Richard Exell
One of the quietest announcements in the Budget Reports relates to Disability Living Allowance : “the government will introduce the use of objective medical assessments for all DLA claimants from 2013-14 to ensure payments are only made for as long as claimants need them.”
The Chancellor was rather more open in his speech, where he put this proposal in the context of concerns that “the costs have quadrupled in real terms to over £11 billion, making it one of the largest items of government spending.”The Chancellor made it clear that existing claimants will have to be re-tested to keep their benefit, and the context makes it plain that claimants can expect the new test to make sure that many of them will cease to qualify. In an attempt to justify this, Mr. Osborne spoke of the need to “continue to afford paying this important benefit to those with the greatest needs, while significantly improving incentives to work for others.”
The Chancellor seems to be a bit confused – DLA is not an out of work benefit, making it harder for disabled people to qualify for it will do nothing to improve – or worsen – incentives to work. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that disabled people will be paying the price for deficit reduction.
The government has a short memory. In 1997, the new Labour government inherited a similar initiative, the Benefits Integrity Project, which aimed to re-assess thousands of disabled people’s benefit entitlement. As news spread that disabled people were being forced into abject poverty and some were considering suicide, the government discovered that cutting benefits can quickly become very unpopular. The Daily Mail and its Sunday sister were particularly critical, and disabled demonstrators chained their wheelchairs to the gates of Parliament.
There is only one paragraph on this in the Budget Report, but it could turn out to be one of the most contentious measures in the whole Budget.
Comment made by Gary Vaux on Jun 27th 2010 at 9:31 pm:
The medical assessment will be based on a point-scoring system, similar in style (but not content) to Incapacity Bneefit and ESA. Osborne has said that it will save 20% of the DLA budget – on what evidence? Assuming the criteria for getting the benefit doesnt change, and what is changing is the method by which its assessed, how does Osborne know that 20% of those who currently get DLA will no longer get it? Or is it simply the case that ATOS, who supply the doctors to the DWP, will be told that they have to fail at least 1 in 5 in order to meet Osbornes target? The medicals will no doubt be as basic as the ones used for ESA – a 20-30 minute chat with someone who doesnt know the medical history or the claimant, and then a report written up that bears little resemblance to the facts. It happens now with ESA and I cant see how DLA claims, handled by the same sort of process, will be any different. And cutting DLA means cutting the numbers getting carers allowance too of course – another ‘saving’.
Comment made by Anon on Jun 28th 2010 at 11:50 pm:
When I first heard ‘famous’ George Obsourne demands to cut or re-assessed of DLA as of 2013. Well, he is certainly NOT famous any more! There are lot of disabled people angered toward his iniatives, its like having our back stabbing. And you know what, I do not like him. What even more sicker is that David Cameron is supporting him especially (correct me if Im wrong) did he had a disabled son died 2 years ago. Surely, David must know what it is feels like living or looking disabled person?!? Its not an easy life to lead.
I can confirm that DLA is NOT a benefit at all.
I am profoundly deaf since birth (aged 28) and receives DLA (middle rate) and also diagnoised heart congential disease. My hearing balance changed dramatically and may possible to have major operation (cholear implant) few years time. This means a deptht counselling, therapy and adapting new environment (back to square one). Whereas my heart at previous routine check up they discovered I have heart that rhymns slowly leaving me severe tiredness, chest pain, and shortness of breath (particularly during activities such as climbing the stairs). To tends feel tired after walking a long distance or working full time.
I have been in and out of employment since 1999. And in 2007-2008 I was employed by a company that failed set up my special phone for 8 months, yes, you heard it – 8 months. having said that before 6 months probabtion period I demanded them to sort it out otherwise it will damage my competentices. however, at 6 months probabtion period they felt extending a probabtion period was necessary becuase I was given a lack of support in term of setting up the speical phone i required. An Extendation of 3 months used and guess what, they dismissed me on ground of lack of competencies. I could not believe what I heard it was like beyond the joke. Colleagues could not believe either and supported me through appealing against them on ground unfair dismissal and lack of duty of mangement in term of reasonable adjustment. the reason why they failed is because it was costing and expensive to change to the number (telephone number) Whlist unemployed after being unfairly dismissed I felt I had my confidence knocked and fear for my future, thinking it seems unrealisitic to sustain an employment, permenantly. I discovered majority disabled people are being recruited temporary rather than permanantly. Why? Perhaps employers are too scared to recruit despite we are protected within Disabled Discrimination Act and the costs of reasonable adjustment support from Access to Work is granted. Not many employers have heard or know more about Access to Work.
Due high unemployment in disabled catorgory since recession appeared. Who failed to spot the ‘recession’ stage, yes – a former MP. So hence why should disabled people should take a blame by having it cuts or re-assessed of DLA. I did not asked to be born disabled person. DLA helps towards my living.
I am bloody work harder, and managed to find a job just still waiting to hear a starting date which is delaying a bit. The downside is that its only 6 months fixed contract. Then back to unemployed that I do not want to be classed. God knows for how long I will be unemployed for the longest I have been 6 months – 2 years.
