28/02/2017 House of Commons


28/02/2017

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 28/02/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

response. For today, we should leave it there. Thank you. Order. Urgent

:00:00.:00:07.

question, Richard Bergen. The prisons minister told the committee

:00:08.:00:11.

this morning that he has a number of the chair of the prison officers

:00:12.:00:17.

Association on speed dial. If the minister... The honourable gentleman

:00:18.:00:20.

is getting a little ahead of himself. What he needs to do is to

:00:21.:00:26.

put the urgent question in the very simple terms that it was put to me.

:00:27.:00:33.

To as the Secretary of State for Justice if she will make a statement

:00:34.:00:37.

on the prison officers Association to withdraw from voluntary tasks. I

:00:38.:00:46.

have done the honourable gentleman's job for him. He is ahead of himself.

:00:47.:01:00.

I thank you for the urgent question on behalf of the opposition. I am

:01:01.:01:04.

grateful for the chance to update the House on this important issue.

:01:05.:01:08.

Strike action is unlawful and we have seen this. It will seriously

:01:09.:01:16.

disrupt normal operations in prisons and whilst we will take any actions

:01:17.:01:20.

that we can to mitigate the risks and what we are clear that action of

:01:21.:01:25.

this nature poses a risk to the safety of prisons and prison staff.

:01:26.:01:32.

The duties that the prison officers Association referred to in their

:01:33.:01:36.

bulbs are not voluntary duty. These duties that are fundamental parts of

:01:37.:01:40.

a prison officer 's role and essential to running a safe and

:01:41.:01:45.

decent prison. They include assessment for those at risk of

:01:46.:01:50.

suicide, first aid, restraint training and intervention, postage

:01:51.:01:56.

negotiation. The instructions by the PO a are clearly designed to disrupt

:01:57.:02:01.

the safe and decent running of prisons. We have made a pay offer to

:02:02.:02:07.

all operational staff in prisons which was the maximum we could make.

:02:08.:02:13.

In addition, we offered a ?1000 retention payment to all operational

:02:14.:02:19.

staff and a reduction ageing pension -- reduction pension age from 65 --

:02:20.:02:26.

265 fully funded by the Government. We were disappointed that this offer

:02:27.:02:31.

was rejected by the POA membership. Despite being endorsed by the POA

:02:32.:02:37.

leadership. This year's pay award is now a matter for the independent

:02:38.:02:42.

prison service pay review body. It will take evidence from all parties

:02:43.:02:46.

and report to the Government in April. The POA has the opportunity

:02:47.:02:53.

to make their case to the pay review body. We are not waiting for the pay

:02:54.:03:04.

review body to respond. We have outlined progression opportunities

:03:05.:03:08.

for more than 2000 staff across the country that will take it to ?30,000

:03:09.:03:15.

a year. In addition, we introduced additional allowances in areas where

:03:16.:03:20.

the cost of living is higher, to take the basic prison officers to up

:03:21.:03:29.

to ?30,000 a year. We understand prison officers do a difficult job

:03:30.:03:34.

in very challenging circumstances and why we are making these moves on

:03:35.:03:39.

pay to recognise that effort in the hard work. In addition, the

:03:40.:03:44.

Government is investing ?100 million to increase the net number of prison

:03:45.:03:50.

officers by 2500 in the next two years. I urge the Shadow Minister of

:03:51.:03:55.

that if he has good sense and cares about the safety and order of our

:03:56.:04:00.

prisons, what he should be doing today is not put prison officers and

:04:01.:04:05.

prisoners at risk but condemn this unlawful strike action. The prisons

:04:06.:04:10.

minister told the Justice committee this morning that he has a number of

:04:11.:04:15.

the chair of the prison officers Association on speed dial and if the

:04:16.:04:19.

Minister is dialling, it is clear he is not connecting because this

:04:20.:04:25.

situation could have easily been avoided. Ministers could have spoken

:04:26.:04:30.

to the POA before imposing a pay policy which has proven to be so

:04:31.:04:35.

divisive and so unpopular. Ministers need to sit down and talk with the

:04:36.:04:39.

