department frequently collaborates with these agencies. “For individual claimants, we can liaise with health and social services to consider next steps, contact GPs for evidence for disability benefits decisions, or access HMRC salary records to calculate child maintenance.” The US outsourcing giant Maximus*, which is believed to have carried out the WCA, had not responded to requests to comment by noon today (Thursday). *Although the review says the WCA was carried out by Atos, the assessment took place nearly two years after the contract was taken over by Maximus, which delivers its WCA contract through the Centre for Health and Disability Assessments. It is therefore likely that the WCA was carried out by Maximus, although neither Maximus nor DWP had confirmed that by noon today (Thursday)
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 8, 2022 21:28:51 GMT
Knock-on effects of PIP assessment backlog ‘show ministers must get a grip’ By John Pring on 2nd June 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/knock-on-effects-of-pip-assessment-backlog-show-ministers-must-get-a-grip/Backlogs in the disability benefit assessment system are having significant knock-on effects on disabled people’s ability to live independently, new evidence has shown. It is showing how lengthy delays in reviewing people’s personal independence payment (PIP) claims are having a substantial impact on their applications for other benefits, blue parking badges, bus passes and Motability vehicles. They are also causing delays for disabled people whose support needs have increased and believe they should now be entitled to higher PIP payments. The evidence has come from the Benefits and Work website, which has heard from a string of existing PIP recipients who say the delays are causing them significant problems. In March, Disability News Service (DNS) reported how the backlog of disabled people waiting for a PIP assessment had more than trebled in the last five years, from 88,500 in October 2016 to nearly 312,000 by December 2021. DNS has also reported on similar problems with the Access to Work system, with DWP figures showing the number of disabled people waiting for decisions on their applications has more than quadrupled in a year from just 4,890 in March 2021 to 20,909 in March this year. One of the ways the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is dealing with the lengthening PIP assessment backlog is by providing temporary, short-term extensions to PIP claimants who are waiting for their benefits to be reviewed. But this appears to be having significant knock-on effects with premiums and other entitlements available to those receiving PIP. One Benefits and Work reader said the extension had caused a “nightmare”, causing their pension credit, council tax and housing benefit to be stopped. Another reader, whose support needs have increased since they were last assessed, has been waiting since last July for a re-assessment, a delay that is causing “constant daily worry”, and has now been told their daughter’s carer’s allowance will stop this month. Another, who sent in a PIP renewal form for his brother last June, has been told he will lose the disability premium on his employment and support allowance (ESA) because of the PIP delay. Other Benefits and Work readers have been left unable to lease Motability vehicles until their PIP reviews have been carried out, as PIP recipients need at least a year left on their claim if they want to lease a vehicle through the scheme. Another reader said they had been unable to renew their bus pass. And many claimants appear to have been waiting for months for a re-assessment after their support needs have risen. One said: “I have now been waiting for a review for over a year now my circumstances have massively changed for the worse. “I keep ringing them and I just get told they are extending it, I’ve never known anything like this before.” Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, said: “With the cost-of-living crisis hitting disabled people particularly hard, it is shocking this government has not got a grip of the PIP backlog, which has been going on for months now. “Short term fixes aren’t enough anymore. Disabled people deserve so much better than this; Tory ministers need to get a grip on this backlog, especially given the impact it is now having on other benefits for disabled people. “A future Labour government would invest properly in disabled people, ensuring they had the support needed.” A DWP spokesperson said: “We closely monitor the progress of PIP cases awaiting assessment and take all steps possible to ensure claimants receive the vital support they require. “We can and do make in-house decisions on award reviews without referral to assessment providers where necessary and use a blend of phone, video and face-to-face assessments to ensure support is given as quickly as possible.”
