Universal Credit: Terminally Ill People Motion made, and
Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Mike Freer.)
7.02 pm Drew Hendry (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and
Strathspey) (SNP) I have raised many times in this place the
subject of universal credit and the problems faced by my
constituents and others across the nations of the UK. This debate
is about UC and its...Request free
trial
Universal Credit: Terminally Ill People
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now
adjourn.—(Mike Freer.)
7.02 pm
-
(Inverness, Nairn,
Badenoch and Strathspey) (SNP)
I have raised many times in this place the subject of
universal credit and the problems faced by my constituents
and others across the nations of the UK. This debate is
about UC and its effect on the terminally ill, and
preparing for it has been one of the most humbling
experiences of my parliamentary career so far. I pay
special tribute to Marie Curie, the highland
Macmillan-Citizens Advice partnership and the Motor Neurone
Disease Association for their input, and especially to
terminally ill claimants who have come forward with stories
of the issues they face—stories of delays, difficulties,
the deficits they face as disabled people, the complexities
and frustrations that confront them, and the humiliations
and indignities they have to suffer.
These are actually very simple things for the Government to
fix, some of them at little or no cost to them. If the
Chancellor is sincere in what he said in the Budget debate
about wanting a civilised and tolerant place that cares for
the vulnerable, he will take on board the representations I
am making on behalf of those agencies and the terminally
ill tonight.
-
(Airdrie and Shotts)
(SNP)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate and
commend him on the work he has done over many years in
highlighting the problems with UC. He mentioned the
Chancellor’s Budget, which was an admission that UC was
failing some of the people he mentions. Does he agree that
the Chancellor and the Government now need to go further to
address the real issues at the heart of UC, such as those
he mentions tonight?
-
Absolutely. We have all accepted the principle of a simpler
benefit and the move to a single payment, but that
simplification does not work if it is not simple for the
users and instead becomes complex and difficult, which is
what has happened.
As my hon. Friend points out, I have been raising issues
with UC since 2013 when I was leader of the Highland
Council, where we took UC through the pilot and on to live
service and finally full service roll-out. During that time
we spotted and reported the problems thrown up by UC, but
until very recent weeks none of them have been taken on
board. As my hon. Friend notes, we have recently seen an
admission, however grudging, from the Government that there
are problems—that the current system is broken. The
Minister has an opportunity tonight to fix some of the
areas in which it is broken.
Prior to universal credit being introduced, personal
independence payment had a specified line for those who
were terminally ill to call. Claimants on PIP who were
terminally ill had their payments processed quickly,
payments could be made weekly and implicit consent was
available, giving supporting organisations the authority to
make claims on behalf of terminally ill claimants. Many
terminally ill people simply do not want to be told that
they are dying, and PIP allowed them some consideration and
dignity.
-
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving me permission to
intervene on him and for bringing this matter to the House
for our consideration. Does he agree that, just as
disability living allowance had special rules for the
terminally ill, universal credit must have compassionate
grounds so that it can be adapted to an individual’s
circumstances? Each person has circumstances that are
specific to themselves.
-
I think the hon. Gentleman for making that point, and I
will underline it later in my speech.
I held a universal credit summit in my constituency,
specifically to challenge the accusations of scaremongering
that were coming from the Government Benches. I invited
every Tory MP, along with Ministers and indeed the Prime
Minister, to come to Inverness to hear testimony from
agencies and claimants about the problems of universal
credit. Had they attended, they would have heard from
Elaine Donnelly, the caseworker at the highland
Macmillan-Citizens Advice partnership. She has been dealing
with the universal credit cases of cancer patients and the
terminally ill. She describes herself as “battle-weary” and
“numb” as a result of the number and type of claims that
are coming forward and the fact that people are dying
before their claims are processed. She told us about a
claimant who was dying of cancer not knowing the outcome of
her claim and being without any support for six weeks. I
welcome the timely reduction of the waiting period to 5
weeks, by the way. It took her three months to get her
payment, and when it came through it was wrong. A £500
deduction had been made for another benefit that had never
been claimed or received.
