[lisa1cares]

Dear minister

considering the fact that a lot that are mentally ill and on DLA get middle rate care component a have a few questions regarding the new PIP.

Is it true that is there is only going to be 2 levels in the new PIP?

what are the criteria that is going to be put in place for each level?

If you are currently on the Middle rate of DLA are you more likely to be put on the lower rate of PIP?

[Burnt Umber]

Dear Mr. Grayling,

Why are people like myself, with serious mental illnesses not exempt from receiving an ESA50?
It would be less far less distressing, if evidence was sought from community mental health teams via an ESA113.

Why are people like myself, who are currently on incapacity benefit, and PCA exempt sent ESA50’s?

I have been admitted as an emergency, to a psychiatric unit on two occasions since September. This is due to the imminent threat of being transferred to WRAG ESA or even being refused and having to apply for JSA. This isn’t helping me, it is only making my condition deteriorate further. I know this, because until September, I had not been in hospital for over five years.

Regards,

Burnt Umber

[lisa1cares]

dear Chris Grayling MP minister of employment why is it you have come to talk to us and not Maria Miller Minister for Disabled People ?

is it because the government think all mentally ill people are fit for work ?

[Bub]

Why is it that people who have appealed and won against an ATOS decision, then have to go through the same rigmarole, a few months later, and in some cases, weeks later? Isn't this just the worst case of intimidation and harrassment on the weakest members of society and is a waste of tax payers money? Are you going to ensure that claimants who have won on appeal are going to be safeguarded from this?

[lisa1cares]

Dear minister
I have a few questions regarding the internal review of the WCA and the harrington review

Is it true to say that the current WCA is failing to pick up on many people that are ill and seeing them as fit for work when they are not totally fit for work?

Do you feel that the assessment should fully take into account the mental state of a person?

Is it true that the internal review was widely criticised?

Is it true that you are implementing some of the internal review changes?

Is it true that in the internal review the amount of questions are being shortened?

Do you not feel by shortening the amount of questions asked on the WCA you are thus making it harder to pick up on many peoples needs?

The current system is not working and is seen as being prejudiced against those that are mentally ill, the internal review will only worse this thus making it harder to see the full state of mind of those with mental health problems. Do you think that it is wrong to be prejudiced against the mentally ill? and if so why are you implementing parts of the internal reveiw?

Would it not be better to totally disregard the internal review and implement all the changes that the harrington review shows that are needed

Do you not think that implementing parts of the internal review will only take away the positive impact that the harrington review will have?

Do you not feel by implementing parts of the internal review you are only going to worsen the WCA for those that are mentally ill?

Do you not think that implementing parts of the internal review will only cause the rates of appeal to go up and thus costing the tax payer more?

Do you not think that the current appeal rate is far to high?

Do you not think that with the number of people winning their appeals (currently around 40%) it clearly shows that the ATOS WCA is massively floored and costly?

Do you not think there should be a totally different assessment for those that are mentally ill and also the views of consultants and GP's regarding the mental state of a mentally ill person should be taken into consideration?

This is the second time I have typed this out as the first one did not post so I am missing some of the questions I had and will add them when I can remember what they was thank you

As a mentally ill person I expect to be treated fairly and it is clear that the current ATOS WCA does not do this nor will it if you implement any of the internal review changes. As a mentally ill person I expect to be treated like any other sick or disabled person but as things stand this is not happening and nor will it happen if parts of the internal review are implemented. It is unfair that the full mental health problems are not being taken into account like others that are sick and disabled. We as the mentally ill are already currently in a system that lacks support and if you implement the changes in the internal review there will be an even larger lack of support and thus leaving many that are mentally ill struggling along with out the much need support they need.
many thanks
lisa1cares

This post has been edited by lisa1cares: 31 January 2011 - 04:26 AM

[bertiebo]

Mr Grayling,

I have a BA(Hons) and a PGCE. I resigned from my job as a teacher in 2008 due to suffering a breakdown brought about by stressors in the teaching profession; namely 5 different head teachers in 4 years, threats of redundancy, a bullying boss who got rid of 16 existing very good teachers and appalling behaviour of children. Despite numerous letters of complaint to our local LEA from staff and parents, our views were completely ignored.