POA rather than threaten legal action and claim the action is

:04:40.:04:44.

unlawful before any court has made any such determination. To fix a

:04:45.:04:49.

prison system relying on staff doing extra work voluntarily but no extra

:04:50.:04:56.

money to keep our prison system running, ministers need to focus on

:04:57.:04:59.

the real problems. Conservative Party conference back in October,

:05:00.:05:04.

the Justice Secretary announced 400 more officers stop these were to

:05:05.:05:09.

working ten challenging prisons but the staffing shortfall are those

:05:10.:05:13.

prisons has grown in the last quarter. Since the White Paper

:05:14.:05:19.

announcement of 2000 -- 2500 additional officers, there has been

:05:20.:05:25.

a fall of 133 staff in the last quarter of 2016. That 2500 is now

:05:26.:05:31.

further away than it was in November. Where is the Justice

:05:32.:05:35.

Secretary? Why have some prisons with no recruitment and retention

:05:36.:05:40.

problems receive the pay award twice -- while some prisons struggling on

:05:41.:05:44.

that front receive nothing? How much additional money has been earmarked

:05:45.:05:47.

for this recruitment drive and what discussions have taken place with

:05:48.:05:54.

POA leadership today? To turn this mass, we need a Justice Secretary

:05:55.:06:00.

who is serious about working with prison officers and we need a

:06:01.:06:04.

prisons built which will deliver serious reforms. Sadly, at the

:06:05.:06:06.

moment, we have nothing. In relation to the additional

:06:07.:06:19.

allowances that were announced for staff last week but also the PM

:06:20.:06:24.

progression opportunity for 2000 prison officers across the estate,

:06:25.:06:30.

the POA were consulted and if the honourable member had read the press

:06:31.:06:34.

release in detail, the actually welcomed it. But they wanted it to

:06:35.:06:39.

apply to all of the country. It is not novel to have a violence in

:06:40.:06:48.

areas where it is difficult to recruit and the cost of living is

:06:49.:06:52.

too high. It is not novel in the prison service or the public sector.

:06:53.:06:57.

He talked about extra money going into the prison Service. 100 million

:06:58.:07:11.

for a net 200 officers. We made the announcement in November and he

:07:12.:07:15.

referred to data from December. Let me update you. We are on track to

:07:16.:07:21.

recruit the 400 new officers for the ten most challenging deals the

:07:22.:07:24.

Secretary of State announced in October. We have more people today

:07:25.:07:28.

in training to be prison officers than ever before. We also are

:07:29.:07:36.

investing ?4 million on marketing to attract new prison officers. The

:07:37.:07:42.

Labour Party is confused on prisons. Last year, they told us they wanted

:07:43.:07:48.

the prison population cut from 80,000 to 45,000. Last Sunday we

:07:49.:07:53.

heard from the shadow Attorney General is that actually prisoners

:07:54.:07:56.

should be allowed to keep mobile phones so they can carry on their

:07:57.:08:03.

life of crime in prison. Until the Labour Party has sorted out its

:08:04.:08:13.

position, if it is in no state to question us. With the Minister

:08:14.:08:21.

accept it is not helpful against efforts that are being made to turn

:08:22.:08:26.

around the situation, which takes time to achieve. It's not helpful to

:08:27.:08:30.

embark upon a course of action which legal or otherwise has the effect of

:08:31.:08:35.

creating further restrictions on the regime, therefore further tensions

:08:36.:08:39.

within the prison population. It makes it harder to deliver

:08:40.:08:45.

rehabilitation. And sadly his the effect of making the job of prison

:08:46.:08:49.

officers harder in the long term rather than easier. The chairman of

:08:50.:08:53.

the Justice committee makes an excellent point. We have made

:08:54.:09:04.

progress on pay and self -- and health and safety. Today, we were

:09:05.:09:07.

due to meet them to discuss pensions. The action today puts

:09:08.:09:12.

prisoners and prison officers who work very hard at risk. Prison staff

:09:13.:09:21.

in England and we'll is, as we have heard, have been demoralised through

:09:22.:09:25.

the understaffing, underpayment and overcrowding of prisons.

