Commons
statement
Work Capability Assessment Consultation
1.15pm
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions ()
With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a
statement on our proposed changes to the Work
Capability Assessment which aim to ensure that no one who
can work is permanently written out of this country’s strong
labour market story. It is a story that has seen nearly 4 million
more people in work compared with 2010, 2 million more disabled
people in work than in 2013 and record numbers of people on
payrolls. But although the overall number of people who are
economically inactive has fallen strongly from its pandemic peak,
there remain over 2.5 million people who are inactive because of
long-term sickness and disability. Yet we know that one in five
people on incapacity benefits who are currently not expected to
prepare for work want to work in the future if the right job and
support were available, and the proportion of people going
through a Work Capability
Assessment who are being given the highest level of award
and deemed to have no work-related requirements at all has risen
from 21% in 2011 to 65% last year.
This situation is excluding significant numbers of people from
receiving employment support to help them to move closer to work
opportunities. It is holding back the labour market and the
economy, but perhaps most important of all, it is holding back
human potential. I want to ensure that everybody who can do so
benefits from all the opportunities that work brings—not just the
financial security, but all the physical and mental health
benefits too. No one who can work should be left behind. That is
why, earlier this year, we announced an extra £2 billion-worth of
investment to help disabled people and those with health
conditions to move into work. That includes bringing in our new
universal support employment programme, which will assist
disabled people and those with health conditions to connect with
vacancies and provide support and training to help them to start
and stay in a role.
Through our individual placement and support in primary care
programme, we are investing £58 million to help more than 25,000
people to start and stay in work. We are modernising mental
health services in England, providing wellness and clinical apps,
piloting cutting-edge digital therapies and digitising the NHS
talking therapies programme. We have also published fundamental
reforms to the health and disability benefits system through our
health and disability White Paper. That will see the end of
the Work Capability
Assessment and a new personalised tailored approach to
employment support to help everyone to reach their full
potential.
The scale of our reforms means that it will take time to
implement them, but there are changes we can make more quickly
that will also make a difference. So before the White Paper comes
in, I want to make sure that the work capability assessment—the
way we assess how someone’s health limits their ability to work,
and therefore the support they need—is delivering the right
outcomes and supporting those most in need. Today my Department
is launching a consultation on measures to ensure that those who
can work are given the right support and opportunities to move
off benefits and towards the job
market. As I have said, we know that many people who are on
out-of-work benefits due to a health condition want to work and,
assisted by modern working practices, could do so while managing
their condition effectively.
We have seen a huge shift in the world of work over the last few
years, a huge change that has accelerated since the pandemic.
This has opened up more opportunities for disabled people and
those with health conditions to start, stay and succeed in work.
The rise in flexible working and homeworking has brought new
opportunities for disabled people to manage their conditions in a
more familiar and accessible environment. More widely, there have
been improvements in the approach many employers take to
workplace accessibility and reasonable adjustments for staff. And
a better understanding of mental health conditions and
neurodiversity has helped employers to identify opportunities to
adapt job roles and the way disabled people and people with
health conditions work.
The consultation I am publishing is about updating
the Work Capability
Assessment so that it keeps up with the way people work
today. The activities and descriptors within the Work Capability
Assessment which help to decide whether people have any
work preparation requirements to improve their chances of getting
work, have not been comprehensively reviewed since 2011, so it is
right that we look afresh at how we can update them given the
huge changes we have seen in the world of work.
For instance, the Work Capability
Assessment does not reflect how someone with a disability or
health condition might be able to work from home, yet many
disabled people do just that. Our plans include taking account of
the fact that people with mobility problems, or who suffer
anxiety within the workplace, have better access to employment
opportunities due to the rise in flexible working and
homeworking.
We are consulting on whether changes should be made to four of
the activities and descriptors that determine whether someone can
work, or prepare to work, to reflect changes in working practices
and better employment support. This includes looking at changing,
removing or reducing the points for descriptors relating to
mobilising, continence, social engagement and getting about. We
are not consulting on changes to the remaining descriptors, which
will remain unaltered. These changes will not affect people who
are nearing the end of life or receiving cancer treatment, nor
will they affect the majority of activities for those with severe
disablement, such as if a person has severe learning disabilities
or is unable to transfer from one seat to another.
We are also consulting on changes to the provision for claimants
who would otherwise be capable of work preparation activity but
are excluded from work preparation requirements on the basis of
substantial risk, most commonly on mental health grounds. The
original intention for substantial risk was for it to be advised
only in exceptional circumstances. It was intended to provide a
safety net for the most vulnerable, but the application of risk
has gone beyond the original intent. We are therefore consulting
on how we might change how substantial risk applies, so that
people can access the support they need to move closer to work
and a more fulfilling life. We are also considering the tailored
and appropriate support that will be needed for this group,
safely helping them move closer to work.
These proposals will help people to move into, or closer to, the
labour market and fulfil their potential. We are consulting over
the next eight weeks to seek the views of disabled people,
employers, charities and others on our proposed changes. If the
proposals were taken forward following consultation, the earliest
we could implement any change would be from 2025, given the need
to make changes to regulations and to ensure appropriate training
for health assessors.
These plans are part of our wider approach to ensuring that we
have a welfare system that encourages and supports people into
work, while providing a vital safety net for those who need it
most. A welfare system that focuses on what people can do, not on
what they cannot do, and that reflects the modern changes to the
world of work. It is time to share the opportunities of work far
more fairly. It is time for work to be truly available to all
those who can benefit from it. It is time to get Britain
working.
I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
1.24pm
(Leicester West) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for early sight of his
statement.
