uk welfare reform in the 21st century

7/23/2019 UK Welfare Reform in the 21st Century

1/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Page 1of 29

Kirstein Gourlay

UK Welfare Reformin the 21st Century

Word Count: 6982

The

Consequencesfor the

Vulnerable in

Society


2/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Introduction

The Welfare Reform Bill 2011 (WRB11) is a controversial shake up of the British WelfareState currently at the committee stage in the House of Commons. Initial reforms started by

the incumbent Labour Government have been radically carried forward by the Conservative-

Liberal Democrat (ConDem) coalition Government and have been the subject of immense

controversy ever since.

Outlined below are the key elements of the WRB11, which shall be discussed further

within this project.

In summary the main changes are:

Introduction of Personal Independence Payments to replace the current Disability

Living Allowance

restricts Housing Benefit entitlement for social housing tenants whose

accommodation is larger than they need

up-rates Local Housing Allowance rates by the Consumer Price Index

amends the forthcoming statutory child maintenance scheme

limits the payment of contributory Employment and Support Allowance to a 12-month

period

caps the total amount of benefit that can be claimed1

These reforms appear to reinstate the principle of less eligibility that was first

implemented by the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act2 and could be seen as a means of

reversing the poverty trap claimants often find themselves in.

The Secretary of State, Work and Pensions Minister, Iain Duncan Smith MP believes that

taxpayers need to see that the Government is spending their hard-earned money

responsibly so that they can receive support as well as supporting welfare recipients.3

The WRB11 has not yet received Royal Assent, and as such is still a work in progress.

The aim of this project is to explore welfare reform past, present and future, and the effect it

will have on the most vulnerable people in our society.

3Duncan-Smith2011

2Fraser2003

1Parliamentary Copyright2011

Page 2of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


3/29

Welfare Reform Bill

I shall discuss the Governments position insofar as it has responded to certain concerns,

look at the critical response to changes already in force and consider public opinion as

expressed in public forums. I shall use mainly internet resources, as they are the most up-to-

date resources. I also acknowledge that some resources may not be academic or fully

reliable, but I believe that unconfirmed and speculative responses are valid in this discussion

as they also reflect public perception of how the reforms will change the lives of people

involved.

The WRB11 can be considered the most radical shake-up of the Welfare System since its

inception in 1944.4 The Coalition Government has taken the notion of welfare reform to

radical lengths5and has been using the current fiscal situation to justify bigger and deeper

cuts than any other Government since Beveridge. I shall explore this reasoning against a

backdrop of political ideology and discuss whether budget deficit is merely a smokescreen

for change that would always have been the bedrock of Conservative policy.

Initially, I will define poor and vulnerable under current legal guidelines. Then I shall look

at changes to welfare from Thatcherism to Brown due to political ideologies. Finally, I will

look at how the WRB11 develops these changes further.

My conclusion will pull together all the arguments discussed in this project and will look at

how these reforms compare to a pre-Beveridgean welfare system. It will consider the future

for vulnerable people in the UK.

5 (ibid.)

4w4mp.org2011

Page 3of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


4/29

Welfare Reform Bill

To Protect the Poorest and Most Vulnerable in Society

In 2010, the Coalition Government pledged to protect the poorest and most vulnerable in

our society6 despite the heavy cutbacks proposed and the drastic reform of the Welfare

System. This pledge does seem like an antithetical position, and is one open to the most

criticism. But what makes someone part of the poorest or most vulnerable category, and

how will the reforms protect them?

Some people are easily identifiable as poor. Those who live on the meagre weekly

payments of means-tested benefits are the most visible: those on Income Support, Job

Seekers Allowance, Carers Allowance and income-based ESA. Pensioners on Pension

Credit and those who qualify for certain levels of Working Tax Credit or Help with NHS costs

are also considered in this definition. However, sometimes people whose working income

takes them just outside of this bracket can be just as poor. Taking into account the payment

of rent/mortgage and council tax, dental treatment, NHS prescriptions, travel expenses,

childcare expenses and school meals plus the loss of access to legal aid and other benefits,

for many families on the threshold of the ambiguous amounts predetermined as the amount

the law says you need to live on7 some people returning to work can find themselves in

more poverty than when they were on benefits.8This is known as the Poverty Trap. These

people are often overlooked but can find themselves in real financial trouble.

In accordance with the principle of less eligibility, the Prime Minister has declared that,

The "refreshingly radical" reforms would mean people would always be

better off in work9

However, there are many people on benefits for whom work is not always a viable option.

These are the most vulnerable in our society. This group of people consists of the lone

parent, long-term sick, disabled, mental health patients, children, people with learning

disabilities and the elderly. The Poor Relief Act (1576) classified these groups (except the

lone parents) as the impotent poor and under the Poor Law Amendment Act (1834) they

9BBC2010

8Mumsnet2011

7 Janet-M2006

6Crown Copyright2011

Page 4of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


5/29

Welfare Reform Bill

would be seen as the deserving poor10. The Government has pledged to protect them, yet

the proposed welfare reforms and the current method of transferring people from long-term

Incapacity Benefit to ESA has shown that this pledge is not as watertight as they would like

the general population to believe.

10Fraser2003

Page 5of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


6/29

Welfare Reform Bill

From Atlee to Cameron

When looking at welfare reform, it is important to understand the basic political ideologies

that influence any changes proposed. No government works in isolation and all decisions

made are based on the mistakes made by previous governments and hopefully lessons are

learned. The table below outlines the major changes to welfare since the 1944 Beveridge

report. It is an overview of political ideology.

Welfare Ideology Since 1944: (Table 1)

PrimeMinister

Political Party Ideology Changes to Welfare

Atlee(1945-1951)

Labour Comprehensive welfaresystem and NationalHealth Service;nationalisation of utilities,railways, British Airwaysand Steel.

