National Debate Called For...!

WUG/ShopMobility

Shop 21, 2nd Floor

Bouverie Place Shopping Centre

Folkestone Kent CT20 1AU

/ fax: 01303 226500

Email: wchairuser@aol.com

www.wheelchairuser.org.uk

Prime Minister David Cameron has called for a national debate on benefits and the welfare system. He believes living on benefits is a “lifestyle choice” and the system encourages millions of working age people to sit at home doing nothing. At present, a reported ⅓ of national spending goes on welfare: if this was even reduced to ¼, the ConDem pact claims it could cut fuel duty and taxes for everyone, among other things... In the light of this national debate and the fact these claims are producing no little fear among disabled people, this newsletter is focusing entirely on the proposed Universal Credit and PIP (Personal Independence Payment). The aim is that these will replace the current system for both benefits and social care, although this will not affect people over the age of retirement. Mr Cameron also outlined plans for after the next election, including to save £2 million by cutting Housing Benefit for the under 25s. Removed from his speech at the 11

th hour

was the idea to vary benefit rates according to which part of the country people live.

Wheelchair Users’ Group - Folkestone ShopMobility

Registered Charity Number 1064955

Newsletter

Summer 2012

ACCESS, MOBILITY & SHOPMOBILITY

WUG Newsletter Summer 2012 - Guide to the Universal Credit

Information is taken from the 16 Universal Credit briefing factsheets on the DWP website. These are all dated May or September 2011 and incorporate the 1

st & 2

nd drafts: All these changes are undergoing continued impact assessments

before further debate & the 2nd

draft has been produced following consultation with those affected NB Applies to working age people only, ie age 16-64

TIMETABLE: 1: Oct 2013-Apr 2014: new claims & those with a change in circumstances will be moved over 2: Apr 2014: start of “managed” changeover for those whose circumstances haven’t changed 3: Late 2015-2017: continuation & completion of “managed” changeover

Apr 2014: Tax Credits & Housing Benefit to be phased out

Contributory benefits will still be available separately (eg JSA, ESA) but will only be intended for short-

term absences from work only If eligible, possible to get these & UC

Currently: multiple different benefits, qualifying eligibility & purposes,

as well as overlap with social care: SINGLE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

PRIMARY AIMS: To support people to work & play full role in society To streamline & simplify

1 application only; 1 payment only (even for couples) Payment likely to be once-monthly to

mimic working life NB this will include any Housing Benefit, which will be made direct to

claimant; their responsibility to pass it on

“NOT REPEATING SAME THINGS” ie difficult to deliver, prone to error,

confusing & maladaptive to changes

CARERS & DISABLED PEOPLE: One person may no longer claim in both capacities

Carers: if caring duties exceed 35 hours a week, one can claim as carer & the other as

disabled: still one claim / one payment Carers Allowance will still be

available separately

“2nd

Earners”: At present, ESA ceases after 1 year if disabled person

has a working partner Majority now (over 6 million) have a 1

st earner whose income is too high

for the 2nd

person to qualify FOCUS WILL BE on household

income with an “earnings disregard” at a higher level TARGET: to have at least one worker in each household How affected: depends on individual combination of benefits & earnings

Earnings disregard will be brought more in line

At present: £5+ per week affects JSA ESA can earn from £20 to £95 per week

SAVINGS: Approx 13% of working age households have capital exceeding £16k: these will be ineligible & expected to live

on savings before claiming

Savings over £6k will affect claim

“SAVINGS”: does not include own home,

some (compensation) payouts, business assets or pension schemes

TRANSITIONAL PROTECTION: is eligible only to those with no change of circumstances

& during the “managed” changeover Will be fixed at time of change

& have a finite length AIM is for smooth transition & no cash losers AMOUNT will depend on overall entitlement

There will be one “earnings taper” so that UC will top up lower incomes

The “threshold disregard” will depend on circumstances

& much will relate to housing costs

Current Housing Benefit ceiling is £25k pa; this is likely to be substantially cut

WUG Newsletter Summer 2012 - Guide to the PIP (Personal Independence Payment)

The overall aim of the PIP is to consider the impact of the impairment & not the impairment itself. Following consultation, draft 2 has been modified slightly but still contains 11 questions; 9 relate to daily living and 2 to mobility. The aim is to make these clear to understand & apply, with consistent outcomes. The 1

st draft

was considered too “medically-based” & low level, focusing on “surviving” rather than “full participation”. The 2

nd draft

intends to take account of all disability types fairly & to accurately assess varying & fluctuating conditions to a consistent standard. The 11 questions carry a maximum 106 points collectively but information is lacking on how many are needed to qualify. There are three possible outcomes, namely: Standard or

Enhanced level or not eligible. The PIP is targeted towards those with the greatest ongoing barriers & people with short-term acute periods of impairment only will not qualify. Difficulty in the subject areas needs to apply for over half of the time but this can be aggregated over an extended period. If a problem “may” occur, this is not adequate; it must be “likely” at the least. The yardstick is “in a safe, reliable & timely manner”, where “safe” is defined as not harming self or others; “reliable” is to a reasonable standard; “timely” is less than twice as long in duration as someone without the condition. Consideration is also given to the impact of pain & fatigue, especially with regularly repeated tasks & whether carrying out such tasks would be detrimental to health in itself.