24 years ago I was told my both consultant that my DLA does not needs to re-assessed!
What makes blood boils is that there are so many frauders claiming DLA when they ARE NOT DISABLED. Its them that needs to re-assessed every 6 months to confirm they are fit or not fit to work. If appears to be fit then DLA should be ceased.
I certainly think that George Osbourn should wear an hearing aids then he should know how haunting yet it is to be deaf person. In fact try any other disabability that even more haunting than my case.
I am sincerly sorry if this forum is too long to read but it is something I want to rant at No 10! I have my rights of have my voice to be heard.
Trackback made by DLA To Be Cut From 2013 | Hello Little Lady on Jun 30th 2010 at 8:48 am:
[...] TUC Touch Stone’s Blog article on the proposed changes » [...]
Comment made by Qj on Jun 30th 2010 at 4:11 pm:
I am 36 years of age, had polio at the age of 6 months which caused paralysis of my right leg. I have extremely poor mobility and use two crutches walk around. Because of one leg paralysed, other parts of body had to compensate which meant extra wears and tears, I am subsequently developed arthritis, swollen joints, pain in good leg, arms, wrists. and over weight due to inability to do proper exercise. Being on DLA enabled me to purchased a car which mean I can go to work. The announcement have made me very anxious and i am getting panic attacks that under the new rule I might not DLA which mean I will have to surrender my mobility car, which mean I will not be able to work. Whilst I recognise govt needs to tackly the financial problem, but does it have to be at the cost of poeple with disability. Does any one had medical assessment before how does it work.. Despite my doctors, physio therapists and consultants supporting my cliam, how many times do I have to prove that “hey look at me I am disabled”
Comment made by Barry Culley on Jul 1st 2010 at 11:59 am:
I thought it worth quoting something I found on the DWP ‘Top Stories’ website as I had not seen it mentioned by anyone. It will be of interest to those on DLA who are retired. “That’s why we’re taking the decision to reassess everyone of working age on DLA, and ensure everyone in the future goes through a proper gateway to claim the benefit.” I do not agree on reassessment at all but perhaps this may put the minds of some Pensioners at rest, particularly if they have gone through several so called ‘medicals’ carried out by Doctors appointed by the DHSS/DSS/BA/DWP or whatever the current title happens to be!
Comment made by jackie on Jul 2nd 2010 at 9:11 am:
I broke my back 3 years ago after an accident, i am in alot of pain all of the time and live on pain killers. i dont have problems with mobility as i find it’s much better when i’m on the move. but i have a great need for help in the home as i cannot bend at all, so find it very difficult to do things for myself which involve any kind of bending. i work, ok i only do 10 hrs a week but i work.
Comment made by miss manchester on Jul 14th 2010 at 9:16 pm:
I am 28years old and i am profoundly deaf, i became deaf when I contracted menigitis when i was 8yrs old.
I do recieve DLA and it helps me get around transport wise and it helps me just to do normal everyday tasks.
DLA is not a benifit it is a allowance which helps disabled people, I do understand that some people get fustrated about DLA claimers, but is it fair to punish genuine disabled people?, we have to go through tests everyday or our lives and we do not need to be prodded anymore.
I hope that the genuine disabled claimers are exempt from these tests because we have enough proof with our white cane, hearing aids/sign language and wheelchairs.
Blind, profoundly deaf and wheelchair bound should not have to go through these tests!
Comment made by Judy on Jul 31st 2010 at 12:12 am:
I just needed to say something about the disbelief expressed in this thread that the number of people who are disabled has tripled since DLA was introduced…
When DLA was introdeced in 1992, assessment up until then had been done by… wait for it… medical assessment. The breakthrough with DLA was that it allowed the claimant more of a voice and looked at the care or supervision that was REASONABLY needed, not MEDICALLY needed.
Also, over the years, some of the DWPs more outrageous decisions have been challenged and overturned by the legal system – e.g. when they suggested that people could avoid falls by staying sitting down…
It has also become recognised within DLA caselaw that needing encouragement/ reminding/ emotional support can leave a person as ‘disabled’ as needing physical help… and the effect of these and similar judgements has been, quite naturally and justly, to increase entitlement.
The implication that DLA is currently awarded without medical scutiny is also wholly bogus – if the DWP have any doubt about entitlement, they already have the power to subject people to assessment by their own doctors.
The DWP’s own research suggests that the level of fraud in DLA is 0.5%… a long, long way from the 20% this cut is hoping to save.
And let’s face it, that is what it is – a cut – at the expense of some very vulnerable individuals.
Comment made by Imran abbas on Aug 16th 2010 at 2:21 pm:
Sir,
I want to ask that IMF AND THE WORLD BANK started prpgrammes for the rehabilitation of the disabled persons some time study from the news papers or hear that on the TV but who is implementing these all,Any body cares about it or not so i think no becouse this only remains a debateful issure where the rights been giving to the disabled persons and spcially the country like PAKISTAN.
The fund given to them for rehabilitation they just enjoye with that money never give rights on any plateforms to the disabled persons.
any querry about this email me my email id is ([email protected]).
Regards,
Imran Abbas