Birth of Welfare StateBased on comprehensive benefits tohelp the unemployed, families, sick,elderly. Provided healthcare that wasfree at the point of use.

Thatcher(1979-1990)

Conservative Aim to 'roll-back' thewelfare state and toallow a free marketapproach to providingservices. Privatisation of

previously nationalisedservices, including thecoal mines.People should work, notbe dependent on thestate.

Tenants given the 'right-to-buy' theircouncil houseYTS introduced for 16-18 years oldsand income support removed formost of this age group.

Tougher eligibility for benefits.Brought in privatisation of NHS andSocial care provision as part of aquasi-free market policy.NHS and Community Care Act 1990.

Major(1990-1997)

Conservative Introduced the ThirdWay into UK politics:based on centralist viewson welfare provision.

Introduced JSA to replaceUnemployment Benefit withrequirements to seek work andsanctions for non-compliance.

Page 6of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


7/29

Welfare Reform Bill

The late twentieth century saw Britain politically dominated by a neo-conservatism

approach to social welfare, known as Thatcherism. Thatcher wanted to roll-back the

Blair(1997-2007)

New Labour Followed the Third Wayand rejected old Laboursocial democraticideology.

Introduced tax credits as part ofwelfare-to-work initiative in April 2003Creation of Jobcentreplus and theNew Deal to provide training andsupport for long-term unemployed,

lone parents, young people and thedisabled.Devolved Scotland, Wales andNorthern Ireland, who were free tomake their own social policy andbudget decisions within agreed fiscallimits set by Westminster.Welfare Reform Act 2007:IntroducedESA to move long-term IB claimantsinto work and to reassess everyclaimant under new PersonalCapability Assessments, changes toHousing Benefit, changes toDisability Living Allowance ageconditions and other miscellaneouschanges.

Brown(2007-2010)

New Labour Traditionally Old Labour.Had ideologicaldifferences with Blair, butcame into power underNew Labour identity.

Welfare Reform Act 2009:Abolishment of Income Support,Work for your benefit schemes,Progression to work for lone parentsand partners of benefits recipients.Right for disabled people to control

provision of services.Enforcement of Child Maintenanceby disqualifying from driving orimprisoning non-resident parentswho fail to pay.

Cameron (2010-Present)

ConDemCoalition(Conservative)

Thatcherism with a hintof Liberal concessionson tax, NHS reform andlistening to consultationon these reforms.Embraces the notion of

less eligibility from the1834 Poor LawAmendment ActBelieves no one shouldbe better off on benefitsthan in work.

Welfare Reform Bill: IntroducingUniversal Credit (UC) to streamlinebenefit system and persuade peopleinto work with incentives for workersand sanctions for non-compliancewith benefit requirements.

Targeting disability and sicknessbenefits, housing benefits and JSAas a priority.Reform of the NHS.

Page 7of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


8/29

Welfare Reform Bill

welfare state and privatise services and utilities previously nationalised under Labour; this

included British Gas, BT and the coal mines.11

In addition, social housing was scaled back, and the 'right-to-buy' scheme was

introduced. A council house could be purchased by its tenants and heavy discounts were

given on the purchase prices of these houses to reflect the length of tenancy a person had

accrued.12Although it gave people a foot on the housing property ladder, it also depleted the

stock of affordable housing available for social housing.

Neo-conservatives believethatby peopletaking unattractive and low-paid work to sustain

them, promotes the dignity of the population, and that the state should interfere with this

dignity as little as possible.There should be welfare provision for those incapable of being

self-reliant, such as the sick, elderly and disabled; but the family and charity should be

encouraged to provide services before the state intervenes. They believe that uniform

provision by the state would lead to a stagnation of life, rather than progress. 13

I believe that this ethos can be a very positive one. In other countries the welfare state is

a fall-back or safety net to help those in dire need and for a limited time.14

In my opinion, Thatcher made a terrible mistake in the closing of the coal-mining pits in

the 1980s. These closures led to mass unemployment in previously prosperous areas. The

Labour MP, Dennis Skinner, campaigned long and hard for his constituents and became

known as the Beast of Bolsover15. All the areas in Bolsover District fell into hard times after

the pits were closed. Now the areas have extremely high levels of unemployment, with

21.5% of this group being long-term unemployed,16and property prices are well below the

national average.17.

I would argue that by creating mass unemployment, Thatcher created a bigger need for

the same welfare provision she wanted to roll-back. Additionally, high levels of

unemployment reduced the amount of taxes and National Insurance contributions filling the

coffers, whilst the amount of money needed to finance the increase in welfare exponentially

increased.

17Mouseprice2011

16Research & Information Team2010 p.16

15Derby Evening Telegraph2010

14WelfareInfo.org2011

13Moore2002 p.21

12Joseph Rowntree Foundation1998

11Fraser2003

Page 8of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


9/29

Welfare Reform Bill

To offset the increased unemployment levels the Conservatives introduced tougher

measures to decrease eligibility of benefits and to force claimants to actively seek work,

whilst cutting benefits. Young people were required to attend Youth Training Schemes (YTS),

if they did not continue education. In 1987, Income Support (IS) was stopped if a claimant

refused an YTS placement and by 1988 16-18 year olds were ineligible to claim IS at all,

(unless they had a dependent child). The rationale was that this age group would either be in

education or in an YTS scheme.