I now suffer from depression and anxiety and at the present time, am unable to work due to my illness. My psychiatrist has stated that I would not be able to return to the teaching profession as I am no longer able to cope with the pressure.

I have never claimed benefit before and find myself being treated with disdain and lack of respect. My first experience with Atos healthcare was humiliating and degrading to say the least. I need support due to suffering from panic attacks and attempted to co-ordinate an appointment where my mother could take me. I was greeted with an offhand and rude approach and a very thick, foreign accent which I found very difficult to understand. This experience and the impending stress of the appointment set me back and I had a relapse.

Due to feeling pressurised by the benefit system, I enrolled voluntarily with Ingeus (formally Work Directions). I was seen by a mental health advisor and a job advisor. There were tremendous discrepancies in the approach of both; the former was very supportive and understood that I needed to take things at my own pace and the latter kept pressuring me into work. This was of course due to the fact that he recieved a huge bonus of £100 for every client he forced into work. As a consequence of this, I again suffered a relapse.

Mr Grayling, being on Incapacity Benefit is akin to being hunted by a pack of wolves. I see my Doctor on a regular basis and send my sick notes in every 3 months. I am baffled that no-one seems to take this into account or requests access to my medical notes. My lifeline is a Rethink Horticultural project where I have access to talking therapy with people who understand and a chance to relax in a non pressurised environment. We have just discovered that our funding is being withdrawn with effect from 31st March.

So, our local council has forced me to loose my professional career through not listening and now it is taking away my lifeline and that of many others.

Mr Graying, I apologise for the 'background check' but I feel it imperitive that you view those of us with mental health problems as real, intelligent people and not lump us with the lawless few who work the benefit system to their own advantage.

I would like to know the following;

People with existing mental health problems find it difficult to cope day to day without the added pressure of a medical and the job centre. Why do these people not take into account sick notes we send in and the views of the medical professionals we see on a day to day basis?

What will you do personally to reduce the anxiety and pressure felt by many mental health sufferers who are receiving benefit.

What will you do personally to reduce the impact of the cuts imposed by the present government on mental health sufferers. (The cuts will undoubtedly prolong peoples claim for incapacity benefit as they are unable to access the services that improve recovery and keep them well.)

Mr Grayling, in the godless, lawless and tough society we live in, I am campaigning to bring the problems of mental health sufferers to the forefront and to melt the icy hearts of those who don't understand. I realise that mental health is a difficult and emotive subject and unless 'you have been there and got the T-shirt' it is very difficult to comprehend. Mental illness is a very 'real' problem; Would you treat cancer sufferers in the same way? I think not.

[jellyfish]

Mr Grayling

The Harrington report raised some very serious questions about the suitability of the current ESA assessment by Atos, and all recommendations were accepted by the government.

If the WCA is not fit for purpose, why are not ALL the recommendations being put into place before the mass migration in April? Surely the fact that 40% of appeals are successful, would it not make more financial sense to halt the testing, until it IS fit for purpose?

One further question. How can the government justify the fact that these tests are making the health of thousands of mental health patients worse. Surely this is morally if not legally wrong?!