:09:26.:09:36.

The Minister does not address the issue of morale of across-the-board.

:09:37.:09:44.

This is a matter for England and Wales, but I am here today to look

:09:45.:09:53.

to what we have done in Scotland, making more use of community

:09:54.:09:58.

alternatives. Does he agree they should concentrate on those schemes.

:09:59.:10:04.

What will he do to ensure newly recruited prison office is our

:10:05.:10:09.

retained and the morale of prison staff is restored. This is a

:10:10.:10:16.

stressful occupation. She is right. Morale is important. Let me be

:10:17.:10:21.

clear. We have a pay deal that was endorsed by the prison Officers

:10:22.:10:27.

Association towards the end of last year that was rejected. It is now a

:10:28.:10:31.

matter for the independent pay review body. We have submitted

:10:32.:10:37.

evidence. We are taking action on pay for the Prison Service as a

:10:38.:10:44.

whole. Additionally, we have put in place additional allowances for 31

:10:45.:10:47.

deals where it is particularly hard to recruit. Further to that, we have

:10:48.:10:53.

created a new progression opportunity for 2000 prison office

:10:54.:10:58.

is across the country. Today, we were due to be in talks about

:10:59.:11:03.

pensions. We value prison officers and their work and we want to

:11:04.:11:07.

support them. Unlawful strike action is not the way to progress. It will

:11:08.:11:12.

achieve the opposite, which is put prison officers at risk. While

:11:13.:11:20.

strongly regretting the strike action announced by the POA. I

:11:21.:11:26.

welcome the reduction in retirement age to 65. In his further

:11:27.:11:35.

discussions regarding pensions, can I ask him to be in mind the

:11:36.:11:44.

comparison in the pension scheme for the police and armed services. I

:11:45.:11:53.

will bear that in mind. The pension deal that was made to the POA would

:11:54.:12:01.

have been fully funded by the government. Last year, 119 prisoners

:12:02.:12:05.

took their lives in one of our prisons. The POA instruction

:12:06.:12:22.

encourages members to withdraw. Can he tell us what impact this

:12:23.:12:27.

withdrawal will have on the already dismal mental health support in our

:12:28.:12:40.

prisons. As I said in my earlier remarks, I would encourage and urge

:12:41.:12:46.

all prison officers to carry on with their task as the shoot. Can I

:12:47.:12:52.

congratulate my honourable friend for the excellent work he is doing

:12:53.:12:59.

with a difficult pack of cards? A prison officer joins to serve. That

:13:00.:13:05.

means you serve in whatever guise without striking. I agree with my

:13:06.:13:10.

honourable friend. The legislation was introduced by the last Labour

:13:11.:13:14.

government, which is why I am surprised that the shadow minister

:13:15.:13:19.

would not condemn this unlawful strike action. When prisons are in

:13:20.:13:23.

crisis and staff are on strike, every available penny should be

:13:24.:13:28.

spent on making prisons safe. Is the Minister aware that half ?1 million

:13:29.:13:32.

of compensation was paid last year to serious criminals because they

:13:33.:13:36.

were released late from prison? When is the Minister

:13:37.:13:53.

going to get that under control and provide prison officers with a safe

:13:54.:13:56.

working environment and prisoners with a safe and drugs free

:13:57.:13:59.

environment in which to be detained? The Right honourable member will be

:14:00.:14:01.

aware that we published a White Paper last year and only last week

:14:02.:14:04.

introduced the first bill to cover prisons and 65 years. It was about

:14:05.:14:10.

improving safety and security. We are taking action. Could administer

:14:11.:14:15.