After Thatcher left power in 1990 and was succeeded by John Major, in 1996, Job

Seekers Allowance (JSA) was introduced to replace Unemployment Benefit. JSA was a

difficult regime that would target the idle claimant, as it introduced tough sanctions and

eligibility criteria. Contribution-based JSA was capped at 6 months, after which the claimant

would move to income-based JSA if they qualified. A claimant had to prove they wereactively seeking paid employment over 16 hours a week and would have to be immediately

available for work, even if they currently worked less than 16 hours a week.18

In 1997 Tony Blair moved into Downing Street and set his sights upon changing the face

of the Labour Party from a social democratic viewpoint to embrace the Third Way.

The Third Way is in favour of growth, entrepeneurship, enterprise and

wealth creation but it is also in favour of greater social justice and it sees

the state playing a major role in bringing this about.

19

20

Tony Blair was adamant that his party was NewLabour, and in many ways the politics of

this revitalised party bore little resemblance to Old Labour. Blair's agenda held little common

ground with social democracy at all and the party was Labour only in name. The Third Way

sought to bring UK politics into a modern, globalized world.

Blair believed that Britain should be devolved and each country should able to manage

their own social policies in line with Westminster, but gave them their own spending power

20 (Ibid.)

19Dickson1999

18Daguerre et al.2002

Page 9of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


10/29

Welfare Reform Bill

and self-government. This was in line with the Third Way principle of accountability and

responsibility, as he recognised that each country was distinctive and had different priorities

to England. He also believed that equality of opportunity was the twofold responsibility of

both the individual and the State.21

Old Labour believed that the community was more important than the individual, whereas

Thatcher believed that the individual rather than community was important. Blair recognised

that both the individual andthe community were equally important in creating a healthy and

productive society; and this was the biggest shift from both Thatcherism and Old Labour.22

During the Blair years, welfare reform began in earnest. The aim was to repair the

damage caused by Thatcherism and a free market approach to society; although Blair did

believe in a free-market economy linkedto state provision.

On the subject of welfare reform, Blair said in 1999:

"It means modernising the welfare system so it helps people, rather than

holds them back - a welfare system that recognises work is the best

route out of poverty and that the vast majority of people want to work."23

A system of Tax Credits was introduced in April 2003 to support low-income families. The

aim of this was to make work pay and to encourage people to go back to work. He

introduced the Welfare Reform Act 2007 which created the Employment and Support

Allowance (ESA).24 This is discussed in detail later in the project. Other relatively minor

changes are summarized in Table 1 (above).

When Gordon Brown replaced Blair in 2007, he continued to implement his predecessors

changes and followed them with the Welfare Reform Act 2009.25The major changes in this

Act were to abolish new claims for Income Support and to move current claimants onto ESA

or JSA.

Disabled people were given the right to make choices about their services and a system

of Direct Payments was introduced so that they could pay for their care. Tougher sanctionsfor non-resident parents who failed to pay child maintenance were introduced as well.

25Disability Alliance2011

24Disability Alliance2011

23BBC News1999

22 (Ibid.)

21 (Ibid.)

Page 10of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


11/29

Welfare Reform Bill

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat (ConDem) Coalition Government came into power in

2010. This appeared to be an unusual mix of political ideology, especially after the three

televised Leaders' Debates. During the television debates Nick Clegg gave such a good

account of his party's political stand that their popularity increased exponentially.26 The

LibDems were seen as a political contender for the first time in many years. As a result,

although the LibDems lost 5 seats overall, the General Election saw the formation of a 'hung

parliament' with the LibDems having the choice to join either the Conservatives or Labour to

form a coalition27.

Although the Conservatives, who won the most seats, could have formed a minority

government, David Cameron feared that it would be unstable. Nick Clegg decided to join

them in exchange for some concessions and a share in political power.28Critics feel that the

LibDems 'sold out' and have allowed themselves to be manipulated by the Conservatives.29

However, Cameron defended Clegg and insisted that the LibDems have a big influence on

the Coalition policy.30However, subsequent bi-elections have proved that LibDem popularity

has dramatically fallen since the General Election.31

One of the biggest bones of contention has been the LibDems agreement to fast-tracking

welfare reform, under the guise of reducing the 'Budget deficit'. The Coalition Government

touts welfare reform as immediately necessary to reduce the budget deficit.32Although David

Cameron made it totally clear in the Election debates that it was Conservative policy from

the outset.

In 2001 their manifesto clearly stated their intentions to increase employment figures in

the UK through sanctions and penalties. Welfare dependency was a major concern. This

echoes the sentiment of the 1988 Secretary of State, who believed that welfare recipients

needed to move from dependence to independence.33

I believe that the move to push through welfare reform by 2013, and the introduction of

some changes by 2011, as a measure to reduce national debt is a smokescreen for political

33Daguerre et al.2002

32Cawston2010

31Wheeler2011

30Unknown Author2010

29Hasan2010

28Travis2010

27BBC News2010

26Lewis2010

Page 11of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


12/29

Welfare Reform Bill

intentions already publicised. I also believe that the LibDems are using the current negative

fiscal position to mask their defection to a political ideology that is antithetical to their

propagandised manifesto in 2010. I believe they have chosen power over promises. Political

promises are known as spin and the Coalition has used spin to pursue an agenda by

manipulating the fears and prejudices of our society whilst we are in dire fiscal

circumstances.

The reforms introduced from Thatcherism to the Third Way marked an end to full state

dependency and actively forced claimants to earn their right to benefits. I believe that this is

the cornerstone of current welfare reforms proposed by the ConDem Government in 2011,

which I shall summarise and discuss below.

