MPs quiz Ministers on Work and Pensions, 13 January 2.30pm

UKParliament

Our goal is to post up information on work undertaken in the House of Commons that has a consumer focus but which may not be highlighted elsewhere.

We have posted this on the Benefits & Tax Credits board because we thought some of you might be interested in these questions. We encourage discussion and comments concerning the topic or content of this thread.


Questions to the Minister for Work and Pensions
Due to take place Monday 13th January at 2.30pm in the House of Commons Chamber

Question Time is an opportunity for MPs to question government ministers about matters for which they are responsible.


Questions due to be asked include:

• What plans he has to improve the work capability assessment? - Ian Mearns
• What recent assessment he has made of Capita's timescales for processing medical assessments for personal independence payments and providing them to his Department? - Mrs Madeleine Moon
• What recent assessment he has made of the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] disability spend? - Fiona Bruce

• What assessment he has made of recent trends in the award of discretionary housing payments? - Dr Therese Coffey
• What assessment he has made of the effect of the under-occupancy penalty on carers? -Teresa Pearce

• What assessment he has made of the extent to which the benefit cap has helped people return to work? - Mr Rob Wilson

To view the full list of questions tabled for Question Time please visit the ‘Business Today’ at http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/commons/agenda-and-order-of-business/#session=73895&year=2014&month=0&day=13


Which questions are you most interested in?


How Question Time works:

Commons oral questions are tabled by MPs at least three days in advance of Question Time. The questions are then printed in the Commons Questions Book. The order in which the questions are asked is determined randomly by a computer.

MPs who are called by the Speaker to ask their question do not read it out, but simply call out its number. When the government minister has replied, the MP can ask another question (known as a supplementary) and other MPs may also be called to ask supplementary questions. The Minister must reply to each in turn.

Supplementary questions must be on the same subject as the original question.


How to watch:

The Questions can be viewed on Parliament TV (Silverlight or Windows Media Player required to stream TV): http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14575

Transcripts of proceedings in the House of Commons Chamber are available three hours after they happen in http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/


Thanks
DOT

UKParliament

We can now post up a link to the transcript of the Question Time session yesterday for those who might be interested in the responses to the questions asked:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/cm140113/debtext/140113-0001.htm#14011313000007

We hope this is useful for people?

Thanks,
DOT

UKParliament

What plans he has to improve the work capability assessment? - Ian Mearns

The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Mike Penning): We remain committed to reviewing continually and further improving the assessment. Dr Litchfield’s independent review was published in December, and the Government will publish their response in the first quarter of this year.

Ian Mearns: It has come to my attention through research conducted by several disability campaign groups that as many as four people a day are dying within six weeks of being declared fit for work under the Department’s work capability assessment. Will the Secretary of State reflect on those figures? When he finds them to be true, as they are based on his Department’s data, will he come back to the House and apologise to the families of the deceased, who suffered unnecessarily in their last precious days? We can recuperate benefits that are awarded incorrectly, but we cannot recuperate a person’s life.

Mike Penning: Our thoughts and prayers are with the people and families who have lost their loved ones. There is a system in place for people with life-threatening illnesses, and particularly for those who are likely to die. As I said to the Work and Pensions Committee, the Chairman of which is in the Chamber, we are trying to get the decision making down to seven days, which we would all welcome.

Sir Tony Baldry: Am I right in thinking that we spend more than £13 billion on sickness and incapacity benefit for almost 2.5 million people of working age? Is it not right to ensure that the support goes to those who need it most?

Mike Penning: I completely agree with my right hon. Friend. Of course, the scheme was brought in by the previous Administration—the Opposition have selective memory loss about that. We are determined to get the scheme right to help people get back into work and to help those who cannot get back into work through the benefits system.

Helen Jones: As the Court of Appeal recently threw out the Government’s appeal against the decision that the work capability assessment disadvantages those with long-term mental health problems and learning disabilities such as autism, will the Minister accept that the test is simply not designed to deal with such people? What will he do about that?

Mike Penning: The Harrington report referred to that matter specifically. Ensuring that people with hidden disabilities get all the help we can give them is something that is close to my heart, but the Harrington pilot is on hold because of the judicial review.