update the House and some of the measures within the bill to help

:14:16.:14:25.

resolve some of these issues? The central face of the bill is that it

:14:26.:14:29.

makes clear that a fundamental purpose of prisons is to turnaround

:14:30.:14:34.

offenders lights. If prisons are focused on turning around offenders

:14:35.:14:38.

lives, we will reduce reoffending and the 15 billion reoffending bill,

:14:39.:14:43.

and it will make our prisons places of safety. On the question of the

:14:44.:14:53.

independent pay review body, with the Minister, to avoid any doubt,

:14:54.:14:57.

say today that he will accept the recommendations that pay review body

:14:58.:15:03.

makes? I can say that we will obviously look at the

:15:04.:15:09.

recommendations of it. I'm not in a position. I will look at it. We

:15:10.:15:15.

value prison officers. We value the hard work they do. We have taken a

:15:16.:15:20.

lot of action to recognise that. You cannot ask me to commit to results I

:15:21.:15:24.

do not know about at the dispatch box. I agree with the Minister it is

:15:25.:15:33.

wrong for the strike to go ahead, given the facts. There were 6000

:15:34.:15:39.

assault on prison officers up until June 2016. What action is being

:15:40.:15:43.

taken to tackle this and to make sure those who commit these assaults

:15:44.:15:50.

are held to account? He is right. Prison officers work in a

:15:51.:15:54.

challenging environment. Our job is to keep them safe. We're looking at

:15:55.:15:58.

a number of things, including making sure that if there is a crying

:15:59.:16:05.

scene, it is preserved. Making sure the impact statements are admissible

:16:06.:16:13.

and well-prepared to be used in court. Also, where someone is

:16:14.:16:23.

convicted of assaulting a prison officer, their sentence is

:16:24.:16:27.

consecutive and not concurrent. It is important to keep prison officers

:16:28.:16:34.

safe. The Minister has had a lot to say about pay. You must realise that

:16:35.:16:39.

this is unhappiness that has been developing in the Prison Service for

:16:40.:16:44.

many years. It is principally about safety at work. The level of

:16:45.:16:51.

assaults on prison officers, of suicide and self harm, are

:16:52.:16:57.

unprecedented. Fixing that is how the government is going to resolve

:16:58.:17:00.

this in the long-term. When are we going to start to see safety in

:17:01.:17:07.

prisons improve? I have set right from the start that the levels of

:17:08.:17:13.

violence in our prisons is too high. We have been working closely with

:17:14.:17:18.

the Prison Officers Association on health and safety and have made

:17:19.:17:26.

progress on regime management plans that the POA accept. We want to add

:17:27.:17:36.

2500 officers to the front line. These problems were long in the

:17:37.:17:41.

making and it will take time to resolve. We have the resolve to do

:17:42.:17:47.

so and we are doing it. The job of prison officers is made more

:17:48.:17:54.

difficult by the presence in our prisons of drugs and mobile phones.

:17:55.:17:56.

Can Myra Bob Friend -- can he tell me when we will have

:17:57.:18:15.

one prison that is free of drugs and mobile phones? We introduced the

:18:16.:18:22.

bill last week to make it easier to test for drugs. On mobile phones, we

:18:23.:18:29.

are taking action. New legislation from last year has allowed us to

:18:30.:18:35.

turn over 160 mobile phones from jails in the last few months. We are

:18:36.:18:39.

working with mobile network operators to be able to switch off

:18:40.:18:44.

mobile phones in our jails. There is a lot of work being done, but it

:18:45.:18:50.

will take time. These are worrying developments. Does the Minister

:18:51.:18:53.

share with me concern that the action will have an impact on family

:18:54.:19:00.

visits? As he knows, prisoners meeting their families and seeing

:19:01.:19:07.

their children, of which there are 200,000, is extremely important for

:19:08.:19:10.

rehabilitation. Will he confirm this will not be affected? As I have

:19:11.:19:18.

