The day the Minister came in for a chat

The main questions were: Why is contributory ESA time-limited, which implies that people will spontaneously recover from their mental health problems in an allocated time frame?  If they don’t, they are penalised by being shuffled onto jobseeker’s allowance, in which the “support” element of that benefit is completely withdrawn. And what about the lack of provisions in the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) for fluctuating conditions such as mental illness?  What about real support to help people get back to work?  And did the Minister recognise the very real risks that the stress of going through the system only to reassessed or refused can bring?

The atmosphere in the room was one of studious concentration.  I had expected for him to verbalise his answers and then for them to be typed, but he was straight in, with his head down, responding to the questions himself.  Occasionally, he was prompted by Rethink’s Lily Carter to respond to specific questions, the ones that had been posed time and time again.  Rethink staff, to my relief, did not give him an easy time. He remained polite and direct when we challenged him on a few points, and didn’t shrug off our questions. But there are no easy answers. It can’t be avoided that there are people out there who will be suicidal because of these changes.  As an activist, a blogger and someone with a mental illness, it is hard to feel equable towards welfare reform when I have seen first hand the effect it is having.   Government ministers do not see this, and while I do not envy Mr Grayling’s position, I am grateful that he took the time to speak to us.

People are afraid.  Fear, coupled with indignation, is the thread that ran through the web-chat.  I don’t know if Mr Grayling understands the true depth of that fear.  He is aware people are suffering due to the whole process, and the fact that it is difficult to identify who they are and thus support them seems to exasperate him.  For those fearing the thud of the ATOS envelope on the door mat, he has reassured them that they will be telephoned and kept up to date with what is happening, rather than shocked out of the blue.  He agreed that the system was flawed.   In his answers, he frequently referenced the Harrington Report (http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-review-2010.pdf), an independent review of the WCA that described the assessment as “impersonal, mechanistic and lacking in empathy”.  This may be, in part, why such a high number of assessment decisions which find someone capable of work are subsequently overturned on appeal. Other questions focused on the fact that those who carry out the assessments are neither mental health professionals, nor do they have much knowledge of mental illness.  Indeed, many of the decisions are made without - or by ignoring - the supporting evidence of psychiatrists, social workers and other professionals.  He wrote that his government will be following up the recommendations of that report, using, “mental health champions” such as charities and mental health professionals to reexamine the way people with mental illness are assessed.  But is this enough?


Some people want to work but do not have the support to do so.  The scrapping of the linking rules and ‘rapid reclaim’ won’t do much to help this. These rules meant that if someone claiming benefits - such as Incapacity Benefit - started a job but found it too much, they could quickly reclaim at the rates they were previously getting.  Now they have to start all over again. People with mental illness also face prejudice which can be a barrier to employment. Mr Grayling mentioned the Work Programme.  It is available to people on contributory ESA.  As he states, “The Work Programme providers have the job of matching individuals to vacancies, and they will only be paid if they succeed in getting people into work and then helping them stay there. They will also be paid much more to help those with disabilities and from challenging backgrounds than for conventional job seekers”.  I explained my situation.  I was on income support for three years due to having bipolar disorder.  I recently moved in with my partner, who, although he doesn’t earn nearly enough to support us both, is expected to anyway.  Because I have been unemployed for three years, I can’t claim any contributions based benefits, which means I can’t be part of the work programme.  Most employers have barely glanced at my CV, and with such huge gaps in my work history, I understand why. For now, I support myself entirely with disability living allowance.  And I’m one of the lucky ones who feels able to even attempt work.

A buzz-phrase has been, “those without financial means”.  People with partners who work - however lowly they are paid - are treated as having the financial means.  Having to rely on partners can not only cause financial strain, but emotional strain.  It isn’t good to feel like a burden.  We are, as the George Osbourne put it himself, “unsustainable”.

An hour is not enough to answer the questions that everybody has.  Mr. Grayling did seem to want to listen, and that’s part of the battle, part of what makes us feel indignant - that we’re not being listened to.  I don’t expect his answers to satisfy many people.  However, at least this discourse is happening.  It matters.