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 23, 2022 21:20:29 GMT
DWP ignored ‘hugely alarming’ research that linked WCA with 600 suicides, MPs are told By John Pring on 23rd June 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/dwp-ignored-hugely-alarming-research-that-linked-wca-with-600-suicides-mps-are-told/The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) ignored leading academics after they published “hugely alarming” research that linked the work capability assessment with 600 suicides in just three years, MPs have been told. The failure is just the latest evidence to show how DWP ignored and covered-up warnings about the safety of its disability benefit assessment system over the last decade. The Commons work and pensions committee was hearing evidence on the assessment system yesterday (Wednesday) from Professor Ben Barr, from the University of Liverpool, and Dr Ben Baumberg Geiger, from the University of Kent. Professor Barr was one of the team who published ground-breaking research in 2015 that concluded that the government’s programme to reassess people on incapacity benefit (IB) through the work capability assessment (WCA) was linked to about 600 suicides in just three years. Professor Barr and other public health experts from the Universities of Liverpool and Oxford showed in the study that, for every 10,000 IB claimants who were reassessed in England between 2010 and 2013, there were an additional six suicides, 2,700 cases of self-reported mental health problems, and an increase of more than 7,000 in the number of anti-depressants prescribed. He told the committee yesterday that the study, and other evidence that has emerged over the last decade – such as reports of individual deaths and reports by coroners – showed “clear evidence that there’s potential for the assessment process to cause some very major adverse effects on mental health”. He said it was impossible to prove that the WCA caused the 600 suicides, although it was “extremely likely” and “extremely plausible that the assessment process led to those outcomes”. But Professor Barr told the committee yesterday, in response to questions from Labour’s Debbie Abrahams, that DWP had not contacted the research team after the article was published. He and his colleagues had recommended in the study that DWP should start to monitor the WCA’s “adverse outcomes”, but the department failed to contact them to discuss the recommendation and the wider study. He said it was not possible to say if the level of harm had decreased since 2015 because DWP “hasn’t been collecting the data to be able to answer that question and hasn’t enabled researchers and others access to the data that would enable that to be answered more robustly.” He called on the committee to push for DWP to monitor “adverse outcomes coming through the assessment process”. Professor Barr later confirmed to Disability News Service (DNS) that he had had no official contact from DWP about the study, despite the number of suicides it linked with the WCA being described by Abrahams as “hugely alarming”. He told DNS the research team had organised a workshop a couple of years after publication, which was attended by representatives from DWP, and in which he and his colleagues discussed the study in an “unofficial capacity”, but there had been no other contact. Conservative MP Dr Ben Spencer repeatedly questioned the data and told the committee that the figure of 600 suicides “seems almost too big to be believable in terms of going through the work assessment process”. He asked if there was another explanation for the increase in suicides, and later said that he “can’t really get my head around it” because “it looks so large”. But Professor Barr said the figure was “entirely plausible” as one million IB claimants had been put through the WCA in those three years. He told DNS later that “using more detailed data that the DWP has access to, we would be able to estimate these effects with greater certainty. “At a minimum, our evidence, along with evidence published by others, is sufficient to warrant further independent inquiry, and changes to the assessment process to minimise harms.” Dr Baumberg Geiger said that – despite recent claims from DWP assessment contractors that their performance had improved – his own research suggested there were “still major problems with the WCA that could lead to increased risks of poor mental health”. He said that provisional results from a survey of more than 7,000 benefit claimants found more than half of those who had been through a WCA said it had made their mental health worse. He told the committee: “It is not sufficient just to say this is a historic problem and everything is fine now.” He also raised serious concerns about the gradual move of disabled people onto the universal credit working-age benefit system, which can place demands on disabled claimants before they have had the chance to be assessed through the WCA. He said: “For universal credit, everybody is part of the system and has the demands imposed on it potentially at the start before a WCA so you’re really, really relying on the safeguarding procedures to be really good.” He said DWP “has a responsibility to make sure for people that it is there to help, that it is not causing harm”. Professor Barr said it was not possible to examine the impact of universal credit on mental health, and whether it had also led to suicides, because DWP was refusing to release the data needed to carry out that research “when it is within its power to do that and it would be possible to assess those impacts”.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 15, 2022 10:02:03 GMT