I look forward to hearing your response

[Loan Ranger]

Mr. Grayling,
every three months there is a DWP Press Release announcing the latest released ESA/WCA statistics in which each time (since July 2010) you and the DWP (acting under your guidance) have been making statements which create a narrative maligning 75% of ESA and IB claimants including the long-term ill and disabled as malingerers. By lumping in "Claims closed before assessment complete" with "Fit for Work" [1] [2] [3] these press releases are selectively using statistics in a misleading way and encouraging anti-disabled prejudice and scapegoat making tabloid bile [4 (i-iii)] which causes us distress, and even greater suffering to those of us with mental health disorders.
Furthermore, the fact that the press releases omit to clarify the full meaning of "Claim closed before assessment complete" leaves an open door for more scurrilous reporting (e.g. Macer Hall in the Daily Express 26/01/2011 [4 (i)] - "...36 per cent simply abandoned their claims as soon as they were told to undergo new work capability assessments introduced to weed out scroungers") [5]

Please could you answer the following questions without using the frequently trotted out "help" and "support" monologues, they have no relevance to my questions.
Neither do I wish to hear (re. the tabloids), "take it to the Press Complaints Commission", I've done it before and it's a waste of time - self regulatory bodies are self-serving and the PCC ranks among the worst of them.

Question 1.
Would you agree with me that conjoining the "Claims closed before assessment complete" cohort with the "Fit for Work" cohort within the same sentence (by using the word "or" in the examples [1] to [3] provided) is misleading and should cease, i.e. clearly separate sentences or paragraphs will be used in future DWP ESA/WCA stats announcement press releases.
Question 2.
Would you agree with me that a footnote should be added to future DWP ESA/WCA stats announcement press releases. (See example below [5])
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Footnotes:
[1] http://www.dwp.gov.u...http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/press-releases/2010/july-2010/dwp095-10-270710.shtml

Quote

The latest statistics for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) applications show that three-quarters of applicants are being found fit for work or are stopping their claim before their assessment period has been completed.

Minister for Employment, Chris Grayling said:

"The vast majority of people who are applying for these benefits are being found fit for work or have stopped their claim. These are people who under the old system would have been abandoned on incapacity benefits. It's a clear indication of why reform is so urgently needed.

"This is exactly why we are going to reassess everyone claiming incapacity benefits for their ability to work, from this October. They will now be given the support they need to get back to work and will be expected to look for work if they are able to do so."

[2] http://www.dwp.gov.u...http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/press-releases/2010/oct-2010/dwp141-10-261010.shtml

Quote

26 October 2010 – Grayling: latest figures show the vast majority of people being found fit for work

Three-quarters of people applying for the new Employment and Support Allowance programme (ESA) are being found fit for work after undergoing the Work Capability Assessment or stop their claim before they complete their medical assessment, according to official statistics published today.

[3] http://www.dwp.gov.u...http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/press-releases/2011/jan-2011/dwp008-11.shtml

Quote

25 January 2011 – Majority of people found fit for work as Government presses ahead with reforms

The vast majority of people who apply for Employment and Support Allowance are either being found fit for work after undergoing a Work Capability Assessment or stop their claim before they complete their medical assessment.

The official statistics, published today, demonstrate why Ministers are determined to reform the welfare system and press ahead with the reassessment of those on the old style incapacity benefit (IB), which began in Burnley and Aberdeen last year and will roll out across the country later this year.

Employment Minister Chris Grayling:

"It’s unacceptable that so many people have been written off to a lifetime on benefits and these figures show just how vital it is that everyone who has the potential to work receives the right help and support.

"We are determined to get the medical assessment right and provide the necessary help for those that need it, however these figures show just how many people are found to be fit for work and not entitled to ESA.

[4] (i) http://www.dailyexpr...http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/225311
Headline: "75% ON SICK ARE SKIVING" (Wednesday January 26,2011 By Macer Hall)

Quote

"Officials who carried out fitness tests on people claiming incapacity-related benefits found that 39 per cent were well enough to get a job.

And a further 36 per cent simply abandoned their claims as soon as they were told to undergo new work capability assessments introduced to weed out scroungers."

(ii) http://www.dailymail...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1324035/75-incapacity-claimants-fit-work-Benefits-test-weeds-workshy.html (27th October 2010)

Quote

"Three-quarters of people who applied for new benefits for the long-term sick failed tests to prove they were too ill to work."