I know from talking to disabled people in my constituency and
across the country that work can bring dignity and self-respect
through the choice, control and autonomy from having money in
their pocket and making the contribution they want to make in
life. Work is the reason for my political party, and supporting
working people is why Labour Members get up in the morning. That
belief is shared by the British public, including hundreds of
thousands of people who currently feel shut out of the workplace
and trapped on benefits when they could work if they had the
right help and support.
On this Government’s watch, a staggering 2.6 million people are
now out of work as a result of long-term sickness. That is the
highest number ever, up almost half a million since the pandemic
alone. This is a serious challenge for millions of our
constituents and for the economy, and it deserves a serious
response, but that is not what we have seen today.
Labour has been warning for years that benefit assessments are
not fit for purpose and, crucially, that unless we have a proper
plan to support sick and disabled people who can work, even more
will end up trapped in a degrading benefit system, costing them
and the taxpayer far more. Labour has already set out plans to
transform the back-to-work help that is available by
personalising employment support and tackling the huge backlogs
in our NHS and social care. Our “into work guarantee” will let
people try work without fear of losing their benefits. Our plan
is backed by the Centre for Social Justice, the Social Security
Advisory Committee and disabled people’s organisations. Why not
the Secretary of State?
We will ensure that employment support meets specific local needs
through proper devolution to local areas and, when disabled
people get a job, we will make sure they get the support they
need to keep them there as soon as they need it, rather than
having to wait for months on end.
We will study the consultation carefully, but I see nothing in
the statement that matches Labour’s vision or scale of ambition.
It does not even deal with the glaring problems in the current
system. Eighty per cent of personal independence payment
decisions are overturned at tribunal, of which only 2% are
because new evidence has become available. How will the proposals
make any difference to the totally inadequate decision making
that causes untold stress to disabled people and wastes millions
of pounds of taxpayers’ money?
The backlog of Access to Work assessments has trebled to 25,000
since the pandemic. How will the proposals help to bring that
down? Where is the plan to help slash waiting lists for help with
anxiety and depression, which we know is a major problem, or to
get the carers that families need to look after sick and disabled
relatives so that they themselves can work?
This is not a serious plan. It is tinkering at the edges of a
failing system. If you run your NHS into the ground for 13 years
and let waiting lists for physical and mental health soar, if you
fail to reform social care to help people care for their loved
ones and if your sole aim is to try to score political points
rather than reforming the system to get sick and disabled people
who can work the help they really need, you end up with the mess
we have today: a system that is failing sick and disabled people,
failing taxpayers and failing our country as a whole. Britain
deserves far better than this.
I thank the hon. Lady for her remarks. It is gratifying that she
agrees with much of the premise I set out. She recognises the
importance of work and that 2.5 million people, or thereabouts,
are on long-term sick and disability benefits—we are all equally
concerned that the number is growing. She also argues that
the Work Capability
Assessment in its current form, is not fit for its required
purpose, which is exactly why we are coming forward with these
reforms. She refers to the PIP assessment requirements, which are
not relevant to the work capability assessments that we are
discussing and that are subject to the current consultation.
We clearly have a plan. The hon. Lady has been in her position
for a very short period, and I respect and understand that. I
invite her to look closely at the announcements that were
made—the £2 billion-worth of support at the last fiscal
statement, including our White Paper reforms in exactly the area
where she is seeking progress; the universal support; and the
WorkWell programme. She mentioned working with local providers,
and there is a huge drive on that. As for mental health, we are
consulting on occupational health across businesses to make sure
that we get in right at the start where people may otherwise end
up on a long-term health journey. We are also working closely
with the NHS on getting employment advisers involved, for
example, in talking therapies, which we know are so effective in
addressing mental health concerns.
(Wokingham) (Con)
I strongly support the initiative to help more people who are
long-term sick and disabled into work where they wish to do that.
My query is: why on earth is it going to take so long? We need to
be doing this now, to ease our workplace shortages and to give
those people earlier support and hope. Will my right hon. Friend
please work with his officials to speed it all up?
I share my right hon. Friend’s keenness to see these
proposals—whatever may or may not emerge—come forward as soon as
possible. They will require a lot of work on IT systems and
changes to systems. The providers will have to incorporate the
changes that may or not come forward as a result of this
consultation. Let me reassure him that, given the benefits there
will be to many people who will otherwise not benefit from work,
I am as anxious as he is to make sure that we move forward at
speed.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Scottish National party spokesman.
(Glasgow East) (SNP)
The big difference between the SNP and the Conservative and
Labour parties is that we do not approach this from the point of
view that people are somehow on the make and on the take; we do
not assume that when somebody comes for an assessment they are
somehow trying to cheat the Government. That is why it is
important that the Select Committee on Work and Pensions noted in
its recent report the concerns that disabled people are still
experiencing psychological distress as a result of undergoing
these health assessments.
Let me show just how perverse some of those assessments are. One
of the first constituency cases I dealt with as an MP involved
someone literally being asked at an assessment whether they still
had autism. That gives us an idea of how fundamentally flawed
this whole process is. Has the Secretary of State read the
Institute for Public Policy Research report that came out today?
It makes a specific recommendation to:
“Limit conditionality to facilitate person-centred support on
universal credit.”
It says:
“People with health conditions, single parents and parents of
young children on universal credit should be exempt from
requirements or financial penalties under any circumstances.”
Has he seen that?
Will the Secretary of State also agree to look again at the
Access to Work scheme? Far too often, the Government’s own
Committee has received evidence that shows that Access to Work
simply is not working. I come back to my fundamental point: will
the Government change their philosophy—this deep suspicion that
somehow claimants are on the make and on the take? All they
actually need is support from their Government.