Page 12of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


13/29

Welfare Reform Bill

21stCentury Welfare: The Universal Credit

One of the most radical reforms34,35proposed is to introduce the Universal Credit (UC)

to replace a myriad of different benefits available under the current system. The aim is tosimplify the system and to reduce the budget deficit by reducing the amount of

overpayments (and underpayments) caused by error and fraud. Furthermore, as UC would

incorporate both in and out-of-work benefits it would ease the transition into work by

incorporating benefits currently administered by three different departments: the Department

for Works and Pensions (DWP), Her Majestys Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and local

councils. In addition, PAYE earners would have their money reduced or increased in line with

their earnings automatically.36

The new UC would take into account household income and there would be a withdrawal

rate of benefit for working families at a rate of 65p in every pound. This last figure is higher

than the 55p per pound that the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) recommended for the 2010

Green Paper: 21st Century Welfare. The CSJ (ironically headed by Iain Duncan-Smith)

believed that a higher withdrawal percentage would lead to less incentive for people to work

additional hours and have a negative impact on second earners.37

Original proposals for UC suggested that there would be two elements: Universal Work

Credit aimed at the unemployed and very low paid and the Universal Life Credit designed to

provide additional help with living costs for those with low incomes. 38

The table below, (Table 2) summarises the main benefits to be replaced by the proposal.

Current Benefits Type of claim and Administrator

Job Seeker's Allowance (JSA) Income-based element. Out-of-workbenefit. Administered by DWP

38 (Ibid.)

37 (Ibid. p 10)

36Crown Copyright2011 pp. 4-13

34w4mp.org2011

35BBC2010

Page 13of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


14/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Income Support (IS) Out-of-work benefit. Administered byDWP

Employment and Support Allowance

(ESA)

Income-based element. Out-of-work

benefit. Administered by DWP

Incapacity Benefit (IB) Income-based element. Out-of-workbenefit. Administered by DWP

Carer's Allowance (CA) Paid if looking after disabled person 35+hours a week. Can work, but benefitaffected after certain level of earnings(Currently 100 a week) Administered byDWP.

Housing Benefit (HB) Paid towards rental or mortgage interestof main home for claimants whosehousehold income is under the amountappropriate for their needs. For claimantson some benefits rental is paid in full:social housing tenants or private tenantswhose rent is under the Local HousingAllowance for their area. Administered byLocal Council.

Council Tax Benefit (CTB) Paid towards council tax of main home forclaimants whose household income isunder the amount appropriate for theirneeds. For claimants on some benefitsCouncil Tax Benefit is paid in full and ispaid regardless of tenure of the mainhome. Administered by Local Council.

Working Tax Credit (WTC) Payable to low-paid working householdswith or without children. Help withchildcare costs may be paid for approvedproviders through the childcare element.Administered by HMRC

Child Tax Credit (CTC) Replaced child-related premiums formerlyincluded within certain out-of-workbenefits. Payable to families with childrenthat also claim child benefit, whether in orout of work. Administered by HMRC

Disability Living Allowance (DLA) Paid to disabled people to help meet extracosts related to their care or mobilityneeds. Administered by DWP

Page 14of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


15/29

Welfare Reform Bill

This new method of paying benefit would certainly streamline the process and make it

easier to ensure that claimants were claiming the right amount of benefit for their

circumstances. Many people are not currently claiming all the money they are entitled to, as

there are so many different benefits on offer; often the uninformed claimant does not know

that they are being underpaid. Data suggests that there is 1.3bn of benefits under-paid.39I

would argue that this may affect people with learning difficulties and hidden disabilities (like

autism) the most; as they are most likely to accept what they are given without digging

deeper.

I can understand the need to streamline the system. In my experience, different benefit

departments using different computer systems do not always communicate changes of

circumstance in a timely manner. This leads to over- or under-payments of benefits and, in

the case of over-payments, can lead to investigations for benefit fraud and huge cuts to

benefits to repay the debt.

However, the Government is not simply consolidating existing benefits into one payment;

they are introducing new thresholds and constraints on the system. There will be new and

fixed limits set on the amount to be paid and time constraints on certain entitlements.40

According to The Guardian,

The Department for Work and Pensions said that the central aim of the

universal credit was to "make work pay", especially for the lowest

earners.41

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) would disagree with this sentiment. According to

their statistics 1.4 million families will be worse off under the new system and the target

group to be most disadvantaged will be Lone Parents.42They do, however concede that 2.5

million families would be better off, particularly those on the lowest incomes, which would

endorse the Government claims that

42 (ibid.)

41The Guardian2011

40Crown Copyright2011

39Full Fact2011 p.4

Page 15of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


16/29

Welfare Reform Bill

"Our reforms will move 350,000 children and 500,000 adults out of

poverty. This will change Britain for generations a change we cannot

wait any longer for.43

The news is not so positive for the sick and disabled. Their needs are different to the

general population. Many long-term sick, autistic and mental health patients have hidden

disabilities that make it impossible for them to undertake functional employment. Most of

these will be on long-term Incapacity Benefit, soon to be reassessed under ESA criteria, and

could lose out on the help and support they need to be able to live productive and healthy

lives. In addition, unless UC takes into account the possible need for vulnerable people to

drop into and out of work and accommodate this without penalty, there could be a real issue

with the loss of certain benefits for these people and the passported benefits they receive in

health and social care.

One of my biggest concerns is how each aspect of the Universal Credit will work

alongside the others. Why spend millions of pounds moving everyone from Incapacity

Benefit to ESA just to abolish ESA as soon as everyone has been reassessed? Surely, if

there is a likelihood of UC passing into law then all reassessments of current IB claimants

should be postponed until 2013 and be integrated into the merging of all the out-of-work

benefits into one? In my opinion, by appearing to make immediate changes to welfare,

Osborne and Cameron are likely to cost the taxpayers more money through being so hasty

in their decisions. They could argue that they are carrying out plans already in place from the

Brown Government, but in light of their criticism of the Blair/Brown governance I believe the

ConDems should have paused and taken stock of Browns plans and seen how they fit into

their own plans for UC.