(iii) http://www.dailymail...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298192/76-say-theyre-sick-work.html (28th July 2010)

Quote

"Three-quarters of those claiming to be too sick to work are fit and able to look for a job, figures reveal."

[5] (My example of an additional explanatory footnote for future ESA/WCA stats press releases)
Claim closed before assessment complete.
The Work Capability Assessment (WCA) does not take place before the 13th week of the Employment Support Allowance (ESA) claim, by which time claimants with shorter duration health conditions will have recovered and returned to either employment or Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) voluntarily. A significant proportion of claimants with shorter duration health conditions may never need to attend a WCA, for example:
1. JSA claimants, they are required to transfer their claim from JSA to ESA after their second week of (un)"well notes" from their Doctor.
2. The self-employed, they can claim ESA immediately after a few 'waiting days' it they provide (un)"well notes" from their Doctor .
3. Employees whose employers don't administer Statutory Sick Pay, they too can claim ESA immediately after a few 'waiting days' it they provide (un)"well notes" from their Doctor.
If someone in one of these groups (above) gets ill or is injured (e.g pneumonia or a fracture etc.) and subsequently recovers before 13 weeks (which typically they will), and then returns to work or JSA of their own accord before the WCA is due, they are recorded by the DWP as having stopped their claim before they complete their medical assessment. This does not mean that they have "abandoned their claims as soon as they were told to undergo new work capability assessments introduced to weed out scroungers", and newspapers should avoid making statements to this effect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A better version of the above with working links to footnotes (named anchors) is available c/o this link.

[lisa1cares]

because of the above post I have this question about this


"And a further 36 per cent simply abandoned their claims as soon as they were told to undergo new work capability assessments introduced to weed out scroungers."

Did you ever think that some of those 36% stopped their claim because the thought of going through the ordeal of the medical assessment was to much of a stress up on them? and how many of these 36% later put forward another claim for ESA once they had the right support from organisations/family/friends to help them through the WCA ?

do you not think that releasing such scandalous statements you are only making things much worse for those that are truely sick, disabled and mentally ill ?

"Officials who carried out fitness tests on people claiming incapacity-related benefits found that 39 per cent were well enough to get a job."

and of the above is it not true that many went on to appeal and around 40% that appealed won there cases and was declared not fit for work?

I say that you minister of the DWP are the reason for all our stress right now and it is you that has caused people like me not to sleep at night. and more to the point it is you that has caused the latest stigma against the mentally ill, sick and disabled. I feel that you should openly and publicly apologise to us all.

It is you minister that has now written us all off as scroungers offering no support and saying people are fit for work when they are not. and this clearly shows how you feel about disability claimants, WE ARE NOT SCROUNGERS. as I have said before all we want is to be treated fairly and you and your system is not doing that. instead of being written off to a life time of benefits many are because of you now being written off to a lifetime of suffering. I would rather have a lifetime of benefits then a life time of suffering any day of the week.

[Chris - Rethink]

Sorry, but posts here that aren't a direct question to the Minister will be moved elsewhere on the forum, or possibly removed.

Non-question posts about private contracting in the welfare system can go on this thread.

You can also start or join a topic here.

Please read the live webchat guidelines.

Thanks,

Chris
RethinkTalk admin

[george]

Could you work out what % of income I have lost due to cut backs and if this is disportionate amount. My benefit has been reduced by £257 per month.My total income for myself and my 16yr old son was £ 1007 per mth. This includes housing costs. Living in derelict mitcham in a small home,I can't move to cheaper accomodation unless I move totally out of London. I have worked / lived for 27yrs before becoming ill and been a single parent 11 yrs[widowed] I am vulnerable and my son is doing GCSE's . There is no help, prehaps it would be easier if we were not around, who is monitoring suicides or does anyone care,saves money! Oppression = Depression, Confucious said that if you solve the problems of the family you solve problems in society. Einstien says you can't solve problems with the same thinking that created them, Prehaps you should have Buddy scheme for Ministers where they have to job share with someone on benefits.We might get some common sense into the Commons rather than upper class judgements.

