Submission from Mencap

1. Mencap welcomes the Public Accounts Committee’s inquiry into sanctions and conditionality elements of welfare benefits. We note that this follows the call in the last Parliament for a full independent review of benefit sanctions made by the Work and Pensions Select Committee in March 2015 and the Independent review of the operation of Jobseeker’s Allowance sanctions validated by the Jobseekers Act 2013 in July 2014.

2. The outcomes of these reviews and the NAO report published on the 30th November 2016, tells us little new. Mencap’s experience in assisting people with a learning disability, through our helpline and employment services and through day to day interactions with people with a learning disability, indicate that the current sanctions regime is grossly unfair and traps many people in an endless cycle of poverty. This policy is failing people in the welfare system, particularly people with a learning disability.
    
3. Mencap is responding to your call for evidence by raising points regarding i) whether benefit sanctions fit with the intended aims and outcomes of DWP's wider working age employment policy ii) whether sanctions are being implemented in line with policy and iii) whether use of sanctions is leading to the intended outcomes for claimants.

Do Benefit Sanctions fit with the intended aims and outcomes of DWP’s wider working age employment policy?

4. Mencap has made the case that sanctions, far from helping people with a learning disability move toward work, instead push them further away. Being sanctioned can be extremely distressing, which can lead to a detrition in mental and physical health.
    
5. A lack of disability awareness and training among job coaches, a lack of clear or accessible information and limited capacity or support can mean that people with a learning disability are disproportionately affected by sanctions.

Graham Trivett’s case: 

 

“At the end of 2011 I lost my job and went to the jobcentre. They told me I had to use the computers to look for work. I did tell them I had a learning disability and tried to explain that I don’t know how to use computers. They didn’t really offer me any alternative, plus there weren’t any specialist advisers who understood my learning disability.

 

 “I ended up being sanctioned and losing my benefits quite a few times because I was struggling to do all the things I was told to do. It was for a month each time. I was very lucky that I have a very kind mother. She helped me out a bit with money. I didn’t have a bus pass then so I had to pay each time I went to sign on. Because of her, I was never hungry and she helped me buy clothes and that sort of thing when I needed them. Without my mum, I probably wouldn’t be here now.

 

“But I was very stressed. I thought about committing suicide. Thankfully I found out about Wirral Mencap and they were able to help me. I am now on Employment Support Allowance in the support group.  I was lucky it got sorted out but worry that without having outside help I would have been in real trouble.”

6. In many cases, such as in Mr Trivett’s case study above, work coaches did not provide reasonable adjustments to support the person with a learning disability, such as in the case outlined above. What is worse is that Mr Trivett was also wrongly assessed. He was placed in the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) Support Group after intervention from his local Mencap and should never have been put in a position where his benefit could be subject to sanction.
    
7. The policy of sanctions does nothing to support people with a disability into work and we believe has in many cases the opposite effect.
    
8. We would therefore encourage the Government to use the Work, Health and Disability Green Paper ‘Improving Lives’ to reset it’s policy towards disabled people looking for work, focusing on individual support and encouragement rather than sanction or conditionality. Mencap is concerned that a form of conditionality may be considered for those currently in the ESA support group. The suggestion of required actions or mandatory appointments as discussed in ‘Improving Lives’ suggest the possibility of a penalty. We are deeply concerned by this and believe that this would be a retrograde step.
    
9. If the Government are to successfully halve the disability employment gap there needs to be a culture of support and encouragement towards disabled people. Mencap believes sanctions have no place in such a culture.

Are sanctions implemented in line with policy?

10. Most people who appeal a sanction decision with our support or that of other organisations have the action overturned.
     
11. In addition, we have found that many people with a learning disability only appeal with support from organisations which is not always available. This is particularly concerning as we also have assisted in cases where people with a learning disability have not been told of their right to appeal. As a result the number of people who take up the option of appealing is likely to be smaller than the number of people who might have had a sanction incorrectly applied.  
     
12. Sanctions are only supposed to be applied if a claimant fails to meet their jobseekers agreement/ claimant commitment, for instance. However, many people with a learning disability have inappropriate agreements which pay little regard to their disability. This is borne out of a mixture of a lack of understanding from job centre staff of how to meet the needs of people with a learning disability to inadequate support provided to people with a learning disability at meetings.