I respect the hon. Gentleman; having appeared before the Select
Committee, I know how seriously he takes the matters that he has
raised. However, I cannot accept being described as bearing down
on those who are
“on the make and on the take”.
If he can find any example of myself or my Ministers making those
assertions, I would like to see it. In the absence of that, I
hope that he will be big enough to withdraw those comments.
The hon. Gentleman does not like the assessments, but we hear
nothing about alternatives or what the SNP’s plan is to replace
assessments. If there are inherent problems with assessments,
presumably the logic is that he is not going to assess anybody at
all. So we do not know what his plan is. He refers to
conditionality, so let me make a point about that. There are
those whose health and disability situation is such that I
passionately
recognise that they should not be expected to undergo any work to
look for work or to carry out work itself. As a compassionate
society, we should be there to support those people, and we will
continue to do so. But where somebody can work, there is a
contract between the state and the individual: if people are to
be supported and they can work, it is right that they should be
expected to do so. In those circumstances, the conditionality
should apply.
The hon. Gentleman made specific reference to Access to Work.
That programme provides up to about £65,000 for each individual
involved to bring forward adaptations to the workplace to
accommodate that individual into employment. It is a huge
commitment on the part of this Government, and I can inform him
that the latest figure I have is that 88% of those applications
are being processed within 10 days.
(Amber Valley) (Con)
It is greatly welcome that we are trying to get the assessment to
give people the outcome they deserve, but it is intriguing to
make what sounds like a fundamental change to an assessment that
we are going to try to scrap in a few years’ time. Will the
Secretary of State set out how many of the 2.5 million people he
cited as being in this situation he thinks would not be in the
same group after these changes? How many of them will have a
chance to be reassessed before we scrap the assessment
entirely?
I dealt in my statement with my hon. Friend’s question about why
we are doing this, given that we will be getting rid of the WCA
in due course: I said that there is no reason why we cannot bring
forward these benefits earlier, even though we are going to be
removing the WCA altogether. As for the numbers impacted, we know
that about one in five people on those benefits do want to work,
given the right support. Until the consultation is concluded and
we know the exact nature of the policy changes that we may or may
not be making at that point, we will not be able to assess the
numbers exactly.
(Oldham East and
Saddleworth) (Lab)
This will lead to a lot of fear among disabled people. I
appreciate the tone that the Secretary of State has taken, but
the record of the past 13 years has been one of excluding the
most vulnerable disabled people from more support than they need.
We know that disabled people are a group who are living in huge
poverty. We also know that some of them have died, not just
through suicide, but because of the lack of safeguarding in the
Department and how it operates. So I urge him to ensure that the
safeguarding system within the Department ensures that people are
protected. I agree with the SNP spokesperson about Access to
Work; we are talking about 4 million disabled people able to work
and 35,000 being provided with it through Access to Work.
I listen to the hon. Lady’s remarks with great respect; having
appeared before her at the Select Committee, I know how serious
she is about the issues she raises and how strongly she promotes
her ideas and concerns. She mentioned the lack of support
available for the people in the situation we are describing,
which is precisely why I want to start providing more support to
them by making these reforms. Let me make an important point in
an area where I am in agreement
with her: we need to do this in the right way. We need to listen
carefully to those who will be affected by any changes we may
bring forward, which is why we have a full eight-week
consultations. My Ministers and I will be engaging closely with
the various stakeholders, disabled people and so on. We will of
course welcome her comments as part of that process.
(North Swindon) (Con)
When I was a Minister, whenever I went on a visit I would ask
young disabled people what they would do if they were the
Minister. They said that they would always want to have the same
career opportunities as their friends. I therefore welcome any
moves to make more personalised and tailored support available,
to build on our record disability employment. However, we lose
more than 300,000 people a year from the workplace and the
majority of long-term health conditions and disabilities develop
during the working age. So during this consultation I urge the
Secretary of State to work with employers to see what more
support and advice they need to make sure that people do not ever
have to even enter the WCA system.
I thank my hon. Friend for that typically sensible and astute
intervention. May I personally thank him for the advice and input
he has given over the preceding months, particularly in this
area? He is right that we should be proud of our record of
assisting disabled people into work—2 million more in work since
2013. Equally, he is right about addressing the hundreds of
thousands of people with these kinds of difficulties and
challenges who are leaving businesses and the workforce every
year. I recognise that it is essential to get help to those
people as early as possible, before they progress too far along
that health journey. That is why we are already consulting on
occupational health, so that we can make sure that is rolled out
more effectively across large and medium-sized businesses.
(North East Fife)
(LD)
In his statement, the Secretary of State mentioned that four
descriptors would be reviewed, but there were no plans for any
other changes. He certainly did not mention adding any
descriptors. At yesterday’s Westminster Hall petition debate on
disability assessment, one of the key issues discussed was
remitting and relapsing conditions, particularly fatigue. Will
the Secretary of State commit to looking at fatigue, and either
adding it as a descriptor or telling us what he is going to do
about it instead?
Nothing in the consultation excludes bringing forward exactly the
point that the hon. Lady makes. I hope she will do just that, and
encourage others to do so as well.
(Gloucester) (Con)
The Secretary of State is quite right to refer to the 2 million
additional people with disabilities who have come into work since
2010. He will recall that the first Disability Confident event,
held in 2013, was in Gloucester. His Department worked closely
with charities and employers to ensure that more opportunities
happened. I have met many people who benefited from that
programme, so I support him in the principle. Can he confirm that
he will engage
closely with charities and organisation such as Seetec Pluss,
which has a lot of experience in helping to bring people with
disabilities back into the workplace?