43 (ibid.)

Page 16of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


17/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Welfare Reform: The Deeper Cuts

In 2008, the Labour Government introduced ESA, which replaced Incapacity Benefit for

new claimants. ESA is a complicated benefit in some ways: it has a contributory element for

people who have paid National Insurance and a means-tested, or income-based, element

for other people unable to claim JSA or Income Support. In addition, it has different tiers of

support.

After a medical assessment, (and currently a Works Capability Assessment), claimants

are given a decision about their fitness-to-work and are awarded one of the following

benefit entitlements:

1.ESA Support Group (SG), which means that the claimant has limited capability for

work-related activity.

2.ESA Work Related Activity Group (WRAG), which means that the claimant must attend

regular Work Focussed Interviews (WFI) and agree an action plan to return to work.

3.Job Seekers Allowance, which means the claimant is deemed able to work and must

meet all the criteria to receive benefit, including actively seeking paid work.44

The aim of moving people from Incapacity Benefit to ESA is to reduce the number ofclaimants and to encourage people back into work. Since April 2011, the Government has

been actively moving people from Incapacity Benefit onto ESA, although they piloted the

transference in Aberdeen and Burnley from 11th October 2010 with 1,700 claimants.

According to the website www.benefitsandwork.co.ukthis pilot had some flaws as it used the

WCA rather than the new Personal Capability Assessment (PCA) detailed below. In addition

the computer systems were different from the ones expected to be used for the wholesale

migration. The Government estimated that 23% of claimants would be forced onto JSA.45

However, there is a lot of controversy surrounding the assessment of certifying people as

fit-to-work and moving them into WRAG or onto JSA. This involves the use of an outside

agency, called Atos Healthcare, conducting medical examinations on claimants to prove their

fitness for work. These include face-to-face and paper assessments.46Furthermore a radical

change in viewpoint concerning a persons fitness to work will also be implemented.

46DWP2010 pp.3, 4

45Donnison et al.2010

44Crown Copyright2011 p.4

Page 17of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


18/29

Welfare Reform Bill

In the past, Incapacity Benefit claimants had to carry out a WCA to determine their level

of incapacity. This test looked at what the claimant could not do in the workplace. Certain

claimants were exempt from the assessment altogether, e.g. people in receipt of the High

Rate Care component of Disability Living Allowance, which was estimated at May 2010 to be

39% of claimants.47

Under the new regulations, all claimants must undertake a PCA, where the emphasis is

on looking at what the claimant is ableto do. This could appear to be a positive emphasis,

as it allows someone to recognise the skills they still possess and the aim is to encourage

them to find work within their capability.

But the situation has not been so clear cut. The test does not take into account the nature

of the claimants illness. Someone with a mental health problem may hate crowds or noise;someone with fibromyalgia may become more ill with increased levels of stress. In the case

of people with illnesses like Lupus, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome their

symptoms can flare up and down many times in the same day. Who would employ a person

that may need to leave work early and be bed-bound for the next three days? Who would

employ someone who may forget instructions the moment they were given? Who would

employ someone so drowsy from the high doses of painkillers they are taking? In a climate

where there are thousands more jobseekers than jobs, what employer would choose the

unreliable employee over the reliable one?

The Government has stated that it wishes to cut 20% of the budget from sickness

benefits and move some claimants into work-related benefits; yet statistics show that there is

only a 0.5%-0.6% fraud rate in DLA48. In essence up to 19.5% of genuinely ill people will

have their ill-health related benefits stripped and will be forced to apply for work that they

simply cannot undertake, with the penalties that are applied for non-compliance of the

conditions of receiving JSA.

The agency that undertakes the medicals have been known to lie on the forms to stop

benefit payments. The internet is full of forums where victims of this and professional welfare

advisers alike have complained about this issue. Many people are told they are fit for work

when they are clearly not and many medicals have been overturned by tribunals at a later

stage.49On some forums claimants have stated that they are stockpiling tablets to commit

49Gentleman2011


47 (Ibid.)

Page 18of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


19/29

Welfare Reform Bill

suicide if they are deemed fit to work. On other forums, people have spoken about how

degrading and unfair the assessments have been. There is a lot of talk of suicide.50These do

not seem like idle threats, but cries of despair from a vulnerable group in society who

certainly do not feel protected by the new legislations.

I would argue that the medical assessments are unfit for their theoretical purpose: to

ensure that those who are unable to be able to carry out functional employment due to

illness or disability are entitled to extra help and financial support by the State.

Functional employment refers to the ability of a sick or disabled person to enter into paid

employment adapted to meet their personal needs on a regular basis, including the ability to

carry out the duties required of them to meet the conditions for such paid employment. For

people with stress-induced or stress-enhanced illnesses, such as Fibromyalgia, Lupus andsome Mental Illnesses, functional employment should not induce or exacerbate the

symptoms of their illness. I would furthermore argue that the medical assessments arefit for

their ideologicalpurpose: to reduce the numbers of genuine claimants who would ordinarily

meet the criteria for being unfit to work in order to reduce the budget deficit and to meet the

targets set by the coalition Government for Welfare Reform as detailed above.

Changes to the benefits awarded to the long-term sick and disabled are some of the most

controversial aspects of the Welfare Reform Bill. In addition to the change from IB to ESAdiscussed above is the change from DLA to Personal Independence Payment (PIP). This

latter change is one that will cause a lot of impact on the people who need help the most.

