Reform UK policies - posters often ask “what are they”

FriedGreenTomatoes2

It will.
We can’t keep on doing the same old nonsense and expecting a different result.

It’s nothing that isn’t already being done.

I think people muddle up PIP, with what used to been known as “sickness benefit”, then Employment & Support Allowance, now widely a part of Universal Credit. This is the means tested “sickness benefit”, which requires a Fit for work assessment and is an entirely different benefit to PIP!

Here’s some more on what the Tories proposed.
www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-welfare-reform/2010-to-2015-government-policy-welfare-reform
There is nothing new in Farage’s proposals.

Thanks for the details, Casdon.

It will.
We can’t keep on doing the same old nonsense and expecting a different result.

None of these proposals are new. Fitness to Work Assessment processes have been around for almost 20 years, and there was a big crackdown during the Coalition Government in the 2010s to try to reduce the benefits bill.

Research from the House of Commons Library in November 2012 highlighted issues with the assessment's accuracy. It showed that 40% of initial decisions were appealed and 38% of those appeals were successful, suggesting problems with initial rulings.

Mental health concerns: There was significant criticism regarding how the WCA dealt with claimants with mental health issues. Critics argued that a "tick-box" form and brief interview were inadequate for assessing complex mental health conditions, and later legal action was initiated on these grounds.

Framework concerns: Parliamentary debate in early 2013, referencing the period of 2012, revealed tragic and heart-rending stories from constituents struggling with the system. Concerns were raised that the fundamental framework of the assessment was flawed and could not realistically determine a person's capability for work.

Contractor profit motive: Some concerns focused on Atos Healthcare, the private company conducting the assessments, with accusations that its profit motives were influencing the process.

All these issues will raise their head again with the same old proposals, which is exactly what these from Reform are. It won’t work.

It’s not about the skills of the assessors (ex DWP), they are a third party employed by the DWP and ALL of them are medically trained and qualified, however, huge however, they don’t just assess those claimants whom meet their medical experience/qualifications.

For example, a physio might assess a claimant with mental health issues, or a nurse with limited physio experience might assess a person with huge mobility issues.

PIP is a non means tested payment given to any individual aged between 18-67, whose mental or physical health (or both) affects them on a day to day basis. Many people in receipt of PIP work part time or full time.
PIP claimants already go through regular assessments, PIP is awarded for periods between 6 months and 10 years. 10 years tend to be conditions like autism or Down’s syndrome, those which don’t go away or improve.

There’s already a massive shortage of mental health therapists, where are Reform going to magic up these people from?

The assessors currently only make “recommendations” after the assessment, all the paperwork AND medical evidence is then sent back to DWP “decision makers” to make final decision and award.

Reform clearly have no idea what PIP is for, that it’s paid to both working and non working people and how the current process works!

Also depends on the criteria used to assess.

Agree with all of it.

Agree with face to face appointments but would be concerned about the level of skill of the Assessors.

It isn't about benefit scroungers us it, it is about an increasing amount of young people never entering the workforce. This is a disaster for those young people.

They were years ago GG13
I think it makes good sense. Back to pre-pandemic ways of assessment.

I think face-to-face assessments should be the norm, as long as those doing the assessing are appropriately qualified.

Ok- so we've turned back from getting at the immigrants to going back to getting at benefit 'scroungers.'

Nothing to read here.