Radical
Statistics
Response to the government Green Paper on welfare reform
Pauline Heslop
1.0 Introduction
1.1 This paper sets out a written memorandum to the House of Commons Social Security Select Committee on the subject of the proposed measures outlined in Chapter 6 (concerning Support for Disabled People) of the Welfare Reform Green Paper "New Ambitions for Our Country: a New Contract for Welfare" (Cm. 3805). Although the comments in this paper relate specifically to the section of the Green Paper concerned with disabled people, it must be remembered that individuals do not always fit so neatly into ordered pigeonholes disabled people may also be lone parents or homeless, for example. Further, other aspects of the Green Paper, such as pension provisions, are of as much salience to disabled people as non-disabled people.
1.2 Principle 4 of the Green Paper states:
That those who are disabled should get the support they need to lead a fulfilling life with dignity
Chapter 6, which deals with this principle, explores a number of ways that this principle may be realised. I shall comment on a number of these in turn, before considering the Success Measures that are proposed.
2.0 Proposed measures for support for disabled people
2.1 Civil rights for disabled people
The plan to introduce effective civil rights for disabled people is to be welcomed. However, merely implementing the remaining provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) will not introduce effective civil rights for disabled people. The DDA as it stands is flawed in its acceptance of "justifiable discrimination", its exemptions and its omission of crucial areas such as education and transport. Wholesale amending or repealing the DDA is necessary in order that it be replaced with legislation similar to that suggested in the Berry and Barnes Private Members Bills. Only then can the Disability Rights Commission fully work to protect, enforce and promote the rights of disabled people.
2.2 The new deal for disabled people
The commitment to support employment for those disabled people who are able to work is to be welcomed. However, the greatest help for employment opportunities for disabled people must come from:
- A fully inclusive educational system that delivers the same standard of education to both disabled and non-disabled children alike
- Tackling attitudinal discrimination against disabled people by society at large
- Employment advisor pilots to work with all employers to help tackle such discrimination. Personal advisors for disabled people merely reinforce the individualising nature of disability, not its social causes
- Circulating examples of good employer practice is not enough. There needs to be a statutory element to this
- Restoring the cuts in funding and eligibility criteria of the Access to Work Scheme
2.3 Disabled Persons Tax Credit
In the Budget, the Chancellor announced the introduction of a new Disabled Persons Tax Credit (DPTC) to replace Disability Working Allowance (DWA). If the DPTC is introduced:
- It must be disregarded when assessing for means tested benefits such as Housing/Council Tax Benefit - OR - the earnings disregard for these benefits must be increased
- There needs to be a commitment to maintaining a two-year linking rule as is the case for the current DWA
Rather than the introduction of the DPTC, I am in favour of the alternative proposal suggested to the Select Committee by Elizabeth Bray. Bray has put forward the concept of a Disability Earnings Concession (DEC) which allows people in receipt of disability benefits to work and earn as and when their health allows it, without any risk to benefit entitlement. Working thus has no effect on benefits. But a higher tax code for DEC earners will deduct the usual tax and NI, plus a reasonable percentage towards DSS, council tax and housing benefits when that person does work (DLA would be excluded from this consideration). Four DEC tax bands have been proposed, and then anyone capable of sustained earnings of £12,500 per annum would stop claiming benefits and come into the usual tax system. The DEC proposal has far greater potential benefits than the introduction of the DPTC. It would allow disabled people to work for the proper market rate for the job and would facilitate intermittent working. It would simplify the bureaucratic maze that one has to deal with when stopping or starting a job and would relieve the uncertainty, risk and poverty traps that disabled people with fluctuating health conditions experience.
2.4 Extended Linking Rule for Incapacity Benefit
The extension of the period of time during which disabled people can take up a job and return to benefit if their health fails to one year is welcome. However, a 2 year linking rule would bring it in line with DWA claimants (or the new DPTC).
2.5 Reforming Incapacity Benefit
The emphasis in reforming Incapacity Benefit appears to be cost-driven and raises the concern that tighter eligibility criteria will deny genuine people the benefit they have paid their contributions to receive.
Any test for claimants of Incapacity Benefit must take account of fluctuating conditions as well as the continuum for capacity to work.
2.6 Review of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and Attendance Allowance (AA)
- The Green Paper states its commitment to maintaining DLA and AA as universal, national benefits for those who meet the entitlement requirements. However, a further commitment is needed not to tax DLA or AA
- There is a need for mental health component criteria to be introduced to the assessment for DLA
- The Benefits Integrity Project, set up to check the validity of DLA claims, has not found significant evidence of any fraud. This suggests that self-assessment of care or mobility needs by the claimant is working well and need not be replaced by assessment by a medical professional in all cases.
- The setting up of a forum to look at the gateway to benefits is to be welcomed, provided that it includes a range of organisations of disabled people.
3.0 Success measures
The Social Security Select Committee sets out a number of success measures against which the Governments progress on reform will be assessed. Four have been identified in the chapter on Support for Disabled People:
3.1 A reduction in discrimination against disabled people
How will a reduction in discrimination against disabled people be measured and assessed? Only fully comprehensive, legally enforceable anti-discrimination policy (as mentioned in 2.1 above) is acceptable, in order to eliminate discrimination.
3.2 An increase in the number of disabled people able to work
An increase in the number of disabled people able to work is not an adequate success measure, if this is based on insecurity, coercion, the continuance of prejudicial attitudes or the absence of any real opportunities for work. A more appropriate success measure must be based on changes taking place in the workplace, the implementation of tighter employment criteria in a Disability Discrimination Act and the number of cases taken on by the Disability Rights Commission to enforce anti-discrimination policy in the workplace, etc.
3.3 A reduction in spending on Incapacity Benefit
A reduction in spending on Incapacity Benefit may suggest tighter eligibility criteria and genuine people being refused benefit, not a measure of success.
3.4 A simpler, clearer and fairer system for determining entitlement to benefits
This is to be welcomed. There are two strands to this one is to reduce the complexity in applying for disability benefits and, therefore, capturing the large number of non-claimants. The second is to streamline the process, improving communication between the different branches of the benefits system and providing a more holistic service. Instead of putting money into personal advisers offering individualised help to disabled people who want to work, I should prefer to see a broader role for Disability Advisors, who would be able to partner each person claiming any type of disability benefit and advise and assist them with regards to the applicability of other benefits or services as well as work-related help.
4.0 Final Comments
4.1 The Green Paper omits to mention support for disabled children and their families. This is a significant area of omission, given the available research evidence on the difficulties of these families and their strategies for coping. For example, reducing the age eligibility criteria for the mobility component of DLA would be welcomed, as would Family Support Workers (similar to Disability Advisors above) who could be the point of reference for families with a disabled child.
4.2 The emphasis on entry to the workplace must not diminish the real needs of those disabled people who cannot work or who are beyond working age. There is a danger in residualising these disabled people, by maintaining them on low level benefits and therefore furthering the process of their social exclusion. Disability benefits for those unable to work must be held up in line with current wage levels, the cost of living and inflation.
This paper has considered one chapter of the Welfare Reform Green Paper, that of support for disabled people. It has identified areas of concern and suggested ways of achieving the principle of support for disabled people.
Pauline Heslop
Department of
Social Medicine
Room 1.14
Canynge Hall
Whiteladies Road
Bristol BS8 2PR
E-mail:saph@ssa.bristol.ac.uk