Central estimates put the rate of fraud on DLA at 0.5% of all claimants; yet the

Government has targets to reduce the number of claimants by 20-23%.51 This raises the

concern that up to 22.5% of genuine claimants with genuine needs will lose their entitlement

to benefit. DLA currently passports a lot of other benefits, including access to the Blue

Badge scheme, extra payments in means-tested benefits and tax credits. As DLA is needs-

tested rather than means-tested, even a millionaire can claim the money if the need is there.

Controversially, the first cut will be Mobility payments for people in care homes that are

funded by the Local Authority (LA). The issue concerns duplicate payments for the same

services. The belief is that the LA provides help with transport. However, critics argue that

residents contribute towards transport costs through their mobility payments and that without


50BBC2009

Page 19of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


20/29

Welfare Reform Bill

these extra payments residents will lose the ability to go out for social reasons. The LA

currently provides transport for essential reasons only, e.g. going to hospital.52

PIP will differ from DLA in several ways:

Daily Living Component: based on ability to carry out key activities in daily life with

two tiers, instead of the three levels of Care in DLA.

Mobility component: based on ability to get around will be removed for people living

in LA-funded care homes.

Six month qualifying period instead of three.

No automatic entitlement for people with particular condition (except terminally ill)

Regular checks on individuals needs

Takes into account aids and adaptations

Face-to-face assessments by independent healthcare professional

Penalty for failing to notify changes to health and ability

Can be forced to seek help with health needs as eligibility for benefit.

Disabled people have argued that the inclusion of aids and adaptations in assessment of

ability, and reducing benefit entitlement accordingly, will disadvantage them, as they often

use their DLA to maintain the aids or pay for additional energy costs in charging up batteries

and using electrical equipment. Cutting their funding could render the aids useless or allow

them to fall into disrepair. Now disability charities are threatening to take the Government to

court for a judicial review.53Furthermore, due to the problems already identified with Atos

Healthcare and their methods of undertaking assessments for ESA, many people on DLA

are concerned that they may lose their benefit altogether after being reassessed.

Housing benefit changes will also impact on disabled people, especially where they live in

adapted social housing with extra bedrooms and classed as under-occupied. The cost of

rehousing and readapting properties for people in accommodation deemed under-occupied

has been argued to have a negative effect on the deficit.54

54Birch2011

53Moynihan2011

52 (Ibid. pp37-44)

Page 20of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


21/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Other changes proposed in the WRB11 include forcing lone parents onto JSA as soon as

their youngest child is five. This will come into effect in January 2012 and the aim is to

encourage lone parents to return to work once their youngest child is in school.55

I am concerned that this measure will create unnecessary stress on these parents, who

will need to find work that is flexible enough to cater for the children's school hours and the

possibility of taking time off for sick children or INSET days. This concern is backed by the

charity Gingerbread, who voiced similar concerns during the consultation period.56I believe

that JSA requirements to actively seek full-time work will also negatively impact on lone

parents without additional family support.

Landlords will be less likely to accept Local Housing Allowance (LHA) recipients once the

payment is linked to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rather than the Retail Price Index

(RPI), as the LHA increases may not match the market rent. The CPI does not take into

account housing costs. This will negatively affect vulnerable people living in private rented

accommodation who may fall into rent arrears.57

I believe that it is unfair to use a fiscal tool that explicitly excludes housing costs to

determine the rate of increase of those same housing costs. I believe that the people who

experience the most difficulty in finding and keeping full-time employment will be the most

disadvantaged by these measures, and the proposal is certainly not protecting them.

Social tenants will be affected by the reduction in Housing Benefit for under-occupied

properties. Although it seems reasonable to ask people to move into smaller accommodation

if necessary to free up the social tenancy market, there are not enough properties available

to move these people into.58As a result many tenants may fall into arrears and face eviction

from their properties. This creates a tautological situation whereby the Housing Associations

need money to build more properties for people to afford to live in, but with rent arrears and

a lack of stability in the social market financial companies may refuse to lend sufficient

money to build those houses.59

Furthermore, the move to cap the amount of benefits one household can receive at50060 will cause even more difficulty for vulnerable groups, as they may not be able to

60 (Ibid. p 18)


58Birch2011

57Crown Copyright2011, pp.17, 25-27

56 (Ibid.)


Page 21of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


22/29

Welfare Reform Bill

afford to top-up their rent. Estimates suggest that 40,000 people could be made homeless

by the new proposals61, and will affect families who may have to move away from their

communities to find affordable housing. This could have a direct knock-on effect on

employment as these decanted families may have to move far away from their jobs in order

to find suitable affordable accommodation, and may have to leave extended family behind

who could help them with childcare and other support that would allow the family to work. 62

Again, I believe that lone parents will suffer the most from these changes.

62 (Ibid. pp23-24)

61Boffey et al.2011

Page 22of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


23/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Conclusion:

Although current welfare reform in the UK looks progressive compared to the 1940s, I

would argue that we are moving backwards rather than forwards. Many of the ideologies

currently espoused echo the ideologies from the sixteenth century and the Victorian era.

During the Victorian era, workhouses were introduced to discourage the use of welfare

benefits as a way of life. Entering the workhouse was seen as a last resort.63The

cornerstone of the institution was that doing anypaid work was better than entering the

workhouse.

I would argue that abolishing the workhouses and introducing comprehensive benefits

has encouraged generations of dependent people who would rather choose a relatively

good life on benefits, than working for a pittance.

However, there is a lot of discrepancy between how the benefits system affects different

groups in society: a single person trying to cope on approximately 60 a week JSA will

struggle more than a family with several children living in a big rent-free house with a total

benefit income of over 30,000 a year.64 I would argue that this family may never achieve

this level of finance through low-paid work, and that by returning to work, the family may see

a drop in their standard of living. They are caught in the benefit trap.