Secret reviews into DWP deaths more than double in three years By John Pring on 14th July 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/secret-reviews-into-dwp-deaths-more-than-double-in-three-years/New figures show how the number of secret reviews into deaths of benefit claimants that have been linked to the failings of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has more than doubled over the last three years. They show how DWP started 43 internal process reviews (IPRs) into deaths between July 2019 and June 2020, 59 from July 2020 to June 2021, and 38 in the last year, a total of 140 in three years. A previous freedom of information request by Disability News Service (DNS) shows this compares with 17 reviews carried out in 2016, 29 in 2017 and 18 in 2018, a total of only 64. The new figures were released by the minister for disabled people, Chloe Smith, in response to a written parliamentary question from Labour’s Debbie Abrahams, who has pushed repeatedly for a public inquiry into deaths linked to DWP’s actions. DWP suggested this week that the rise was because it had “broadened the range of circumstances where a review is carried out”, but it has so far declined to say when it made this change, or exactly what changes were made to its guidance. This week, Abrahams asked the speaker of the House of Commons if he could suggest why work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey was refusing to order a public inquiry. She told him: “It is a scandal that the bereaved families are not made aware of or involved in these investigations, and that we are denied data on the true scale of the deaths.” The speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, said he was “not responsible for the actions of the secretary of state”, but that he hoped government ministers had taken her comments “on board”. The IPR figures were released following the publication of new research which shows how decades of welfare reform and DWP failings are linked to hundreds – and probably thousands – of suicides and other deaths of disabled people. The draft version of the Deaths by Welfare timeline* exposes how DWP was alerted more than 40 times over the past 30 years to life-threatening systemic flaws in its disability benefits systems, by academics, coroners and its own researchers. IPRs are not released publicly, and grieving families are not even told that they are taking place. They were initially called peer reviews, and DWP only started collecting them in February 2012. Imogen Day, the sister of 27-year-old Philippa Day, one of the claimants whose death was caused by DWP’s failings, said the new figures showed a “collective and systemic tragedy”. She said it was accepted by families, disabled activists and politicians that only a small minority of deaths linked to DWP deaths were investigated through an IPR, but she said the number of IPRs being carried out was still “far too many”. She said: “It is still showing that there were 140 disabled people who have been failed by a government department and lost their lives in just three years.” And she said it was “infuriating and heart-breaking that we will never know how many disabled people are really dying”. Philippa (pictured, above, left) – known to her family as Pip – died in October 2019. Her unconscious body had been found by Imogen and her father two months earlier, days after she had been told she would need to attend an assessment centre for a face-to-face appointment to decide her claim for personal independence payment. In January last year, the coroner who heard the inquest into her death concluded that flaws in the personal independence payment system were “the predominant factor and the only acute factor” that led to her taking her own life. Gordon Clow, assistant coroner for Nottingham and Nottinghamshire, highlighted 28 separate “problems” with the administration of the system that helped cause her death. The Days are still believed to be the only family that has managed to obtain a full IPR, although the family of Errol Graham – who starved to death, months after DWP wrongly stopped his out-of-work disability benefits – have seen a summary version of the IPR into his death. Both families had to use the legal system to obtain the IPRs. The draft IPR into Pip’s death stated: “The purpose of the IPR is to consider the Department’s handling of the most serious cases where there is a suggestion/allegation that the Department’s actions or omissions may have negatively contributed to the customer’s circumstances.” Imogen (pictured, above, right) said seeing a draft version of the IPR had provided “so much clarity” for the family, and that it had shown them how DWP had failed Pip. She said: “We needed it to know that there was nothing else that we could have done. “It was necessary, we needed it, and my heart breaks for every family that hasn’t had access to that peace of mind.” She said it was “disappointing” that DWP had put protecting its own reputation and that of its ministers above the needs of the families and loved ones of those who have died. DWP had previously been forced by a tribunal to release the recommendations made by IPRs, but work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey is now preventing the release of even that limited information. Previous redacted IPRs released under the Freedom of Information Act have shown how DWP staff had to be repeatedly reminded what to do when claimants disclosed suicidal thoughts, following reviews into the suicides of as many as six claimants. Imogen said it was “absolutely enraging” that DWP was now attempting to prevent the public release of even the recommendations made by IPRs. Dr China Mills, who is leading the Deaths by