Mr David Heath: In my part of the world, the work capability assessment and the personal independence payment are administered by Atos. When my constituents finally get an assessment, they find an organisation that is as insensitive as it is incompetent. Would not the best way of improving the work capability assessment be to remove the incapable Atos?

Mike Penning: We inherited the contract with Atos as the company that was running the WCA. We were not happy with the quality of its work, which is why we brought in measures. We accept that that is causing delays to the system, but it is better to have the necessary quality than to get it wrong.

Mr Dennis Skinner: How many people have to lose their appeal after 12 months of trying to get justice done? How many more people—including the four a day referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Gateshead (Ian Mearns)—have to die before they get an appeal? Surely it is time for even this insensitive Government to understand that Atos is not fit for purpose and should be abandoned, and that we should start all over again.

Mike Penning: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman said that all the way through to his own Government when they brought in Atos. What the Opposition put in place when they were in government was a complete mess. We are determined to get it right. We are listening to why the tribunal judges make their decisions so that we get the decisions right earlier on.

Sarah Newton: Will my hon. Friend confirm that that the Department has service level agreements with Atos and Capita that include claimant satisfaction and timeliness?

Mike Penning: Yes, we do. There is a financial penalty regime that I have every intention of implementing.

UKParliament

What recent assessment he has made of Capita's timescales for processing medical assessments for personal independence payments and providing them to his Department? - Mrs Madeleine Moon

The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Mike Penning): As I said earlier, the end to end journey time for people claiming PIP is too long—within the DWP as well as with Capita and Atos in the hon. Lady’s constituency. More than anything else, this is to do with quality issues that we want to get right. There is no point in having a very quick journey if we get the wrong decision.

Mrs Moon: I thank the Minister for that reply. My constituent Mr Weaver applied for PIP in June, and Mrs Curran did so in July. They both had their assessments with Capita in August. The assessments have still not reached the DWP, which is totally unacceptable. Legitimate claims are being denied, which cannot be good money for the Government and cannot be a quality service. This company is inept, inefficient and not fit to carry out the work it is asked to do.

Mike Penning: I thank the hon. Lady and we will obviously look into the individual cases she mentioned. It is absolutely crucial to get it right and to get the quality right so that when benefits are claimed, those who deserve them get them and those who do not deserve them do not. Face-to-face assessment is a crucial part of this and I have said previously, fewer than 6% of those who claimed benefit were ever assessed.

Miss Anne McIntosh: Is it not the appeals process against the initial decision that is slowing the process down? Will my hon. Friend use his good offices and those of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to raise this issue as a matter of urgency with the Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor?

Mike Penning: My hon. Friend raises an important point. What often happens is that evidence is produced on the day of the tribunal that the Department’s officials have never seen before. In some cases, evidence has understandably come forward at that stage when we might not have known anything about it. We are looking closely at that as well as at getting more information from the judges.

Ian Lucas: Since June, I have had five cases brought to my attention at my constituency surgery where applications for PIPs have been made yet not one of them has been paid. The assessments have been carried out, yet DWP employees are telling people being treated for cancer to phone up and chase Capita. Will the Minister do something about it because this system is collapsing?

Mike Penning: People suffering from terminal illnesses are being dealt with very quickly in most cases—

Ian Lucas: They are not.

Mike Penning: Those with terminal illnesses are; cancer is not always terminal. I know this is an emotive subject, but fortunately plenty of people in this country live through their cancer. I will look carefully into what the hon. Gentleman says, but it is not the case that no benefits are getting through. The vast majority are. I see cases at my surgery the same as others do, but the vast majority are getting their benefits. We will, however, work on the quality.

Tessa Munt: A GP whose patient has particularly complex medical and learning disability needs is still waiting for an assessment and a decision many months after making his application. Why are doctors’ letters not accepted?

Mike Penning: Even the last Administration had the sense to recognise that GPs were very close to their patients, and that it was therefore necessary to obtain evidence from other health experts as well, especially consultants. However, the assessment relates not to an illness or other condition, but to a person’s capacity to work. That is what is important.