THE QUESTIONS... Daily living: 1: Preparing food & drink - up to 8 points 2: Taking nutrition - up to 10 points 3: Managing therapy or monitoring a health condition - up to 8 points 4: Bathing & grooming - up to 8 points 5: Managing toilet needs or incontinence - up to 8 points 6: Dressing & undressing - up to 8 points 7: Communicating - up to 12 points 8: Engaging socially - up to 8 points 9: Making financial decisions - up to 6 points Mobility: 10: Planning & following a journey - up to 15 points 11: Moving around - up to 15 points

As with the DLA form, a variety of model answers is given from which to choose what best applies, followed by space for further information. A further consideration is assistance from another: this can be physical support or interaction, supervision for the whole activity or verbal prompting only. Relative weightings of the questions to one another and cumulative effects are still being debated. There has been some criticism that those who use aids or adaptations are already being penalised as being “more able” for doing so. There is also concern that lower levels of disability have been dismissed as irrelevant, which is also likely to be detrimental. The government’s intention was to focus on what people can do, instead of inability, but this rapidly became unworkable. For disability related expenditure the actual costs were felt to be too subjective so the focus is on ability to carry out day-to-day activities.

WUG Newsletter Summer 2012 - Points for debate...

From a disability perspective... The numbers thrown off ESA following review of the former Incapacity Benefit is taken as evidence of false claims. There is a massive waiting list for tribunals, some of which are overturned on sight. ATOS professionals are reported to receive a cash bonus for every claim denied while disability spending has risen in May 2012: does this include ATOS expenses?! This is NOT a good starting point for reassessing every disabled person and has directly contributed to several suicides and deaths already.

Lifestyle choice: you have to quite desperate to jump through all the hoops that the government sets to receive disability benefits already. In reality, fraud is minimal. Those who do “swing the lead” are usually taken as genuine (because they know how to do it) while those who are genuine are regarded as frauds. The current view is that ALL disabled people are blaggers and a drain on the system. This view is being fed downwards by the national media and politicians and leading to overt discrimination.

The current jobs marketplace has an average 150 people chasing every part-time vacancy. Full timers are going part time, squeezing the part-timers out. With 150 “abes” to choose from, which employer is honestly going to choose a disabled person in preference? The National Minimum Wage (NMW) seems not to apply to those with disabilities, who are expected to work for nothing and be grateful for it. Many disabled people DO work; very hard and at greater personal cost, but start off at a disadvantage in the marketplace.

From a wider perspective... The “something for nothing culture” and inbuilt “sense of entitlement” are all attacked as if they come from disabled people only. They are prevalent on ALL levels of society and when there are people at the “top” earning millions when others can’t afford to live and no hope of doing so, this is RANK hypocrisy. Perhaps a national maximum wage is more relevant. It’s emotive blackmail - and untrue - to claim that the welfare system is causing the economic collapse when big companies and “important” people are sitting on millions: and believing it shows how clever they are for doing so.

We won’t solve any financial problems until we re-evaluate the purpose of money: it is a useful universal currency and means of exchange, NOT an end in itself. Accumulating big piles of wealth is directly depriving others and it needs to flow to have value. Furthermore, the true environmental costs of our activities needs to be considered, including wars and destroying the natural world for short-term profit.

Demographics and life expectancy dictate that welfare will need to increase if doctors feel their lot is unfair, where do the rest of us stand?! Putting welfare costs on individuals’ tax bills will only exacerbate existing discrimination.

There is more ways than money alone to measure contributing or taking from the whole. How can one person’s time really be worth that much more than another’s?

Distinguishing between the “deserving” and “undeserving” poor is divisive at the least and it seems that the wish is to get disabled people fighting among themselves...

For further information, see: dwp.gov.uk (factsheets), benefitsandwork.co.uk (DIY PIP self-test and e-newsletter), Private Eye (various), Evening Standard (7th February 2012 - Disabled are at the mercy

of ministers and media), disabilitynewsservice.com, wearespartacus campaign group for economic effects of cutting benefits & more, youtube.com for a Chris Grayling video on how to win ESA appeals