I thank my hon. Friend for all the passion and intelligence he
brings to these issues. I can confirm that our door will be open
to Seetec Pluss. In fact, I will go further and make sure that
our officials reach out to my hon. Friend to ensure that that
happens.
(Hemsworth) (Lab)
In a key paragraph of his statement, the Secretary of State
appears to envisage that he will either remove or reduce the
descriptors giving access to benefits for people who have
problems with mobility or are incontinent. Will he explain what
he means by that? Will he also tackle problems on the other side
of the world of work, including rogue employers exploiting people
through low-paid part-time or temporary jobs? One in nine workers
are in poverty as a result. Is it not time that he took on the
employers rather than the poorest in our society?
That sentiment of taking on the employers is probably not
conducive to having an economy that is generating the jobs that
have occurred under this Government. As to the
descriptors—indeed, the activities—that the hon. Gentleman refers
to, there is a plethora of information out there about exactly
what those mean. If he has trouble finding that, I would be very
happy to have my Department point him in the right direction.
(Blackpool North and
Cleveleys) (Con)
The Secretary of State rightly points to the tripling of the
number of people receiving the highest award after
a Work Capability
Assessment Does he share my concern that a false assumption
is growing not only that those people cannot work, but that they
should not work, which therefore writes them off? Do we not have
a serious moral obligation to remove all sorts of barriers that
come between those individuals and the workplace? His approach is
exactly right in trying to target those obstacles that most get
in the way of people enjoying the agency and autonomy that
activity in the workplace brings.
I thank my hon. Friend for the advice and support he has given me
when we have discussed these issues over the last few months. I
know he is extremely knowledgeable in this area. He is absolutely
right that we do not want people to be trapped, to use that
expression, on benefits. We want to help people to move into the
labour market and work. That is better for the economy and the
labour market, but most importantly it is better for the physical
and mental health of the individual concerned, as shown by all
the evidence.
(Glasgow North West)
(SNP)
I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary
group on myalgic encephalomyelitis. The Secretary of State has
said that the Work Capability
Assessment is not fit for purpose, and many disabled people
with invisible or fluctuating conditions would agree with him
entirely. They report not being believed, their medical evidence
being disregarded and leaving the assessment feeling as though
they have been belittled by the assessors. The Department of
Health and Social Care is undergoing a massive change in the way
it deals with people with ME
and other conditions like ME. Can he provide an assurance that
his Department will look at how people with ME and other
invisible disabilities are being considered through work
capability assessments?
I can give the hon. Lady exactly that assurance when it comes to
ME. I point her to the White Paper that we published in March, in
which we made a clear commitment on fluctuating conditions and
said that we would test and trial around those conditions, as
part of the White Paper process.
(Kettering) (Con)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and thank him for
his offer of more personal, tailored support for disabled people,
who we must always do our best to help and support. Given that
this is the 21st century and there have been huge advances in
medical treatments, adaptations of buildings to help disabled
people, improvements in mobility devices and a rapid rise in
digital connectivity, it is staggering that the proportion of
people going through a WCA who are deemed to have no work-related
requirements at all has gone up from a fifth to almost two thirds
in just over a decade. Why does the Secretary of State think it
is like that?
It is correct that we have gone from 21% to 65% in that short
space of time and I recognise that that statistic is simply
unacceptable. We know that one in five people in that group wants
to work, given the right support, and we need to do something
about that. Quite rightly, my hon. Friend also raises the
fundamental change in the way that work is conducted in the
modern world. The last time the Work Capability
Assessment was reviewed for reform was 10 years ago. That is
inadequate and it is now time to make appropriate changes.
(Arfon) (PC)
There are 76,000 people in Wales with a severely limiting
condition. New research this summer shows that four in 10 of them
are having to skip or cut down on meals or have gone without
heating. Is the Secretary of State confident that the proposed
changes will remedy that?
It is a fact that people are better off, on average, being in
work than being on benefits. I pay tribute to my predecessor who
introduced universal credit, which makes that the case. Bringing
people into work who would not otherwise be in work means that
they will, on average, be better off. This Government have
increased the national living wage by over 9%—it has been £10.42
since April—and have introduced cost of living support for 8
million low-income households, 6 million disabled people,
pensioners and so on. In response to the hon. Gentleman, the
proposed changes are another step in exactly the right
direction.
(Newcastle-under-Lyme)
(Con)
In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr
Hollobone), the Secretary of State referred to the statistic of
65%. It strikes me that out of that 65% of people, a number of
them could work, should work or want to work, because that is the
best thing for them. Building on the 2 million people with
disabilities who we have got back into work, is it not the case
that there must be people who are trapped in that 65%? Is it not
imperative for the Secretary of State and his officials to get
those people into the world of work as soon as possible?
My hon. Friend has used exactly the right word: it is imperative
that we get those people into the world of work. If somebody is
on benefits—and we know that one in five of those people would,
with the right support, like to get into work—it is our duty as a
Government and as a society to do whatever we can to support
them.
(Bermondsey and Old Southwark)
(Lab)
In 2011, this Government said that they would help 100,000
disabled people into employment through dedicated personalised
support, such as Access to Work. In the 12 years since, the
number of disabled people supported by Access to Work has risen
from 37,000 to 38,000. Given the Department’s failure and the
wider context of cuts, would disabled people not be forgiven for
thinking that this is just further cuts dressed up as
modernisation?
Not at all, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have set out very clearly the
principled reason why we are bringing forward these measures. As
the hon. Gentleman will know, when it comes to more disabled
people moving into the workforce, we set a target for the 10-year
period from 2017 to see a million more disabled people in
employment. We broke that target in half that time, reaching 1.3
million in addition after just five years.