UKParliament

What recent assessment he has made of the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] disability spend? - Fiona Bruce

The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Mike Penning): The most recent OECD figures, from 2009, show that the United Kingdom spent 2.4% of its gross domestic product on benefits for people with disabilities. According to UK figures for 2012-13, we are spending about £50 billion a year on such benefits.

Fiona Bruce: Can the Minister explain how that money is being used to help disabled people in my constituency to lead full and independent lives?

Mike Penning: The reason we are spending so much money is that we want to ensure that people with disabilities or other long-term conditions can lead lives that are as fulfilling as possible, and, if they are able to do so, enter the workplace. Much of the money is spent on the Access to Work scheme, which has proved very successful. It is interesting that not many Opposition Members seem to approve of the £50 billion that the Government are spending.

Kate Green: Ministers have been taking a pick-and-mix approach to the OECD figures, claiming that the United Kingdom is a top spender on disability-related benefits while referring to only one indicator rather than to total incapacity-related benefit spending. Is it not time that they came clean? Will the Minister now admit that disabled people are bearing the brunt of the Government’s welfare reforms?

Mike Penning: We do not “pick and mix” at all. Those who look carefully at the figures will see that Germany spends roughly half the amount that we spend in relation to GDP. If the hon. Lady thinks that we should spend more, that will mean another spending commitment from the Opposition.

UKParliament

What assessment he has made of recent trends in the award of discretionary housing payments? - Dr Therese Coffey

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr Iain Duncan Smith): Figures published in December show that in the first half of the financial year 2013-14 the average committed spend by local authorities was 40% of their allocated budget. Against those who had said that they were overspending, in fact it turns out that the vast majority are not.

Bill Wiggin: Will the Secretary of State explain the particular circumstances for people who have been on housing benefit constantly since 1996 in relation to discretionary housing payments?

Mr Duncan Smith: Yes, this is a narrow but complicated area dating back to 1996 with the introduction of local reference rent rules. They were intended to offer transitional protection at that time for existing claimants, but they were not in any way time limited. There was another opportunity, in 2008, to change the regulations when the previous Government brought in local housing allowance. They were not adjusted then. This protection had been dormant for 17 years and not used. This is a complex area that we are now resolving, but I have to say that in three different Governments it has missed the attention of Ministers.

Chris Heaton-Harris: Some would have had us believe that the discretionary housing payment would run out very quickly and that people would be forced out of London to live elsewhere. Will the Secretary of State confirm that there was an underspend in discretionary housing payments of nearly £11 million, and that the claims of social cleansing from the Opposition were complete rubbish?

Mr Duncan Smith: Yes, I can. The reality, as my hon. Friend says, is that last year about £11 million in underspends was returned to the Department. It is interesting to note the claims made by some in this House. The hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell) said that the money in her area was fast running out. It turns out that, at the six-month cut, only 28% of discretionary housing payment has actually been used.

In Nottingham South, only 33% has been used. The hon. Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Jack Dromey) said that too much had been spent in Birmingham, Erdington, but only 47% has been used. Discretionary housing payments are there to be used to help those in the most difficult circumstances. Councils should get on and use them.

Dr Th!rèse Coffey: My right hon. Friend may not be aware that Suffolk Coastal has used 60% of its budget after nine months and Waveney has used half its budget. Does he agree that that shows that discretionary budgets are working and that it is wrong to try to make political capital out of potentially very difficult human circumstances?

Mr Duncan Smith: It does. The reality is that about 71% have spent less than half of their discretionary budgets by the half-way cut of the year, and politicians should always be careful about using individual cases and making political capital out of what are often human tragedies.

Lucy Powell: The Secretary of State should be careful about throwing around accusations of incompetence in local authorities. I was going to ask a different question, but I want to put it on record, and reassure the Secretary of State, that Manchester city council will be spending all its discretionary housing payments and has recently applied for more. Will he accept that application for more funding?

Mr Duncan Smith: The answer I gave previously was based on what the hon. Lady actually said previously, which was:

“The money is fast running out, if it has not already run out”.—[Official Report, 12 November 2013; Vol. 570, c. 838.]

At the six-month cut, Manchester city council had spent 28% of the discretionary payments. I suspect that, in reality, the hon. Lady was about to ask me about that, but realised that she could not because she had got it wrong.