[lost32]

Mr Grayling it is a fact that a trait of severe mental illness is to isolate one self from, wider society and also from the stigma that accompanies these illness from the population. It makes it very difficult for people like myself to access medical treatment as we find it hard to speak about our problems. So at least in my case I have very little interaction with my GP and due to cuts I had to give up my CPN. So I do wonder how easy it will be to assess a person like myself and not pass him fit for work because of the assumption that he must be well as we actively avoid as much as possible contact with medical personnel. I have a diagosis from a psychiatrist 8 years ago of paranoid psychosis and have been in hospital and supported accomdation for a number of years, yet someone who ticks boxes and fills forms in wouldn't see what my life is like day to day which causes me huge difficulties.They wouldn't have understanding perhaps of the decision my psychiatrist took to remove my medication as the side effects were seriously damaging my health and could have caused long term physical damage.

Iam also concerned about the assessment process it'self and it's suitability for those with severe mental illness. I do not have the strength now to organise futher medical evidence or to access support workers to help me through this as my illness means I become paranoid about what they think about my appearance and they are talking about me. I seriously can't see me leaving the house for this medical when in my anxious episodes I have to venture out early morning when it is dark to buy food to avoid people looking at my body. Tesco's is too much for me some days. and I go days without a meal. I personally think those with our diagnois should be exempt from a face to face medical at the very least we should have an automatic home visit as standard if we must be assessed. You have medical information from consultants to back this up,so I fail to see the point in potentially hurting the most vunerable in society.

I wonder how much money your decisions will save if people like myself have breakdowns and end up in psychiatric hospitals and placing increased demands on the community mental health teams and perhaps in some unfortunate cases the police and secondary medical care .I wonder if you will look peoples relatives in the eyes if tragedies happens owing to your extremely cruel decisions on this and your efforts to demonise people like myself in the media. I do wonder how people like you sleep at night.

I challenge you Mr Grayling to spend the day with me, living my life to give you an education on how it feels to live as a person with severe mental illness. And listen while I explain to you in great depth what we deal with day to day week in week out. This perhaps will give you a greater understanding of the human beings behind the statistics .

[Melrose]

To Mr Grayling,
I consider myself to be a reasonably intelligent person but I have to say I feel somewhat confused, perhaps you can explain something to me. I used to run my own business, and like most self employed I worked very hard, often working 18 hours a day. In 2002 I had to have emergency surgery when I was told that the Irritable Bowel Syndrome that I had been treated for the past 15 years was in fact Chronic Chrons' Disease. I had to have a further surgery a year later. After losing half my body weight, I was told by my consultant and my doctor that if I did not stop working I would die. You see in order to even go out of the house for any reason (say shopping), I cannot eat or drink anything until I return home. Ive no wish to bore you with all the medical details, but in short, as soon as I eat or drink anything it 'kicks start' my system and I have to go to the toilet. If I eat or drink then go out I suffer the indignity of bouts of incontinence. If you know anything about Chrons Disease you will know how debilitating it is, I also have Chrons related arthritis which makes it impossible to walk on many days due to the level of pain in my joints.
I reluctantly gave up my business and went on Incapacity Benefit. For me it was a devastating blow, I went into depression and was literally grieving for years. Now Im being told that in order to stop me 'languishing' on sickness benefits, you are quite willing to force me out to work where, once my health is once again critical with starvation and dehydration, I will no doubt have to go back on sickness benefit. I am a single mother with a son who has Aspergers Syndrome, it is essential that i remain alive until he at least is mature enough to live an independent life. I feel I am being sacrificed on the pyre of Tory ideology and whilst I already realise that you have no sense of social justice or good conscience, I just wanted to let you know the damage you are doing to people like me.
Now to my question, People are being assessed by ATOS for ESA etc at considerable expense to the taxpayer. Our doctors and consultants apparently do not have the competence to decide whether their patient is fit enough for work or not. As part of the Government's NHS reforms, you say that 80 billion will be handed over to GP's consortia because they know their patients best and they know what is best for their patients. So, as I understand it, when it comes to cutting the amount of benefit payments and receivers the GP's and Consultants the GP's are the last people you trust, yet when it comes to forcing through Lansley's unwanted demolition of the NHS the GP's can not only be doctors but also accountants! What a glaring double standard. I will listen with interest to your reply.