(North Ayrshire and Arran)
(SNP)
The number of people who are economically inactive due to
long-term sickness has reached a record high of 2.55 million,
which is very concerning. Given the Secretary of State’s fanfare
today, what level of reduction in those figures would he measure
as a success in supporting disabled people into secure and
sustainable employment? What specific improvements does he
envisage to the sorely inadequate Access to Work scheme to
prevent the disability employment gap widening even further?
I have addressed the issue of Access to Work—what a significant
programme it is and the recent improvements in the processing of
those particular awards. On economic inactivity, I make two
points. First, compared with the EU, the OECD and the G7,
economic activity overall is below the average across those
different groups. Secondly, it has declined by about 360,000
since the peak that occurred during the pandemic, and that in
substantial part is due to the policies of this Government.
(Chesterfield) (Lab)
It is very noticeable that the Secretary of State did not answer
the question of the hon. Member for Wellingborough about why he
believes that there has been a trebling of the number of people
who are now getting the maximum verdict under the Work Capability
Assessment I have helped many of my constituents who have
had problems with their WCA, and not one of them has come to me
and said that it is the WCA that is keeping them out of work.
Many of them have said that it is not nuanced enough to
understand the issues, and I welcome the fact that it is to be
replaced. However, can the Secretary of State tell us what
assessment he has made of how many people are likely to win their
appeals after the changes that he has brought in, and what
percentage are winning them now? At the moment, huge numbers are
winning their appeals, which makes it clear that
the Work Capability
Assessment is not working.
I feel duty bound to correct the hon. Gentleman. It was my hon.
Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) who asked the
question to which he referred. Of all the Members in this House,
he is probably the one who promotes his constituency the most,
and he should be lauded for doing so.
The bottom line is that we know that one in five, or thereabouts,
of those who are receiving these benefits at the moment actually
want to do some work, if they are supported in doing so. That
means that we have a duty to look at the way that the WCA
operates and to look at reforming it to make sure that, in every
case that somebody can do some work to the benefit of themselves
and the economy, we facilitate that.
(Glasgow North) (SNP)
I have been supporting a disabled student who has not been able
to access universal credit because their Work
Capability Assessment was not completed before they started
their studies. They are now at risk of dropping out of
university, because they cannot work to support themselves
through their course because of their disability, and they cannot
access social security either. That means that they cannot
improve their skills and abilities, when that might lead to an
opportunity of employment in the future. What resources or
flexibilities, if any, are featured in this consultation and the
Department’s plans so that my constituent can carry on with their
studies, and others will not face the same situation in
future?
The hon. Gentleman is able to feed into the consultation and I
encourage him and his constituents, as appropriate, to do so. I
cannot comment on the individual case that he raises, but if he
would like to get in touch with me and my private office, I would
be very happy to look at the circumstances that he has
raised.
(Edinburgh West) (LD)
I think all of us in this place would welcome an improvement to
the Work Capability
Assessment Like many others here, I have had a number of
constituents who currently receive PIP payments coming through my
door. They have contacted the DWP to advise officials that their
situation has significantly deteriorated. They now face lengthy
delays of several months before their payments are taken over by
Social Security Scotland and their change in circumstances is
considered. Can the Minister assure us that, in the work being
undertaken and in the consultation, there will be discussion
between the DWP
and the Scottish Government to make sure that payment recipients
in Scotland are not put at a significant disadvantage, and that
the upheaval that they are currently undergoing is taken into
account?
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. Just to clarify, there
are no plans on the part of the Government to make any changes to
the way in which PIP operates—and she did refer specifically to
PIP. On the broader point, which is an important point about the
interaction between my Department and the Scottish Government, I
assure her that I have written today to my Scottish counterpart
to open my door to whatever discussions they wish to have. The
Minister for Disabled People will also be having his regular
engagement with the Scottish Government next week.
(Motherwell and Wishaw)
(SNP)
I am almost tempted to say another week, another consultation.
Disabled charities come to me regularly with real doubts and
worries about the way disabled people are being treated. I
visited Project Search in my constituency last week. It was
wonderful and inspiring—they practically had to throw me out the
door. It is a programme that takes in young people, often from
college, with severe disabilities and learning issues and gets
them into work and then continues to support them. The support
that is offered once people get into work is crucial to the
success of any programme the Government undertake, and how they
treat these people is vital. What is the Government going to
change? How are they going to change these work capability
assessments to benefit the recipients, and how will they treat
the people that they force into them?
I believe that my hon. Friend the Minister for Disabled People
will be meeting the hon. Lady very shortly. That is in the diary,
so those matters can be discussed in greater detail then.
Specifically, she asks what support we will be providing. It will
be exactly the kind of support to which she has just alluded.
There will be universal support to help train and place
individuals in work, and it will stay with those individuals for
up to 12 months to make sure that they get the support to hold
down that job.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement.
Lords
repeat
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work
and Pensions () (Con)
My Lords, with the leave of the House, I will repeat a Statement
given in the other place by my right honourable friend the
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. The Statement is as
follows:
“With permission, I would like to make a Statement on our
proposed changes to the Work Capability
Assessment which aim to ensure that no one who can work is
permanently written out of this country’s strong labour market
story. It is a story that has seen nearly 4 million more people
in work compared to 2010; 2 million more disabled people in work
than in 2013; and record numbers of people on payrolls. But,
although it is the case that the number of people overall who are
economically inactive has fallen strongly from its pandemic peak,
there remain over 2.5 million people who are inactive because of
long-term sickness and disability.