said, strike action is unlawful. If prison officer to withdraw their

:19:19.:19:22.

labour, it will make the regime more restricted. The chairman of the

:19:23.:19:27.

select committee pointed to that. We urge hard-working prison officers to

:19:28.:19:32.

go back to work and make sure that prisons can carry on with regimes,

:19:33.:19:38.

carrying on the important rehabilitative work and making sure

:19:39.:19:44.

prisons are safe. It's concerning this action could lead to Tornado

:19:45.:19:48.

team is being withdrawn. Can he confirm contingency measures are in

:19:49.:19:53.

place to ensure prison order can be maintained at all times? I'm sure

:19:54.:19:58.

our prison officers will do what they always do in terms of their

:19:59.:20:02.

duty, if there is disorder in prisons, even at this difficult

:20:03.:20:10.

time. We are urging the PO aid to withdraw its pollutant. Also we want

:20:11.:20:15.

to ensure we have contingency plans for times like this. The Minister

:20:16.:20:22.

doesn't need me to tell him that staff morale is low and not helped

:20:23.:20:28.

by law staff numbers. In my constituency, Franklins has gone

:20:29.:20:35.

down by 20%. Durham by 15%. When does the Minister think he will be

:20:36.:20:44.

in a position to bring forward a pay offer to recognise the difficult and

:20:45.:20:46.

dangerous job that prison officers do?

:20:47.:20:58.

The independent pay review body will report in April. We will take action

:20:59.:21:07.

further to that. The government commitment to opening new prison

:21:08.:21:22.

places is welcome news. Having modernised fit for purpose prisons

:21:23.:21:26.

will have a huge impact on safety. The role not be corners for people

:21:27.:21:32.

to hide behind. It will be good for rehabilitation. Today we have opened

:21:33.:21:38.

the largest prison in Europe. It takes its first prisoners today. We

:21:39.:21:46.

are reducing overcrowding and improving safety.

:21:47.:22:00.

I have listened carefully. Does the Minister understand the reason why

:22:01.:22:07.

prison officers with roaring is because we have safe and decent

:22:08.:22:13.

prisons. Prisons that I wouldn't want to work on and I'm sure the

:22:14.:22:21.

Minister wouldn't want to either. I'll -- our prison officers do a

:22:22.:22:27.

difficult job. I know how hard they work. The POA has decided it is

:22:28.:22:32.

going to make a stand on pay with a bullet and we have seen today and

:22:33.:22:38.

I'm urging the POA to withdraw its bulletin because it will not do

:22:39.:22:41.

anything to improve safety in our prisons. Could the Minister outlined

:22:42.:22:49.

what steps he is taking in the last few months to improve career

:22:50.:22:58.

prospects of prison officers? In addition to a workforce strategy, we

:22:59.:23:03.

will be publishing later this year, the progressive and promotion

:23:04.:23:08.

opportunity we announced last week which will allow officers to do job

:23:09.:23:14.

search as safer custody roles, mentoring roles, hostage negotiation

:23:15.:23:22.

and get a pay rise is a huge step not just in professional lies in the

:23:23.:23:26.

workforce but allowing people to operate more senior roles and

:23:27.:23:30.

improve the pay packets of our hard-working prison officers? Will

:23:31.:23:39.

the Minister at that his action will be counter productive and any

:23:40.:23:44.

lockdowns will lead to more troubling prisons? The action is

:23:45.:23:56.

unlawful strike action which will do nothing to make our prisons safe. It

:23:57.:24:06.

will be easier to manage the prisoners in our jails if we didn't

:24:07.:24:11.

have to incarcerate 10,000 foreign nationals who should be imprisoned

:24:12.:24:15.

in their own country. Jamaica has rejected an offer from the

:24:16.:24:18.

Government to return its foreign nationals. What steps is the

:24:19.:24:22.