Other claimants have included Lucy, a 22-year-old who had
missed the deadline, which meant that her PIP and her
mobility component were stopped. Her blue badge was lost
and her mum’s carer’s allowance was taken away. It was hard
work to sort that out. In another case, Jo-Ann’s dad was
told in April 2016 that there was nothing more the doctors
could do, and he was moved from DLA to PIP that summer. He
received two points—eight points are needed for the
standard rate and 12 for the enhanced rate. The rules on
terminal illness suggested that if the probability was that
dying could be expected within six months, the claimant
could apply under the special rules. However, the prognosis
was unknown. The doctors were saying that it could be a
month or a year, and it was unclear whether those rules
would be an option, as the doctors could not reasonably say
whether death would be likely within six months. Let us
just imagine that discussion.
Jo-Ann’s dad and the family had not come to terms with the
prognosis, so they could not claim under the special rules.
The process was incredibly difficult and caused a lot of
stress. As the special rules option was not available, the
application had to be followed in the usual way and PIP was
not awarded. The mobility car was taken away, leaving
Jo-Ann’s dad unable to attend medical appointments or get
shopping, due to their rural location, which had no bus
services.
Jo-Ann also sat in with her dad, John, at the face-to-face
assessment. She described the experience as “awful”,
saying:
“They pushed and pushed my dad until he gave them the
answer they wanted.”
When he was asked if he could walk 50 yards, he said no, so
he was then asked if he could do it even if it took a long
time. When he again said no, he was asked if he could do it
if there was an emergency and he absolutely had to walk 50
yards. At that point, he felt so pressurised that he said
yes. The overview of the assessment then said that he could
“reasonably” walk 50 yards. The assessment process is
deeply humiliating and degrading, putting claimants in a
position where they often feel bad about not being able to
carry out certain tasks and even about asking for extra
assistance in the form of benefits.
I hope that no one here or watching the debate ever faces a
diagnosis of cancer, motor neurone diseased or any other
terminal illness, yet that happens to people every day. It
must be absolutely shattering not only for those who are
diagnosed, but for their families. I imagine that the last
thing on their minds would be going through the hoops to
get the basic financial support that they need, yet that is
what universal credit means in its current form.
I mentioned the Motor Neurone Disease Association, which
states that MND is a devastating fatal disease that rapidly
progresses through the brain and central nervous system,
leaving people trapped in a failing body and unable to
move, walk, talk, swallow or, eventually, breathe. It kills
one third of people within the first year and more than
half within two years. A small number survive longer.
People with MND and other terminal illnesses and their
families face significant financial burdens, with an
estimated extra cost of £12,000 a year.
Universal credit needs to work smoothly for the terminally
ill, but it does not, and there is nothing like it for
causing stress. People do not need and should not suffer
delays or stress, and a financial burden is the last thing
that they should be asked to face. Universal credit should
be easy, but not everyone can use the online portal. Many
are simply unable to type. Completing an online application
has been described by those who assist the terminally ill
as
“extremely arduous and time consuming, often requiring
outside help”,
yet help is available only over the telephone, which is
clearly inappropriate for anyone who is unable to speak.
The severe disability premium has been abolished under
universal credit, costing disabled adults with no carer
£62.45 a week or £3,250 a year. The enhanced disability
premium was also abolished, costing disabled adults under
the pension age £15.90 a week. The Department for Work and
Pensions’ stipulation that terminally ill claimants can
apply only via special rules if death can be reasonably
expected within six months does not work for many people
with terminal illnesses. Health professionals are often
confused by that condition and about whether they should
sign the relevant form, which is known as a DS1500, meaning
that people often do not get the swift support that they
badly need. Whether people apply under the special rules or
not, there is no customer journey specific to claimants
with disabilities or vulnerabilities, especially the
terminally ill. Those with severe and progressive
conditions, including terminal illnesses, are all given
work-focused interviews, which is clearly insensitive. As I
mentioned earlier, some people do not want their doctor to
tell them that they are dying, and it is cruel to ask them
to self-certify their fate—cruel and unnecessary.
In conclusion, I have some simple low-cost or no-cost
requests of the Minister that he can agree to given the
relatively low number of terminally ill claimants: remove
the waiting time, which should not be there, for terminally
ill people; make the application simpler, which should be
easy for this limited number of people; provide direct
support or give implicit consent for agencies to apply on a
claimant’s behalf; reinstate the severe disability
allowance and the enhanced disability premium for
terminally ill people; provide a specific journey and
special rules for the terminally ill; allow the DS1500 to
be submitted by third parties without explicit consent;
and, easiest of all, get rid of the cruel requirement for
self-certification.