[Saz]

I have lived with various physical disabilities from a very early age. These physical problems and what they mean for me day-to-day invariably cause stress and depression. I was awarded DLA for life, as my condition will never get better. I have encountered many problems in the various workplaces I have been in and this has added to my stress and depression. I am therefore likely to go through life drifting from one type of job to another and spending large periods on benefits. I will, therefore, have very few prospects in the near and distant future, despite my intelligence and strong work ethic.

Can the minister please tell me what the proposed reforms to welfare will mean for my future and for others in similar situations?

As a former student of politics, my first suggestion would be to look at tightening up some of the relevant peices of legislation rather than going for what might seem like the easiest solution but may infact make things worse for so many.

[des-rethink]

The members who use Rethink/Bridges in Norwich and are deeply worried about the proposed changes to the benefit system and would like to ask the minister the following questions:

Why do people with major health problems have to re-apply for benefits with the threat of them being reduced and taken away?

Is it really neccessary to cut sickness benefit to those suffering long-term illness, such as poor mental health, causing even more distress, worry and compounding their problem even more?

Are you aware that there is a significant number of the long term mentally ill too unwell to be able to work?

Rather than helping the more vulnerable sections of society, the proposed benefit changes appear to be penalising those people suffering illness and disablility. Added to the drastic cuts being made by local authority services, the foreseeable future looks particularly bleak for milions of vulnerable people who in many instances could, with help, play their part in 'The Big Society'. Would the minister like to comment?

Are government minister's wages going to be subject to the same scrutiny and re-assessment as those on benefits will be experiencing?

[adv]

Research shows and people’s experiences confirm that unsuitable and unstable accommodation for people with enduring mental health difficulties has a very detrimental effect on their health and often leads to a crisis in a person’s life.

Home Ownership, through a shared ownership scheme such as HOLD has proved a very valuable way of providing good quality, long term homes for people with enduring mental health difficulties.

What assurances can the minister give to Carol , a shared owner in Oxfordshire, with an enduring mental health problem and the many hundreds of others in a similar situation, who are in danger of losing their homes due to the changes to Support for Mortgage Interest introduced in October last year?

[lost32]

My Grayling , do you feel articles like these provide any benefit for society apart from enabling you to soften up the public for your decision to make life miserable for many vunerable people?

http://www.dailymail...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1353111/Disability-benefits-Half-claimants-asked-prove-eligibility.html

Do you supply these figures to the Daily Mail direct? Is the plan to bully enough people to become more unwell and commit suicide?

I just wonder ,whether you have considered if you get this wrong and there are many high profile media stories of people being removed from benefit with horrible results that this very same paper which is notorious for it's strident views will continue to support you? Just as they can stir things up for disabled people right now and serve a purpose for you, they can just as soon turn against you,with it's huge readership. Remember that newspapers do not just influence the public mood they can also reflect the public mood.

They want people to read their rag more because that is what makes them money than any political allegience.This newspaper will not care about their role on all this ,they have very short memories, and they will put the blame squarely at your door, and it will be you and you friends joining us in the dole queue not them.

I believe the term dancing with the devil would be more apt. This paper is already critical of the coalitions policies in other areas.It might seem it,but they are not your friends.I can just imagine the hysterical headlines they will use to make you and others out to be very similar to members of nazi party to the general public, and they will make sure to including quotes from grieving relatives,blaming you and your collegues for these deaths or hospital admissions. The guardian will look positvely tame in comparison to how the Mail and the sun will treat you.