Government doing to get these people back to secure detention in their

:24:23.:24:30.

own countries? Since 2010, we have deported 33,000 prisoners to the

:24:31.:24:41.

home country, 5810 in 15 /16 alone. There is more work that we can do

:24:42.:24:46.

and I am engaging with governments and the foreign governments where

:24:47.:24:51.

the top ten prisoners are held in order to speed up their process. Our

:24:52.:25:00.

prisons are unsafe and dangerous and that present Minister has inherited

:25:01.:25:06.

this situation. We lost 7000 experienced prison officers. When

:25:07.:25:15.

spies came onto the market, we had prisoners going out and expanding

:25:16.:25:19.

their business on the next landing. The present steps taken are a

:25:20.:25:25.

sticking plaster rather than major surgery. We need recruitment of

:25:26.:25:30.

massive numbers, proper pay, proper skills, not adverts for 18 euros

:25:31.:25:37.

with no experience for our prison officers. We lost 7000 prison

:25:38.:25:43.

officers as the honourable member mentioned but we closed 18 prisons.

:25:44.:25:56.

The key change in our force is the advent of spice which has a huge

:25:57.:26:01.

member of values imprisons and they make them violent. The cohort

:26:02.:26:06.

prisoners has become more violent. Three fifths in our prisons are in

:26:07.:26:12.

for dangerous or document -- drug-related offences. More staff

:26:13.:26:18.

are part of the answer and they are doing with drugs and mobile phones

:26:19.:26:23.

and it is a key part of it also. Isn't part of the solution to the

:26:24.:26:27.

problem improving working conditions by prison officers and is in the

:26:28.:26:33.

Government right to close Victorian prisons and open modern ones such as

:26:34.:26:39.

the one in Wellingborough? He is right. The working conditions for

:26:40.:26:43.

prison officers and the estate in which we housed prisoners are all

:26:44.:26:47.

important to improve safety on our prisons. I look forward to the new

:26:48.:26:52.

prison in Wellingborough opening shortly. With 15 of the most

:26:53.:26:59.

dangerous prisoners being transferred from the beer Ming and

:27:00.:27:03.

-- Birmingham riot and with prison officers saying they fear that they

:27:04.:27:07.

safety and the prison being locked down in December, can the Minister

:27:08.:27:13.

understand why the morale of prison officers is so low, especially with

:27:14.:27:17.

the pay award not going to areas like hole-macro. Can the Minister

:27:18.:27:20.

tell me whether the Government will have the flexibility April two -- to

:27:21.:27:27.

give the prison officers that pay increase through his own decision?

:27:28.:27:34.

Prison governors will have control over their budget and they can make

:27:35.:27:38.

decisions around staffing and how they deployed their staff from April

:27:39.:27:47.

this year. We have to be clear that the POA says this unlawful strike

:27:48.:27:52.

action is about pay but only last week we announced not only promotion

:27:53.:27:57.

opportunities but also increased pay for vast numbers of prison officers

:27:58.:28:02.

across the country. Having had an in-depth conversation with the

:28:03.:28:05.

constituent who has just left his role as a prison officer,

:28:06.:28:10.

understanding from him that the prison population is getting younger

:28:11.:28:13.

and spices on the rise, mental health issues are on the rise and

:28:14.:28:21.

morale is rock bottom. Could the Minister, where he is asking for

:28:22.:28:28.

detached... What is he doing to reassure the families of people who

:28:29.:28:34.

are in prison who are vulnerable, that they will not suffer during

:28:35.:28:41.

this dispute? The best reassurance we can give to families of prisons

:28:42.:28:47.

is for the prison officers Association to withdraw its bulletin

:28:48.:28:50.

and not pursue unlawful strike action. That is the best

:28:51.:29:03.

reassurance. Urgent question. I want to as the Secretary of State to make

:29:04.:29:07.

a statement on the cuts to entitlement to Personal Independence

:29:08.:29:17.

Payment. Recent legal judgment have interpreted the assessment criteria

:29:18.:29:21.

the PIP in ways that are different to what was intended by the

:29:22.:29:25.