Yet we know that one in five people on incapacity benefits who
are currently not expected to prepare for work want to work in
the future, if the right job and support were available, and the
proportion of people going through a Work
Capability Assessment who are being given the highest level
of award and deemed to have no work-related requirements at all
has risen from 21% in 2011 to 65% last year. This situation is
excluding significant numbers of people from receiving employment
support to help them to move closer to work opportunities. It is
holding back the labour market and economy but, perhaps most
important of all, it is holding back human potential. I want to
ensure that everyone who can benefits from all the opportunities
that work brings—not just the financial security but all the
physical and mental health benefits too.
No one who can work should be left behind. That is why, earlier
this year, we announced an extra £2 billion-worth of investment
to help disabled people and those with health conditions move
into work. That includes bringing in our new universal support
employment programme, which will assist disabled people and those
with health conditions to connect with vacancies, and will
provide support and training to help them start and stay in a
role. Through our individual placement
and support in the primary care programme, we are investing £58
million to help more than 25,000 people to start and stay in
work. We are modernising mental health services in England,
providing wellness and clinical apps, piloting cutting-edge
digital therapies and digitising the NHS talking therapies
programme. We have also published fundamental reforms to the
health and disability benefits system through our health and
disability White Paper. That will see the end of
the Work Capability
Assessment and a new personalised, tailored approach to
employment support to help everyone reach their full
potential.
The scale of our reforms means that they will take time to
implement, but there are changes we can make more quickly that
will also make a difference. So before the White Paper reforms
come in, I want to make sure that the work capability
assessment—the way in which we assess how someone’s health limits
their ability to work and therefore what support they need—is
delivering the right outcomes and supporting those most in need.
Today my department is launching a consultation on measures to
ensure that those who can work are given the right support and
opportunities to move off benefits and towards the jobs
market.
As I have said, we know that many people who are on out-of-work
benefits due to a health condition want to work and, assisted by
modern working practices, they could do so while managing their
condition effectively. We have seen a huge shift in the world of
work in the last few years—a huge change that has accelerated
since the pandemic. This has opened up more opportunities for
disabled people and those with health conditions to start, stay
in and succeed in work.
The rise in flexible and home working has brought new
opportunities for disabled people to manage their conditions in a
more familiar and accessible environment. More widely, there have
been improvements in the approach that many employers take to
workplace accessibility and reasonable adjustments for staff. A
better understanding of mental health conditions and neuro-
diversity has helped employers to identify opportunities to adapt
job roles and the way disabled people and people with health
conditions work.
The consultation that I am publishing today is about updating
the Work Capability
Assessment so that the way it works keeps up with the way
people work. The activities and descriptors within
the Work Capability
Assessment which help to decide whether people have any
work preparation requirements to improve their chances of gaining
work, have not been comprehensively reviewed since 2011. It is
right that we look afresh at how we can update them, given the
huge changes we have seen in the world of work. For instance,
the Work Capability
Assessment does not reflect how someone with a disability or
health condition might be able to work from home—yet we know many
disabled people do just that.
Our plans include taking account of the fact that people with
mobility problems, or who suffer anxiety within the workplace,
have better access to employment opportunities due to the rise in
flexible and home working. We are consulting on whether changes
should be made to four of the activities and descriptors that
determine whether someone can work, or prepare to work, to
reflect changes in working practices and
better employment support. This includes looking at changing,
removing or reducing the points for descriptors relating to
mobilising, continence, social engagement and getting about. We
are not consulting on changes to the remaining descriptors, which
will remain unaltered. These changes will not affect people who
are nearing the end of life or receiving cancer treatment, nor
will they affect the majority of activities for those with severe
disablement—for example, if a person has severe learning
disabilities or is unable to transfer from one seat to
another.
We are also consulting on changes to the provision for claimants
who would otherwise be capable of work preparation activity but
are excluded from work preparation requirements on the basis of
substantial risk, most commonly on mental health grounds. The
original intention for substantial risk was for it to be advised
only in exceptional circumstances. It was intended to provide a
safety net for the most vulnerable. However, the application of
risk has gone beyond the original intent. We are therefore
consulting on how we might change how substantial risk applies,
so that people are able to access the support they need to move
closer to work and a more fulfilling life. We are also
considering the tailored and appropriate support that will be
needed for this group, safely helping them move closer to
work.
These proposals will help people move into, or closer to, the
labour market, and to fulfil their potential. We are consulting
over the next eight weeks to seek the views of disabled people,
employers, charities and others about our proposed changes. If
the proposals were taken forward following consultation, the
earliest we could implement any change would be from 2025, given
the need to make changes to regulations and ensure appropriate
training for health assessors.
These plans are part of our wider approach to ensuring that we
have a welfare system that encourages and supports people into
work, while providing a vital safety net for those who need it
most—a welfare system that focuses on what people can do, not on
what they cannot, and that reflects the modern changes to the
world of work. It is time to share the opportunities of work far
more fairly. It is time for work to be truly available to all
those who can benefit from it. It is time to get Britain working.
I commend this Statement to the House.”
5.40pm
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement and
for advance sight of it. The way we support sick and disabled
people in this country is of huge importance, both to the
millions directly affected and their families and to our country
as a whole, and it says something about who we are as a nation.
Labour believes passionately that everyone who can should be able
to access a decent job, with all the financial and other benefits
that brings. That is why we have been so concerned at the
Government’s failure to address the disability employment gap
over such a long time. Nobody should be shut out of the workplace
when, with the right help and support, they could be working.
We are now in a position where an astonishing 2.6 million people
are out of work as a result of long- term sickness—the highest
number ever, and up almost
half a million since the pandemic. This is a serious problem for
individuals and a challenge for our country. The Government have
been warned for many years now that benefit assessments are not
fit for purpose and, crucially, that unless we have a proper plan
to support sick and disabled people, even more people will end up
stuck out of work when they do not need or want to be.