Welfare project, said: “Given that the recommendations suggested by IPRs could likely prevent future deaths, we need transparency and accountability, where instead the DWP maintains secrecy.” She added: “Given mounting evidence of harm, evident in the Deaths by Welfare timeline, IPRs likely represent only a small proportion of the number of deaths linked to welfare reform, even though the number of reviews has risen so sharply in the last few years. “And IPRs are just one part of a much longer history, documented in the Deaths by Welfare timeline, of the DWP ignoring evidence of harm and withholding evidence of deaths (for example failing to share evidence of deaths linked to the work capability assessment, during the independent reviews of the WCA), all the while demonising people who claim benefit.” A DWP spokesperson said: “We take these cases extremely seriously, which is why we have broadened the range of circumstances where a review is carried out to improve the outcomes for our customers with changes made including better support for vulnerable customers, and the introduction of a mental health training package for staff.” The DWP press office has passed on the DNS request for further information about changes to the IPR process to its freedom of information department. *To provide feedback or suggest additions to the timeline, visit the Deaths by Welfare timeline home page
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2022 20:11:08 GMT
MPs who refused to quiz minister on benefit deaths ‘have failed disabled people’ By John Pring on 21st July 2022 Category: Benefits and Poverty www.disabilitynewsservice.com/mps-who-refused-to-quiz-minister-on-benefit-deaths-have-failed-disabled-people/MPs have refused to quiz the disability minister about new research that brings together more than 30 years of evidence linking her department with the deaths of countless disabled benefit claimants. The draft version of the Deaths by Welfare timeline features more than 300 pages of evidence linking the systemic failings of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) with hundreds, if not thousands, of deaths. Members of the Commons work and pensions committee – which is trusted to hold DWP to account – had the chance to question Chloe Smith about those links yesterday (Wednesday) when she gave evidence on the department’s disability benefits assessment system. She was questioned for nearly two hours (pictured), but none of the committee members even mentioned the research, which was published on 4 July. Each of them had been alerted to the timeline by Disability News Service (DNS), although they should already have been aware of its existence. The committee’s chair, Labour’s Stephen Timms, had suggested that DNS contact each member individually, after DNS emailed him about the research. Timms also suggested that the research would be circulated to committee members ahead of the meeting. The committee’s failure to mention the timeline comes days after both Labour and the Liberal Democrats offered only half-hearted support for the research last week. Although the most damning evidence is linked to decisions made by post-2010 Conservative-led governments, the timeline shows how both Labour and the Liberal Democrats are also implicated in many of DWP’s failings. Disabled activist Rick Burgess, who played a key role in preparing the timeline, said the committee “simply does not deserve the confidence of disabled people until it raises this issue forcefully, not just with the minister but with the secretary of state and whoever the prime minister turns out to be”. He added: “When human rights defenders in the UK clearly evidence a link between government policy and a great many deaths, you can judge the health of our democracy by how the oversight systems of parliament bring this evidence to government and take them to task. “What this tells us is we are in a failing state. This leaves disabled people at great risk of ongoing, massive state-sponsored harm.” He said the committee’s actions demonstrated how disabled people were “increasingly isolated and adrift of help” and illustrated the community’s need to organise “for its own defence”. He called on disabled people to join their nearest disabled people’s organisation or even start one themselves. Timms had failed to comment by noon today (Thursday) on the committee’s refusal to question the minister about the timeline. The draft timeline is based on more than a decade of investigations by disabled people’s grassroots groups, journalists, academics and other organisations and campaigners, and has taken 18 months to put together. The evidence includes government reports, academic research, disabled people’s activism, letters to DWP from coroners, media reports of deaths linked to DWP’s failings, freedom of information responses and political speeches. It shows how years of warning signs of the harm to come were ignored, while it also demonstrates systemic negligence by DWP, a culture of cover-up and denial, and a refusal to accept that the department has a duty of care to those disabled people claiming support through the social security system. The timeline is part of the Deaths by Welfare project, headed by Dr China Mills and supported by Healing Justice Ldn, which works with marginalised and oppressed communities. Mills has led the work on the timeline alongside DNS editor John Pring, with key input from Burgess, disabled activist Ellen Clifford, author of The War On Disabled People, welfare rights expert and researcher Nick Dilworth, and disabled artist-activist Dolly Sen. *To provide feedback or suggest additions to the timeline, visit the Deaths by Welfare timeline home page
|
|