TO REMAIN SILENT IS TO BE COMPLICIT

Copy of letter sent to: Right Honourable Iain Duncan Smith MP,

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
and
Right Honourable Maria Miller MP,
Minister for Disabled People

Dear Sir/Dear Madam,

I write to you to raise my concerns regarding a recent announcement by the Department for Work and Pensions that a 'Mobile Regional Taskforce' is to target false benefits claimants in what it describes as high risk areas.

The DWP estimates that false benefit claimants stole in the region of £900 million during the tax year 2008-2009. I am sure we both agree that this theft of public money is to be abhorred. However, I am very worried about the impact DWP measures to reduce fraud will have on disabled people.

The DWP press release states:

„The Mobile Regional Taskforce will scrutinise the claims of a high proportion of current benefit customers within a specific geographical location, regardless of age, gender, ethnic make-up, type of benefit recipient, income, disability breakdown or family status.“ (emphasis mine).

It seems quite clear that the taskforce will be authorised to target benefit claimants, including the disabled, without being required to supply any evidence or suspicion of fraud.

Of the £900 million estimated total annual benefit fraud, around £50 million relates to Disability Living Allowance payments. As I am sure you are aware, to combat theft of disability benefit a company named ATOS Healthcare has been awarded a contract to conduct work capability assessments to validate genuine claims and to expose frauds.

However, the stated aims of fraud reduction appear incongruent with the fact that ATOS has been budgeted to reduce the amount of disability payments by 20%, an estimated total of £2.4 billion, when fraud is thought to be only 0.5%.

One might conclude that vulnerable people are being systematically denied the government help which they desperately need and that it is not only welfare fraud but Department for Work and Pensions policy itself which "takes money away from the most vulnerable".  Indeed, this is borne out by the evidence supplied to the Commons Select Committee on Work and Pensions by Tom Greatrex MP which showed that, of those ATOS deemed fit to work, 40% of these had the decision overturned successfully on appeal. Mr. Greatrex goes on to state:

„It is reasonable to suggest that this figure would be even higher were it not for the fact that a large number of those deemed fit for work do not appeal as they do not wish to go through the stress the whole process entails. It goes without saying that it is not acceptable to reduce the numbers of those on Employment and Support Allowance, and its predecessor benefits, simply by making the testing process as difficult and strenuous as possible for those involved.“

The suffering inflicted on disabled people by the denial of the aid they need is demonstrated in the high profile case of former Scottish Ballet prima ballerina Elaine McDonald OBE who is forced to sleep in her own faeces and urine due to withdrawal of support.

Sad to say, Mrs. McDonald is not alone in being subjected to degrading treatment. The mental health charities Mind, Rethink Mental Illness, the Centre for Mental Health, Hafal, and the Scottish Association for Mental Health stated in an open letter to the Guardian that

„The prospect of IB reassessment is causing huge amounts of distress, and tragically there have already been cases where people have taken their own life following problems with changes to their benefits.“

Bearing in mind the difficult and stressful nature of the work capability assessments, I would be very grateful if you could consult your colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions in order to confirm:

A) How banging on the doors of claimants will succeed in exposing frauds where the work capability assessments do not

B) What steps have been taken to avoid distress to disabled and vulnerable benefit claimants who now face the intimidating prospect of a team of people visiting them in their own homes to force them to once again prove that they are not criminals

In a nation where tax evasion and fraud costs the taxpayer thirty times as much as benefit fraud, why is it considered acceptable to treat like criminals the very people who need the most help, to intimidate and harass them in their own homes?

It has often been said that the moral test of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable members.  I fear that our society and your government's policies are failing that test.