So what can be done? Our approach has been to set out some
serious plans in this area: to transform back-to-work help by
personalising employment support and tackling the huge backlogs
in our NHS and social care; by offering an “into work guarantee”
so that people can try work without worrying about losing their
benefits—something that has had widespread support both from the
voluntary sector and within Parliament; to make sure that
employment support meets local needs by devolving appropriately
to local areas; and to make sure that, when disabled people get a
job, they get the support they need when they need it, not
several months down the line.
By contrast, this consultation is rather small in scope. The
Statement seems to suggest that the Government have decided that
the main problem is that too many people who undergo
a Work Capability
Assessment are classed in the higher rate, and therefore the
only way to solve that is to change the criteria. We will look at
the outcome of this consultation carefully but let me ask a few
questions of the Minister now.
Is the sole intention of this exercise to reduce the number of
people who are classed as having limited capability for work and
work-related activity? If so, by how many? Is there a target? The
Statement says that the current situation
“is excluding significant numbers of people from receiving
employment support”.
Will the Minister tell the House whether DWP could choose to
offer employment support now to people who are deemed LCWRA?
If in future more of these millions of people were classed as
simply having limited capability for work, rather than in the
higher area, would that make any other difference to them, as
opposed to just getting employment support? Might it affect how
much money they were given to live on while they were waiting to
get a job? Can the Minister tell us how these proposals will
address the total inadequacy of decision-making, which causes
untold stress and wastes millions of pounds?
The Minister pointed out that the Government have longer-term
plans. The Health and Disability White Paper outlined plans to
abolish the Work Capability
Assessment altogether and replace it with a single
assessment, which will be the PIP—the personal independence
payment assessment. I do not want to be mean, but PIP is hardly a
model of good practice: 80% of PIP decisions get overturned at
tribunal, and only 2% are down to new evidence. In any case,
these plans are way in the future, beyond this Parliament. If the
proposals contained in this consultation will not come in until
2025, when will we possibly see the plans that will not even be
considered until after the next election? Will the Minister give
us some idea of when, if his Government were returned to power—I
accept that it is an “if”—they would expect to see those plans
come to fruition?
We need a big plan now to help sick and disabled people who want
to get back to work—after all, the backlog for Access to Work
payments has trebled to 25,000 since the pandemic. Where are the
proposals to bring that down? Where is the plan to slash the
waiting lists for those who are struggling with anxiety and
depression, which is keeping them out of the workplace? Where are
the plans to give help to carers to support their sick and
disabled loved ones so they can get back to work?
I understand what the Minister is trying to do, but the truth is
that this is tinkering around the edges of a system which is
failing sick and disabled people. It is not providing the help
they need and, in the meantime, our NHS and social care, on which
sick and disabled people depend more than anyone, is being run
into the ground. We need more than this and we need it soon.
of Childs Hill (LD)
My Lords, what a mixed message there is in this Statement. The
first page of the Statement that the Minister so kindly read says
how successful the Government have been in getting people back to
work and in the next part it tells us how we need to get more
people into work. If ever a message was mixed, that is it. It is
not a good story, and the fact that it needs consultation shows
that. With all this so-called success, the Statement says that
the policies are, in its words, “holding back human potential” so
let us have the old idea of consultation.
Flexible and home working usually require that the employee has
adequate access to space and technology to safely work. This is
even more the case for someone with a disability. Will the
Minister say whether the Government will also commit to extra
funding for the aids, adaptions and technology required to take
up work- from-home opportunities?
The Minister, in rereading the Statement, is suggesting removing
descriptors. Will the Government also review additional
descriptors, which can impact on someone’s ability to work? At
the moment, fatigue is not a descriptor. However, we know that
this is a significant symptom for people with long Covid, MS and
pain conditions. Sitting at a desk—we know all about sitting on
the Benches here in the Lords—for long periods, even for people
who do not need to leave their house, may be no less fatiguing.
Will the Minister consult to make sure a safety net is kept in
place?
I am concerned about the consultation on substantial risk. We
know that, for many people, engagement with the DWP can create
anxiety and worsen their mental health. In doing his review, will
the Minister take the opportunity to get his own house in order
and make employment support a positive experience and not one
that has, sadly, seen so many people come to harm and even take
their own lives?
Finally, in the real world, when somebody comes before someone at
the Department for Work and Pensions, how consistent will the DWP
be in treating them in the way they should be treated? I am
worried about the balance between helping people into work and
forcing people—and I do mean forcing—to give up on support for
those least fortunate in society.
(Con)
I begin by thanking the noble Lord, , and the noble Baroness, Lady
Sherlock, for their points. The way I read it is that the
consultation has broadly been accepted, but I understand that a
number of questions have been raised and I will do my best to
answer them.
First, there is some agreement that it is very important to
support disabled people and to give them every opportunity, if
they are not in work, to find a way of getting into it or to
prepare for it. Hopefully, there is agreement to that extent. The
noble Baroness, Lady Sherlock, is absolutely right that no one
should be shut out of the workplace. We are at the forefront in
wanting to do more to ensure that disabled people who want to and
can work are able to do so. However, some disabled people may not
be able to work; we are a compassionate country and it is
important to make the point that, where they are generally unable
to work, the state should step in and support them, as it does at
the moment.
I take issue with what the noble Baroness said about the
intention and scope. We believe that it is an important measure
to look at the conditionalities during this eight-week
consultation, because it is important to move quickly. It is part
of a whole package of measures that the Government have taken and
continue to take for the disabled, which includes, as the House
will be aware, the national disability strategy and the
disability action plan. I will expand on that to try to be
helpful. By the way, the sole intention is not to do with figures
—there is no target; it is not to do with that at all; it is to
look more closely at who in the disabled diaspora might be
willing to work and how they can be encouraged and helped into
work or preparing for work.