A good example of the Daily Mail being very hypocritical,is it's articles talking about womens bodies ,as well as mens appearance which really affect people like myself with body image disorders and eating disorders. Then they will shamelessly do another article bemoaning how many young people suffer from these disorders and all tragic it is.

A final thing I want to say to you Mr Grayling is this. I was a lifelong conservative supporter. Before I became unwell , I was a member of my local conservative future and was treasurer. To me being a conservative also means not just looking after British interests abroad but also looking after the interests of all British people . I do not believe your cabinet have fulfilled this covenant. You have lost your sense of fairness, and doing what is right and instead care more about pleasing your european masters and your banker friends. I wonder just who benefits from the likes of atos getting a lot of money from yourselves to do these medicals?Oh don't get me wrong I know ESA was started under Labour, I also know that it was the Labour party who wanted to get rid of DLA, and it was the conservative party under David Cameron who talked about protecting Disabled people and said he would keep DLA.Yet another promise broken.You people may not realise this but some of us keep track of what you are doing in power. I voted for you. Not just because of this,but because I knew all of what Labour was about when it got in in 1997,despite only being 17.

You call this 'protection'. I honestly don't know how you sleep at night. I will never vote conservative again and in future I will be voting UKIP, and in the future if I ever get better because a miracle occurs, I will be joining them, and they will benefit from my intellect,and believe me you would much rather me pissing out the tent than pissing in . You and your collegues are sellouts and a disgrace.

[Melrose]

I would like to know why the Tribunal Service's independence is being compromised by you allowing people from the DWP and ATOS to go through the appeals bundles held for consideration by the TS? How can there be independence when you are sending people in by the back door to nobble the decisions before it is even heard? Ive already heard the nonsense about this meaning people who are sick and disabled not having to attend tribunals but if you did a proper and fair assessment in the first place then those people wouldnt have the stress of going through a tribunal so dont give us that crock! The Harrington report states:

“In exceptional cases, if the decision maker feels that the appeal has no reasonable prospect of success, they may apply for a direction under the provisions of the Tribunals Procedure (First Tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement) Rules 2008.” So, this isn’t just about 'helping claimants', it’s more about forcing claimants out of the appeals system where possible.

To borrow the words from someone who put this better than I, "We can be absolutely certain what would happen if the Tribunal Service were to introduce similar back door access in other parts of the system. If employment tribunals allowed large employers free access to their offices and clerks’ services, they would be deluged with breach of natural justice challenges by outraged appellants solicitors and barristers. But the reality is we’re only talking about sick and disabled benefits claimants here.

And, as the government is making increasingly clear, sick and disabled claimants should no longer expect the same rights and respect as other members of society. Justice is now reserved for those who are in work.

[sjrose]

Minister,

I ask this question as a member of the Mental Health Action Group - a service user led campaigning organisation which works around issues affecting people experiencing mental health difficulties in Derby and South Derbyshire.

We note the conclusions of the Harrington Report into the way that Employment and Support Allowance is being administered. We further note that your Government embraced the recommendations of this report. What progress has been made in addressing the weaknesses of the ESA assessment system identified by Harrington that affect people suffering from mental health difficulties?

Furthermore, will you undertake to ensure that the weaknesses identified in the Harrington Report are not replicated when the process of re-assessing Disability Living Allowance recipients begins?

Simon Rose, Representative - Mental Health Action Group, Derby

[Spartikus Rex]

How are benefits gonna be protected from the coming high inflation levels? If benefits are increased only once a year and inflation is running at 25 or 30 per cent it will make things difficult for pensioners, the unemployed and the former disabled towards year end. Extreme levels of unemployment in the face of such high inflation and oil shortages will make this a very important question within a few years.