The welfare state currently makes it harder to return to work due to its comprehensive

and often complicated system of passported benefits. I believe it is a good thing that the UK

has begun to replace this wide variety of benefits with an ever-decreasing range that are

monitored and sanctioned where necessary.

I believe that, although we have a nation of people who have had different expectations

for generations, the idea of promoting the dignity and responsibility of the individual for their

own welfare, and the reduction of state help is a change that is necessary, wherenecessary.

However, I am concerned that disabled and vulnerable people are being held responsiblefor the actions of more able and 'idle' claimants. The quality of their lives is set to deteriorate

through the reforms.

I am concerned that people who are too sick or unable to sustain functional employment

will be forced into a situation that could make their conditions deteriorate further. The idea

that the state could effectively accuse them of fabricating the extent of their conditions by

moving them off sickness benefits or reducing the level of their benefits may have a

64Daily Mail2010

63Fraser2003

Page 23of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


24/29

Welfare Reform Bill

devastating effect on the mental, physical and emotional well-being of those affected. In

setting absolute targets of a 20% reduction in claimants/disability budget the government

has failed completely to honour their commitments to those who truly need the state to

support them.

Furthermore, by putting their homes and family life at risk, the government is set to create

an even bigger divide between those who can and those who simply cannotwork.

The Coalition Government's current plans undermine the very same dignity they purport

to encourage in those whose self-esteem and place in society is often low. The very real

threat that many disabled people may commit suicide as a direct result of these changes

should not be disregarded as hyperbole; the people who push through the changes without

due care and attention would, in my view, be guilty of the manslaughter of everyone who

feels forced into this position.Although I agree with welfare reform, I would therefore argue that in its current form the

WRB11 makes a mockery of the pledge "to protect the poorest and most vulnerable in

society". It is nothing more than political spin and the Government should be ashamed of

themselves.

Page 24of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


25/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Works CitedBBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/messageboards/NF2322273?

thread=7004085&post=95505288Ouch! Didability Forums[Online]2009[Cited: 26 05

2011]Posts up till 2011http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/messageboards/NF2322273?

thread=7004085&post=95505288

BBC News National Results after 650 of 650news.bbc.co.uk[Online]06 05 2010

[Cited: 07 07 2011]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

UK Politics Blair determined on welfare reformnews.bbc.co.uk[Online]23 05 1999

[Cited: 01 07 2011]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/350558.stm

BBC NI minister 'vigilant for unjust welfare reform cuts'bbc.co.uk[Online]03 10 2010

[Cited: 20 05 2011]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11462542

Victory in overpaid benefits casebbc.co.uk/news[Online]14 10 2009[Cited: 05 06

2011]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8307059.stm

Birch, Jules Going spareinsidehousing.co.uk[Online]21 06 2011[Cited: 10 07

2011]http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/home/blogs/going-spare/6516194.blog

Boffey, Daniel; Helm, Toby Eric Pickles warns David Cameron of rise in homeless families

riskguardian.co.uk[Online]02 07 2011[Cited: 03 07 2011]http://www.guardian.co.uk/

politics/2011/jul/02/eric-pickles-david-cameron-40000-homeless

Cawston, Thomas How to scale back welfare spending - and close the deficit

Conservative Home: Centre Right[Online]14 10 2010[Cited: 29 05 2011]http://

conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2010/10/thomas-cawston.html

Cookson, Matthew Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government: when Labour's best wasn't good

enoughsocialist worker online[Online]16 08 2003[Cited: 09 07 2011]http://

www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=3048

Crown Copyright Early day motion 1529www.parliament.uk[Online]03 03 2011[Cited:

20 05 2011]http://www.parliament.uk/edm/print/2010-11/1529

Page 25of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


26/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Welfare Reform Bill: Reform of disability benefits, Housing Benefit, and other

measuresparliament.uk[Online]04 03 2011[Cited: 26 05 2011]www.parliament.uk/

briefing-papers/RP11-23

Welfare Reform Bill: Universal Credit provisionsparliament.uk[Online]07 03 2011

[Cited: 26 05 2011]www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP11-24

What to do if your benefit is overpaid[Online][Cited: 19 05 2011]http://

www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/BenefitsTaxCreditsAndOtherSupport/

BeginnersGuideToBenefits/DG_10035707

Daguerre, Anne; Taylor-Gooby, Peter Welfare reform in the UK, 1985-2002kent.ac.uk

[Online]2002[Cited: 20 05 2011]http://www.kent.ac.uk/wramsoc/workingpapers/

firstyearreports/nationalreports/ukcountryreport.pdf

Daily Mail Daughter of benefits scrounger with TENTH child on the way brands her own

father 'lazy and useless'dailymail.co.uk[Online]17 08 2010[Cited: 23 06 2011]http://

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303794/Daughter-benefits-scrounger-tenth-child-way-

brands-father-lazy-useless.html

Derby Evening Telegraph Miners' Strike, 1984-85: Dennis SkinnerBygone Derbyshire

[Online]02 02 2010[Cited: 15 06 2011]http://www.bygonederbyshire.co.uk/stories/8203-

Miners-Strike-1984-85-Dennis-Skinner/article-1798014-detail/article.html

Dickson, Niall UK Politicsnews.bbc.co.uk[Online]27 09 1999[Cited: 09 07

2011]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/458626.stm

Disability Alliance Welfare Reform Act 2007disabilityalliance.org[Online]20 06 2011

[Cited: 01 07 2011]http://www.disabilityalliance.org/ibchange.htm

Welfare Reform Act 2009disabilityalliance.org[Online]20 06 2011[Cited: 01 07

2011]http://www.disabilityalliance.org/welfare5.htm

Donnison, Steve; Whitehead, Holiday IB to ESA pilot begins

www.benefitsandwork.co.uk[Online]11 10 2010[Cited: 05 06 2011]http://

www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/latest-news/1254-ib-to-esa-pilot-begins