7.14 pm
-
The Minister for Employment (Damian Hinds)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn,
Badenoch and Strathspey (Drew Hendry) on securing a debate
on this important matter. These are, of course, extremely
difficult situations, and we in turn must always be careful
to treat them with the highest level of sensitivity.
I will begin by setting out the recently announced changes
to universal credit, which of course apply to all
recipients, before addressing the hon. Gentleman’s specific
points. We continue to roll out universal credit gradually,
constantly improving the way the system works as we do so.
I am sure that hon. and right hon. Members on both sides of
the House welcome the changes to universal credit that my
right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and
Pensions announced in his statement to the House last
Thursday.
New guidance will be issued to staff next month to ensure
that claimants in the private rented sector who have their
housing benefit paid directly to landlords are offered that
option when they join universal credit. We will make two
changes to advances from January. First, the maximum period
over which an advance is recovered will increase from six
months to 12 months, making it easier for claimants to
manage their finances. That will apply regardless of the
level of advance claimed. Secondly, we are increasing the
amount of support that a claimant can receive through an
advance from up to 50% of their estimated entitlement to up
to 100%, Of course, the advance is interest-free.
If someone is in immediate need, we can fast-track the
payment so that they receive it on the same day. In
practice, new claimants in December can already receive an
advance of up to 50% of their estimated overall
entitlement, and may receive a second advance in the new
year to take it up to 100%. Taken with the first scheduled
payment, that means that claimants in need could receive
nearly double the amount of cash that they would previously
have received over that period.
In addition, from spring next year, we will make it
possible to apply for an advance online, further increasing
accessibility for those who need it. From February we will
remove the seven-day waiting period, reducing the time
claimants might wait to receive their first full payment.
From April, for new claimants already receiving support
towards their housing costs, we will provide an additional
payment of two weeks’ housing benefit to support them as
they transition to universal credit, which will help to
address the issue of rent arrears for those most in need.
It is important that I explain that the personal
independence payment is a separate benefit to universal
credit. It will continue to be paid weekly in advance to
provide important financial support to help people to meet
the additional costs of disability in the latter stages of
their life. PIP is also not taken into account when
assessing entitlement to universal credit. To be clear, PIP
is not a benefit that is being replaced by universal
credit. PIP and UC are not comparable, as they are not
intended for the same thing.
Income-related employment and support allowance and the
linked disability premiums, including the severe disability
premium, are being replaced by universal credit as part of
the process of simplifying benefits to help us address
overlaps. To mirror the design of ESA, universal credit has
two disability elements for adults. The higher rate is set
at a substantially higher level than the equivalent support
group level in ESA. By structuring the rates in that way,
the Government are making it clear that they are not
looking to make savings. Transitional protection will also
be provided for those claimants who are transferred across
to universal credit by the Department for Work and Pensions
and who have not had a change of circumstances.
We will continue to listen to and act on feedback as we
roll out universal credit. I regret to say that mistakes
can be made in any benefits system and, when errors happen,
I am sorry. Of course we recognise that people with health
conditions or disabilities face extra challenges. People
may be dealing with more than one condition or disability,
and the same condition can affect people in different ways.
-
Will the Minister take on board some of the specific points
that I raised? These things are easy to do and would cost
nothing. Specifically, will he address the issues relating
to self-certification? I also referred to other things that
would be very easy to deliver, so will he consider any of
those?
-
Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will allow me to continue. As we
roll out universal credit, we are absolutely committed to
ensuring that terminally ill patients are treated with the
utmost sensitivity and care, and receive the support they
need to make a UC claim.
It might be helpful if I briefly set out to the House how
the claim process works in the pre-existing system—the
legacy benefit system. Under that system, additional
financial support can be obtained by someone who is
terminally ill by making a claim to ESA. This is a manual
process that requires an application to be completed via a
telephone call or a paper-based form. As part of the
process, the claimant is asked whether they would like to
apply for ESA under “special rules”, as the hon. Gentleman
mentioned. For ESA, “special rules” means someone who has a
terminal illness with a prognosis of less than six months.