Do Sanctions lead to intended outcomes for claimants?

13. Mencap has no evidence to suggest that sanctions, ostensibly used to encourage people to comply with requests and direction from Job Centre Staff, have this intended outcome for disabled claimants.
     
14. Of particular concern for people with a learning disability is that information is not always clear and information in easy read is often absent. Easy read information is jargon free, easy to understand text accompanied by images. In our experience people with a learning disability are often not aware that they have been sanctioned at the point it happens. This can cause  panic, confusion and financial hardship when the first notice they have of their support being stopped is a payment not arriving.
     
15. Hardship payments are also poorly signposted and we have examples of people with a learning disability who were not told of their right to appeal. Much of this could be avoided if staff at Job Centre Plus ensured that their circumstances and options were explained to them in a way they can understand or if easy read documentation was available.
     
16. Unfortunately many claimants view the Job Centre with suspicion and distrust. An organisation which is supposed to help them into work, is instead a cause of fear. This cannot be an environment which encourages engagement with claimants and pushes disabled people away from the support they need.

Case study L.S.

 

L.S. is in her late 20s. She moves between living with various family members throughout the week and is in receipt of the low rate of Disability Living Allowance (DLA). She was referred to Mencap by family in order to support her to find her own housing. While being supported by Mencap, the advisor discovered that she had her “money stopped” until after Christmas. L.S. neither understood what was happening, nor why. All she knew was that her money was being stopped.

Mencap discovered that L.S. had been sanctioned for the second time because she had not been attending all of her scheduled appointments at her local Jobcentre Plus (JCP). After investigating, Mencap discovered that L.S. had not deliberately missed any of appointments. She had forgotten that she even had her appointments.

It transpired that L.S. had told the JCP that she often forgot things, due to her learning disability, and had asked them to text or telephone her the day before her appointments to remind her. They refused to make that adjustment to their usual policies and agreed to give L.S a printed appointment letter when she made her next appointment.

This forgetfulness was confirmed by the community nurse who used to visit L.S. The nurse often went to meet L.S., but was unsuccessful because L.S. had forgotten about their appointment. Due to the forgetfulness, the community nurse eventually stopped attempting to visit her, as she was unable to keep any appointments, and different arrangements were put in place.

L.S. did not know about her right to appeal against the sanctions. This is hardly surprising, given the fact that she was unaware of her sanction. L.S did, however, manage to apply for hardship payments. She was not sure what they were or even how she applied for them, and was confused as to what the difference between them and her JSA is.

In order to receive her hardship payments, she still has to have regular meetings. This presents the same issue as before, namely that she easily forgets. Luckily, Mencap have supported her with this issue. However, because the hardship payment level is so low, she cannot afford to get the bus for the eight mile round-trip to the JCP. She has a bike, but lacks the funds to repair it and is therefore unable to cycle to the JCP.

These issues have resulted in at least one missed appointment. Unfortunately, Mencap have been unable to contact L.S. for several weeks as her phone seems to have been disconnected. This is likely due to her inability to pay the bill. As L.S. is not getting help to remember her appointments from the JCP, there is the possibility that she has missed more appointments and will be sanctioned further.

17. Of particular concern is that at present people with complex needs are not getting the support or reasonable adjustments they need. In the case of L.S a reminder on the day or day before an appointment would have ensured her attendance at meetings and would have been reasonable given one element of her learning disability is forgetfulness, confirmed by medical professionals.

Recommendations

18. Conditionality should have no role in the current system or the new system. If improving lives is to have meaning and lead to sustainable employment for people with a learning disability, then the culture needs to change from one of sanctions and punishment to understanding and support.
     
19. Job Centre staff must have a better understanding of disability and learning disability issues so that people are given the reasonable adjustments they need and are treated as individuals. There also need to be a greater number of work coaches and other advisers so that adequate time can be given to those who need it. We are encouraged by the Governments acknowledgement of this in the Green paper.
     
20. In addition, the focus needs to be on getting the employment support right as this will have an impact both on the individual’s ability to look for work as well as the employers’ attitudes towards them. This system must be properly funded.

6 November 2016