John Healey: What a lot of waffle in response to that planted question from the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Bill Wiggin). The bulletin that the Secretary of State issued last week is a clear admission that he has been hitting thousands of people illegally with the bedroom tax since April. Is he aware of the latest survey from the Northern Housing Consortium, which says that nearly half of all front-line housing workers have dealt with someone who has threatened to commit suicide, largely because of the Government’s welfare changes? Will he apologise this afternoon to those people for the concern and chaos that he is causing?

Mr Duncan Smith: I said it all right, and I say it again: the Department is, and I am, absolutely sorry that anybody may have been caught up in this who should not have been. However, what we were left by the last Government was this: 1,000 pages of complex housing benefit regulations. Under universal credit, they will be reduced to 300 pages and we will simplify them. The reality is that this is a problem of the massive complexity of housing benefit that the last Government left us, with a housing benefit bill that has been rising and that doubled in 10 years on the right hon. Gentleman’s watch.

Dr Eilidh Whiteford: Discretionary housing payments simply will not plug the gap for disadvantaged tenants in Scotland. Given that last week the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities published clear evidence showing that the policy is costing more to implement than it saves, will the Secretary of State finally accept that it has been a disaster and abandon it?

Mr Duncan Smith: What I never hear about from the other side of the House, including from the hon. Lady, is what was left to us, which is 250,000 people living in overcrowded accommodation. Nobody on the Opposition Benches ever speaks for them or for the 1 million people they left on waiting lists who cannot get into homes while the taxpayer subsidises people to live in homes that they do not fully occupy. I simply put it back to the hon. Lady: I wonder when she or Opposition Front Benchers will ever speak for those they left in terrible conditions in overcrowded accommodation.

UKParliament

What assessment he has made of the effect of the under-occupancy penalty on carers? -Teresa Pearce

The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Esther McVey): Live-in carers are provided for as part of the assessment of household need. An additional room for non-resident overnight carers is allowed in certain circumstances. Discretionary housing payment funding has been increased to £180 million for 2013-14 to help support vulnerable claimants to adjust to the reforms.

Teresa Pearce: Many children grow up with separated parents, but I think we would all agree that joint parenting is in the best interests of the child. One of my constituents is a devoted father whose small son lives with him 50% of the time, but he now has to lose his son’s bedroom because the benefits system will accept only one parent as the “main carer”. Will the Minister re-examine that rule and consider an exemption?

Esther McVey: The hon. Lady is right to bring this matter to the House, and such situations are always difficult, but the room would be allocated to whoever was the main carer of the child. In this instance, that is the mother and that is who we would be looking to. We would not be supporting two sets of rooms in two separate houses, as we are trying to get this housing policy right.

Barbara Keeley: May I bring the Minister back to the issue of unpaid family carers of sick and disabled people? She recently admitted in a response to my question that 50,000 or 60,000 of those carers were affected by the bedroom tax. More than 1 million of those carers have given up work to care, and they have nowhere to go to find the money. She has talked about live-in carers, but it is not about that. Will she answer about the 50,000 or 60,000 carers? Will she admit that it was a mistake not to exempt them from the bedroom tax?

Esther McVey: What we did is not name absolutely everybody who could have part of the discretionary housing payment. We have allowed discretion for those people who might need it the most, hence it is called “discretionary”, hence it has been trebled and hence we are supporting these people. Obviously, if somebody on housing benefit, or their partner, needs an overnight carer on a regular basis, they would have their spare room subsidy; they would be exempt from this.

UKParliament

What assessment he has made of the extent to which the benefit cap has helped people return to work? - Mr Rob Wilson

Esther McVey: It is my strong belief that there is a connection between the benefit cap and getting people into work.

Poll findings show that of those notified or aware that they would be affected by the cap, three in 10 took action to find work.

To date, almost 36,000 have accepted help to move into work from Jobcentre Plus and around 19,000 potentially capped claimants have moved into work.

Morglin

Waste of time that was - the usual sneering from Dismal Duncan Smith, and ms McVey proving she peaked at being a TV presenter.

Lin :whistle: