This week, Iain Duncan Smith has again been talking about thereplacement of disability living allowance (DLA) with the personalindependence payment (PIP). The key to this reform will be the wayits eligibility criteria are used and it is imperative that this isgot right – but will it be? Concerns remain. In an interview with the Telegraph,published on Sunday, Work and Pensions Secretary Duncan Smithreiterated his arguments for the planned reform of DLA. For thosewho have followed the debate, he said nothing new: claims have goneup by 30% in recent years, assessments weren’t rigorous etc.However, it should be noted that Duncan Smith’s comments didcontain some inaccuracies, such as his statement that 70% ofclaimants had ‘lifetime’ awards. This is untrue: ‘lifetime’ awardswere abandoned in 2000 and replaced with ‘indefinite’ awards. Inany event, it’s not unreasonable for a proportion of people toclaim DLA for long periods of time. Rather than “fester” on it, asDuncan Smith put it, many people with learning or physicaldisabilities will never see substantial improvement in theirconditions. While their life and capabilities may improve withhelp, taking away their benefit and what it enables them topurchase, could see their progress reversed. With this in mind, thefocus has to be on ensuring that PIP is as fair as possible andthat the eligibility criteria take such things into account. TheTelegraph said that PIP may be based on the workcapability assessment (WCA), which is used for employment andsupport allowance. This will send a shiver down the spine of manywho claim that benefit. The WCA is widely disliked by claimants,and has been the subject of two reviews by Professor MalcolmHarrington since its introduction in October 2008, yet stillconcerns remain. The main gripes about the WCA revolve around suchthings as whether it takes into account the difficulties thatpeople with conditions such as autism face – and the help they needto function. The eligibility criteria for PIP will need to ensurethat issue of this kind are properly addressed. While people withprofound or complex learning disabilities may have little to fearin these reforms – Duncan Smith says that the benefit will focus onthose who need it most – some at the milder end of the spectrum,such as those who currently claim lower-rate DLA may well lose out.Indeed, with the stated aim of getting 500,000 people off theexisting benefit, it seems certain that some will be deemedineligible. This is where the main concerns lie. While the changesmay help to cut the benefit bill, people who do lose out couldexperience serious reductions in their quality of life and in theirindependence. For example, if the money is currently used to payfor transport to work, it could mean they will not be able getthere and would lose their job as a result. If theeligibility criteria aren’t up to scratch, that may result inshort-term cost savings for the Government. But, in thelonger-term, it could cost more in economic and – more importantly- human terms. Consultations are on-going over the eligibilitycriteria, so now is the time to get these messages across toGovernment in the strongest possible terms.