Duncan-Smith, Iain Welfare Reform Bill: 9th March 2011: House of Commons Debates

They Work For You[Online]09 03 2011[Cited: 30 04 2011]http://

www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2011-03-09a.919.0

Page 26of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


27/29

Welfare Reform Bill

DWP Ad-hoc analysis of incapacity benefits face-to-face assessments

Research.dwp.gov.uk[Online]12 2010[Cited: 05 06 2011]http://research.dwp.gov.uk/

asd/asd1/adhoc_analysis/2010/Adhoc_analysis_of_face_to_face_assessments.pdf

Fraser, DerekThe Evolution of the British Welfare StateHampshirePalgrave

Macmillan3rd Edition2003

Full FactWelfare Reform BillFull Fact2011Parliamentary Briefing: Second Reading, 9

March 2011

Gentleman, Amelia 'The medical was an absolute joke'guardian.co.uk[Online]23 02

2011[Cited: 12 05 2011]http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/feb/23/government-

reform-disability-benefits

Hasan, Mehdi The Liberal Democrat surrenderNew Statesman[Online]12 05 2010

[Cited: 01 06 2011]http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/mehdi-hasan/2010/05/lib-dem-

tory-labour-clegg

Humphrys, John Welfare reform: will it work this time?yougov.co.uk[Online]08 07 2011

[Cited: 09 07 2011]http://today.yougov.co.uk/commentaries/john-humphrys/will-welfare-

reform-work-this-time

Janet-M Thread: How much the law says you need to live onConsumer Action Group

[Online]18 03 2006[Cited: 12 07 2011]Post #1http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/

forum/showthread.php?2001-How-much-the-law-says-you-need-to-live-

on&p=12544&viewfull=1#post12544

Joseph Rowntree Foundation Reviewing the Right To Buyjrf.org.uk[Online]12 1998

[Cited: 11 07 2011]http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/HRD28.pdf

Kennedy, Steven Recovery of benefit overpayments due toParliament.uk[Online]08 02

2011[Cited: 05 06 2011]http://www.parliament.uk/briefingpapers/commons/lib/research/

briefings/snsp-05856.pdf

Lewis, Paul Nick Clegg: Leaders' debate 'just the start' of Liberal Democrat campaign

guardian.co.uk[Online]16 04 2010[Cited: 07 07 2011]http://www.guardian.co.uk/

politics/2010/apr/16/nick-clegg-liberal-democrat-campaign

Moore, StephenSocial Welfare Alive!CheltenhamNelson Thornes3rd Edition2002

Page 27of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


28/29

Welfare Reform Bill

Mouseprice Average current values - Bolsovermouseprice.com[Online]2011[Cited:

09 07 2011]http://www.mouseprice.com/area-guide/average-house-price/S44/Bolsover

Moynihan, Tim Legal action threatened over disability cutsindependent.co.uk[Online]02

07 2011[Cited: 11 07 2011]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/legal-action-

threatened-over-disability-cuts-2305760.html

Mumsnet Benefits calculator says I'm worse off to work - is this possible?!!!mumsnet

[Online]01 05 2011[Cited: 20 05 2011]http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/lone_parents/

748025-Benefits-calculator-says-I-39-m-worse-off-to-work/AllOnOnePage

Owen, Paul Hardest Hit: Disabled people march in London Wednesday 11 May 2011

guardian.co.uk[Online]11 05 2011[Cited: 11 05 2011]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2011/may/11/disabled-people-hardest-hit-march-in-london

Oxford Mail Tony Blair backs the New Dealoxfordmail.co.uk[Online]28 01 1999[Cited:

10 07 2011]http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/archive/1999/01/28/Oxfordshire+Archive/

6637391.Tony_Blair_backs_the_New_Deal/

Parliamentary Copyright Welfare Reform Bill 2010-11Parliament UK[Online]29 04

2011[Cited: 30 04 2011]http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/welfarereform.html

Research & Information Team Monthly Unemployment Statisticsbolsovercvp.org.uk

[Online]01 07 2010[Cited: 09 07 2011]http://bolsovercvp.org.uk/lsp_laa/lsp/mun

%20(2).pdf

The Guardian Welfare reforms will make 1.4m families worse off, says IFS

guardian.co.uk[Online]12 01 2011[Cited: 20 05 2011]http://www.guardian.co.uk/

politics/2011/jan/12/welfare-reforms-make-families-worse-off-ifs

Travis, Alan Q&A: How the coalition government will workguardian.co.uk[Online]12 05

2010[Cited: 11 07 2011]http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/12/coalition-

government-explained?intcmp=239

Unknown Author Cameron: Clegg has not sold outmetro.co.uk[Online]29 06 2010

[Cited: 01 07 2011]http://www.metro.co.uk/news/833385-cameron-clegg-has-not-sold-

out

Page 28of 29

Kirstein Gourlay


29/29

Welfare Reform Bill

w4mp.org Welfare Reforms - What's going on?[Online]21 03 2011[Cited: 26 05

2011]http://www.w4mp.org/html/library/guides/1103_welfare_reforms.asp

WelfareInfo.org Welfare Information: US Welfare System - Help for US Citizens

welfareinfo.org[Online]2011[Cited: 11 07 2011]http://www.welfareinfo.org/

Wheeler, Brian Barnsley by-election: What now for Lib Dems?news.bbc.co.uk[Online]04

03 2011[Cited: 05 07 2011]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12645311

uk welfare reform in the 21st century

Documents