To pick up a point from the noble Lord, , as he will know, the
consultation is inviting comments on the four descriptors:
mobilising, continence, getting about and coping with social
engagement. As the House will know, people are referred for a WCA
when they report a health condition or disability which may
prevent or limit their ability to work or undertake work
preparation activities. Currently, the activities do not take
account of somebody’s ability to work from home, as the Statement
said. We have identified some activities as the most likely to be
affected by modern changes in the workplace, including working
from home and better support and understanding from employers
around how to overcome barriers to work for disabled people and
people with health conditions. To that extent, we are moving more
quickly and offering this targeted approach as part of the
consultation.
On our broader support, I remind the noble Baroness that we
announced £2 billion at the Spring Budget 2023 to support
disabled people and people with health conditions into work,
including through WorkWell and universal support. We also
increased our support offer to help people move back into work
when they can with additional work coach time.
I will set out some figures for the House. Roughly 700,000 new
benefit claimants go through a Work Capability
Assessment each year and we are seeing around 450,000 determined
as having limited capability for work-related activity.
Hopefully, that gives some scope of the population we are working
within. Clearly, if we helped just 10% of that cohort, around
45,000 more people per year would be placed in a group in which
they would receive the necessary help to get into employment.
(Lab)
I do not think the Minister answered some of the questions I
asked—maybe he omitted to do so. I asked about the timing and
whether a shift away from the higher rate to the lower rate would
have any implications for the amount of money somebody got, for
example. Did he miss those questions?
(Con)
This is unusual procedure. On the timing, I made it clear in the
Statement that we will work through this consultation and receive
the results. In terms of the results coming through, I mentioned
2025. I will certainly look at the other questions the noble
Baroness raised and write to her, although I think there were
probably just one or two.
5.54pm
(Con)
My Lords, I apologise for not being here for the start of the
Statement. In all my time in the department, now being carried on
by my noble friend the Minister, there was real ambition to help
those people in the work capability assessment—earlier rather
than later, because the longer you leave it, the worse the
condition gets.
This weekend, I was trying to tidy up my study, which is a
massive job, when I came across an independent evaluation of a
programme we ran at Tomorrow’s People when I was there—I declare
an interest, although I am not there any more. We had a programme
in a doctor’s surgery called “The Right Prescription: A Job”.
When somebody was physically or mentally unwell and came to the
doctor, if there was nothing he could do for them, he called them
his “heartsink patients” because his heart sank when they walked
in the room. He wrote “a job” with us on the prescription
pad.
We had a consulting room and, initially, we worked with a cohort
of 200 people. The results were pretty astounding. We ended up
with 880 surgeries across the country wanting us, representing
millions of patients. The Government at the time—I will not
declare which—said that it was too expensive, but for an
investment of £2,000 you got a return to society of £10,000. We
reduced the anti-depressant prescription bill by 34% for those
200, saved the doctor 20% of his time, saved referrals to
counsellors and got people into work. On average, 80% of them
were there 12 months later, although it was intense.
We must look at the consultation as an opportunity for people to
put forward ideas that make life better for people. If the
department will have me in for 10 minutes, I will certainly come
back and share that evaluation to see whether it can help,
because people with mental health issues in particular need all
the help we can give them.
(Con)
I take this opportunity to encourage all those who are interested
to give input to the consultation. To pick up on my noble
friend’s point about GPs, a key principle is that the WCA
considers what impact the person’s disability or health condition
has on them, not the condition itself. To clarify, the department
does not ask claimants’ doctors to make decisions about their
patients’ capability
for work. This is because the doctor diagnoses and treats a
patient’s illness, whereas the WCA healthcare professional’s role
is to assess the effects of the claimant’s illness on their
ability to perform everyday work-related activity. It is
important to make that distinction.
(GP)
My Lords, my question is informed by a study published this May
by a group called INvolve, which spoke to 500 UK employed adults
with invisible disabilities, including visual impairment and
chronic pain. Two-fifths said they were not getting the support
they needed at work, particularly as businesses cut back under
the current economic challenges; two-thirds said it was up to
them to sort out their own support, as they were not getting help
from their employer; one-quarter said they had a workload that
they simply could not manage; and one- fifth said they were
considering leaving their job as a result of their difficulties.
The kinds of things these sick and disabled workers were seeking
were flexible working hours, training for other employees to
understand their situation and assistive technologies and
tools.
This government action is focused entirely on people suffering
from sickness and disabilities, but they are going out into a
workplace where there is clearly significant discrimination. The
Statement makes a lot of the move towards working from home, but
quite a number of businesses have been heading in the opposite
direction, trying to force staff now working from home to come
back into the office. Do the Government plan measures of a
similar scale to those in this Statement to crack down on
discrimination in the workplace and to ensure that employers
offer conditions in which the people this Statement refers to can
work?
(Con)
The noble Baroness makes a very good point, which allows me to
emphasise the dependence on employers. The noble Baroness will
know that we have reached out considerably to employers to
encourage them, and we continue to encourage them to take on
those who are disabled. ONS data from September 2022 to January
2023 shows that 44% of working adults work from home exclusively
or at least some of the time each week. If that is translated
into those who are disabled working for employers, that is quite
encouraging. We encourage everyone to input into the
consultation.
The noble Baroness may know that recent published data suggests
that disabled people are more likely to work in the health,
retail or education sectors. As of July 2023, these three
industries have a combined total of 350,000 vacancies. There is a
tremendous opportunity there, and we need to work through that.
