Written evidence from Ms Jacqueline Smith (WTW0063)

• Barriers to recovering health, confidence and self-determination
• Work Programme is a failed project causing misery to thousands of vulnerable claimants
• ESA legislation and DWP failures to apply regulations correctly, fairly and safely

I am a strong, intelligent and articulate woman in my fifties but I am also ill, disabled and very vulnerable after being denied justice by the DWP. I am submitting my evidence on behalf of other claimants on the Work Programme (WP) who are unable to communicate their despair and have no help, advocacy or online access. Disability is not a choice or lifestyle option.

1) The barriers for me include a visual impairment, a neurological impairment and medical disorders following life-saving surgery many years ago, stuffy and noisy libraries, the prospect of my late evidence not being accepted or believed and being exposed. The process of trying to compose letters and working online leaves me feeling overwhelmed and ill. I cannot fix my brain, cure my autism or get a diagnosis despite decades of mental health support. I cannot access counselling for my diagnosed PTSD because I’m seeking an autism diagnosis, specifically Asperger’s syndrome. My daughter identified it and without this understanding, without her and reliable information about ESA regulations, I am certain I would not be here now. She has never studied law or claimed benefits but understands this legislation as well as I do. I examined the Statutory Instrument at the British Library to discover that every law centre and charity is offering the same incorrect information and advice about ESA regulation 29 – exceptional circumstances. I cannot recover my health or confidence under such conditions.

2) The WP is a failed project and has caused hardship and mental distress to thousands of claimants. There is little to recommend having endured seven years of it. Since 2008, I have been processed through Pathways to Work, Work Directions and referred repeatedly to A4e/PeoplePlus. The WP model produces overwhelming amounts of administration for people with impaired abilities. My constituency MP repeatedly declined to intervene despite receiving similar complaints following the closure of Camberwell Job Centre in 2012(when the WP was expanding). The job centre manager transferred my claim to Peckham and re-referred me to A4e in February 2014.

3) The Tribunal applied ESA regulation 29 in January 2014 which offered me the protection of the Support Group and payment of the higher component of support allowance but instead, the DWP returned me to WRAG. The DWP repeatedly insisted I had misinterpreted the regulations and should appeal again if I disagreed with the court decision. I maintain that no appeal would be allowed because it was correct. HMCTS insist that it cannot enforce DWP regulations.

A4e has collected payment every month since February 2014, simply for sending me texts and up to five letters a day for up to two appointments a day. A4e accepted this second contract worth £6440 knowing that I had registered and engaged with them in 2012. A4e assigned me a new “opportunity number”, changed the settings on their system to show the original referral was not mandatory but all my correspondence proves otherwise. WP providers make no distinction in approach or provision between jobseekers on JSA and disabled people on ESA. It would be barbaric to renew any contract without a full public inquiry and investigation into DWP operations, decision-making and actions.    

October 2015