WOW Petition debated by MPs on 27 February

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 Disability and Dosh board because we thought some of you might be interested in the topic of debate – you might even have signed the petition yourself. We encourage discussion and comments concerning the topic or content of this thread.


Effects of Welfare Reform on Sick and Disabled People
Thursday 27 February, due to start at c. 11.30-11.45am* in the House of Commons Chamber

The motion for debate is:

"That this House calls on the Government to commission an independent cumulative assessment of the impact of changes in the welfare system on sick and disabled people, their families and carers, drawing upon the expertise of the Work and Pensions Select Committee;

requests that this impact assessment examine care home admissions, access to day care centres, access to education for people with learning difficulties, provision of universal mental health treatments, closures of Remploy factories, the Government’s contract with Atos Healthcare, IT implementation of universal credit, human rights abuses against disabled people, excess deaths of welfare claimants and the disregard of medical evidence in decision-making by Atos, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Tribunals Service;

urges the Secretary of State for Health and the Secretary of State for Education jointly to launch a consultation on improving support into work for sick and disabled people; and further calls on the Government to end with immediate effect the work capability assessment, as voted for by the British Medical Association, to discontinue forced work under the threat of sanctions for people on disability benefits and to bring forward legislative proposals to allow a free vote on repeal of the Welfare Reform Act 2012."

This debate relates to the e-petition: We call for a Cumulative Impact Assessment of Welfare Reform, and a New Deal for sick & disabled people based on their needs, abilities and ambitions.

The e-petition called for:

A Cumulative Impact Assessment of all cuts and changes affecting sick & disabled people, their families and carers, and a free vote on repeal of the Welfare Reform Act.

An immediate end to the Work Capability Assessment, as voted for by the British Medical Association.

Consultation between the Depts of Health & Education to improve support into work for sick & disabled people, and an end to forced work under threat of sanctions for people on disability benefits.
An Independent, Committee-Based Inquiry into Welfare Reform, covering but not limited to: (1) Care home admission rises, daycare centres, access to education for people with learning difficulties, universal mental health treatments, Remploy closures; (2) DWP media links, the ATOS contract, IT implementation of Universal Credit; (3) Human rights abuses against disabled people, excess claimant deaths & the disregard of medical evidence in decision making by ATOS, DWP & the Tribunal Service.

In total 104,721 people signed the e-petition.
If you would like more details please go to the ‘WOW’ e-petition webpage


About the Backbench Business Committee:

The Backbench Business Committee meets weekly on Tuesdays at 3pm to consider requests for debates from any backbench Members of Parliament on any subject, including those raised in e-petitions or national campaigns.

An MP must make a representation before the Committee for an e-petition or petition to be debated; e-petitions exceeding the Government's 100,000 signature threshold are not automatically allocated backbench time.

The Committee then has to decide how to allocate the limited Parliamentary time it has at its disposal.

To find out more information about how an e-petition can be debated at Parliament visit e-petitions and the Backbench Business Committee


How to watch:

The Debate can be viewed on Parliament TV (Silverlight or Windows Media Player required to stream TV): Parliament TV Player

Transcripts of proceedings in the House of Commons Chamber are available three hours after they happen in Todays Commons Debates


* It may begin later if any Urgent Questions or further Statements are granted on the day, as Parliamentary business is subject to change.

Thanks
DOT

Richie-from-the-Boro

Yep ............... a year ago on this very forum. FlipFlop29's thread 14 months ago here.

Morglin

Hope they also debate the ethics of suspending ESA reviews for two years, and no one bothering to tell The a House or the claimants....:whistle:

Lin

Morglin

A pity there was so few MP's there, and a further pity that the Coslition still seem to think it's all going wonderfully well!

Lin

lemontart

Morglin wrote: »

A pity there was so few MP's there, and a further pity that the Coslition still seem to think it's all going wonderfully well!

Lin

More a case the negative impact side of things is something they do not care about

Morglin

True, but I also feel there should have been more Labour MP's there.

They should be shouting long and loud about the unfairness, and the extra costs to taxpayers, as the welfare bill is still rocketing, along with the costs of failed projects.

Lin

schrodie

Morglin wrote: »

True, but I also feel there should have been more Labour MP's there.

They should be shouting long and loud about the unfairness, and the extra costs to taxpayers, as the welfare bill is still rocketing, along with the costs of failed projects.

Lin

Given that Rachel Reeves has said that Labour (if elected) will be tougher on welfare reform than the tories may explain the paucity of these Nu labour MPs!!

Morglin

You could be right, but hopefully, we will lose some of the bile and spite, towards disabled people, that we have seen from the Coalition.

Getting rid of the bedroom tax will be a good start!

Lin .)

Richie-from-the-Boro

Getting rid of the discrimination that the bedroom tax is [STRIKE]will[/STRIKE] would be a good start! but that's a policy that the disability lawyers chased and up to now have lost in both the high and the Appeal courts. They were lost because the cases were about whether the bedroom tax policy was lawful.

A decision to impose the bedroom tax against an individual is about housing benefit regulation and not with policy, whether or not its legal to do so is decided by appeal, the best way for the disabled to deal with the bedroom tax is to appeal each and every decision.

Asking your LA to your to reconsider or review their decision on disability needs grounds is not an appeal its merely a revision of a decision made. The disabled need to appeal to the courts within 13 months from the original decision using a GL24 form.

tomtontom

Morglin wrote: »

You could be right, but hopefully, we will lose some of the bile and spite, towards disabled people, that we have seen from the Coalition.

Getting rid of the bedroom tax will be a good start!

Lin .)

And evening up the playing field for those on LHA and SMI?

cattermole

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Getting rid of the discrimination that the bedroom tax is [STRIKE]will[/STRIKE] would be a good start! but that's a policy that the disability lawyers chased and up to now have lost in both the high and the Appeal courts. They were lost because the cases were about whether the bedroom tax policy was lawful.

A decision to impose the bedroom tax against an individual is about housing benefit regulation and not with policy, whether or not its legal to do so is decided by appeal, the best way for the disabled to deal with the bedroom tax is to appeal each and every decision.

Asking your LA to your to reconsider or review their decision on disability needs grounds is not an appeal its merely a revision of a decision made. The disabled need to appeal to the courts within 13 months from the original decision using a GL24 form.

They are looking at appealing to the Supreme Court.

Decisions are yes based on regulations, so unless you can show the regulations have been incorrectly or unlawfully applied then the appeal will be thrown out. There isn't the same element of "decision" or "judgement" as there is in ESA or DLA for example.

Now there has been this ruling it will affect cases at first stage as well. on HRA and DD grounds IMO.