The claimant is asked to provide medical evidence from
their GP or medical practitioner confirming this. If the
claimant has already provided the medical evidence to
another part of the DWP, the Department will confirm that
and make a referral to an expedited work capability
assessment. That is entirely clerical; it is a review of
papers. The healthcare professional will provide a report,
usually within 48 hours, confirming the claimant’s
prognosis and condition to the DWP, which will then be able
to award immediate additional financial support by
allocating the claimant to the support group. As the hon.
Gentleman mentioned, the UC full service is designed to be
accessed and claimed for online, although a claim can be
made over the phone or via a home visit, which can be
arranged if needed. Universal credit has a similar process
in place to support claimants when they have been diagnosed
as terminally ill to make sure that additional support is
provided as quickly as possible.
I am are aware of the concerns raised by the hon. Gentleman
about the process of notifying the DWP about a claimant’s
terminal illness. However, we do not need to change the
consent rules in UC to support these claimants; we can
already accept information directly from claimant
representatives, such as claimant appointees and
third-party organisations representing the claimant.
However, we are also aware that there are instances when
this is not happening as intended, and we are working very
hard to make sure that the system works properly, with all
the necessary guidance and procedures in place to support
terminally ill claimants and to help our operational staff
to assist them.
As part of the training that our staff receive, they are
made aware that claimants might not know their prognosis or
condition and that they therefore should not record or
refer to the nature or detail of the illness on the full
service journal or in discussions, unless requested by the
claimant. Our approach is, and always has been, that we
must ensure that terminally ill claimants are treated
sensitively and with empathy at all times.
When a claim is made to UC where the claimant is terminally
ill, we want to ensure that claimants receive any eligible
additional financial support as quickly as possible. To
make sure that that happens, the claimant is asked if they
have a terminal illness. We have already asked that
question of ESA claimants, but using the terminology of
“special rules”. I must stress that, in effect, the two
questions are the same. We changed the wording to make
things clearer to the individual, and to make sure that
people would be able to get the support to which they are
entitled and which they need. That applies to new claims
and to existing claims on a change of circumstances.
When somebody present with such an illness, they are given
the option of continuing to provide further information
themselves, or of receiving support from the DWP to do so.
When they indicate that they would like support, it becomes
a high-priority task for a case manager to telephone the
claimant to gather the information on their behalf. A home
visit can also be arranged.
The most usual way for claimants to supply evidence of such
an illness is by providing the DS1500 form to which the
hon. Gentleman referred. It is issued for the DWP by a GP
or healthcare professional, either to the claimant or to
their representative. We check our systems immediately and
as a matter of course to see whether we already hold a
DS1500 that was submitted as part of another claim. If one
is already held, we reuse it for the universal credit
claim. Receipt of that information indicates to us that the
claimant must receive immediate access to DWP support, and
that support immediately results in an additional £318.78
per month being included in their universal credit
entitlement. The additional amount is payable from day one
of their claim. In addition, the claimant is completely
removed from any conditionality requirements.
The Department and the universal credit programme have
regular meetings with key stakeholders, including
Macmillan, Maggie’s centres and Mind, to understand how our
policies are working, and to identify and discuss possible
areas for improvement. I recognise that the hon. Gentleman
has encountered universal credit claimants who have had
issues with the service in his constituency. As I
acknowledged earlier, things can go wrong, and when they
do, I am sorry for that. If cases involve vulnerable
claimants, it is particularly important that they are
escalated, investigated and resolved quickly. I am aware
that the hon. Gentleman has an effective direct
relationship with the Scotland complaint resolution team,
as well as with our local operations team, which has helped
to manage a number of urgent cases to successful
resolution.
As we continue to deliver the full universal credit
service—it is now available in 178 jobcentres—with its
expanded claimant base, we are continuing to review and
further develop the customer journey for claimants with
complex needs, including by looking into how we support
terminally ill claimants to engage in the process. In that
context, I welcome the hon. Gentleman raising these
important issues on the Floor of the House. I do recognise
that there are areas for improvement in the service, but he
has seen for himself the drive, commitment and passion of
so many of our staff, stakeholders and people working
across universal credit to see this important reform
through.
Question put and agreed to.
7.27 pm
House adjourned.
|