Coalition Government. We are now making amendments to clarify the

:29:26.:29:30.

criteria used to decide how much benefit claimants receive in order

:29:31.:29:34.

to restore the original aim of the policy as previously agreed by

:29:35.:29:38.

Parliament and which followed extensive consultation. I want to be

:29:39.:29:43.

clear what this is not. It is not a policy change or is it intended to

:29:44.:29:47.

make new savings. Want to reiterate my commitment that there will be no

:29:48.:29:51.

further welfare savings beyond those already legislated for. This will

:29:52.:29:56.

not result in any claimant seeing a reduction in the amount of PIP

:29:57.:30:02.

previously awarded by the DWP. Mental health conditions and

:30:03.:30:04.

physical disabilities which lead to higher costs will continue to be

:30:05.:30:08.

supported as has always been the case. This Government is committed

:30:09.:30:12.

to ensuring our welfare system provides a strong safety net for

:30:13.:30:16.

those who need it. That is why we spend ?50 billion a year supporting

:30:17.:30:21.

people with disabilities and health conditions and we are investing more

:30:22.:30:27.

in mental health than ever before, spending ?11.4 billion a year.

:30:28.:30:29.

Personal Independence Payments are part of that support and provide

:30:30.:30:33.

support towards the additional costs that disabled people face. At the

:30:34.:30:38.

core is the principle that support should be made according to need

:30:39.:30:43.

rather than a certain condition, whether physical or nonphysical. It

:30:44.:30:46.

is designed to focus more support on those likely to have higher costs

:30:47.:30:55.

with their disability. PIP works better for those with health

:30:56.:31:04.

conditions. This is about restoring the original intent of the benefit

:31:05.:31:09.

which has been expanded by the legal judgment. It is appropriate for the

:31:10.:31:13.

Government to act to restore clarity to the law as governments have done

:31:14.:31:17.

before and will no doubt continue to do in the future. In a written

:31:18.:31:25.

statement published without warning on Thursday, ministers announced the

:31:26.:31:29.

cuts the Secretary of State has been referring to and it will take effect

:31:30.:31:33.

in two weeks' time. Over the weekend, another minister said this

:31:34.:31:38.

was to stop the payment of benefits people and I quote, taking pills at

:31:39.:31:44.

home who suffer from anxiety. Why is so little notice being given with no

:31:45.:31:49.

opportunity at all the Parliamentary scoop -- scrutiny of these cuts?

:31:50.:31:57.

Will the Minister confirm, as stated in the impact assessment published

:31:58.:32:02.

with the regulation, that people suffering from schizophrenia, then

:32:03.:32:05.

disability, autism and dementia will be among the worst affected by these

:32:06.:32:12.

cuts? The cut is being achieved by taking benefit away from people

:32:13.:32:18.

whose mobility payments are the result of psychological distress.

:32:19.:32:22.

They will no longer be entitled to benefit according to the wording of

:32:23.:32:26.

the regulation. Doesn't that directly contradict the Prime

:32:27.:32:29.

Minister's commitment to treat mental health on a par with free

:32:30.:32:37.

vehicle health? I thought every part of that question was based in error,

:32:38.:32:43.

if I may say. Nobody is losing money from what they were originally

:32:44.:32:51.

awarded by. That part is simply factually incorrect. Froth from that

:32:52.:32:56.

far from being slipped out, we made a huge effort to let people know

:32:57.:33:01.

this was happening. I left a message for this shadow Secretary of State

:33:02.:33:04.

and I spoke to the chairman of the select committee. I know my

:33:05.:33:10.

honourable friend spoke to a number of colleagues. The idea that this

:33:11.:33:14.

was slipped out is simply ridiculous. He talks about

:33:15.:33:18.

individual conditions. I can only repeat what I said in answer to his

:33:19.:33:25.

original question that PIP is not awarded for conditions. It is

:33:26.:33:29.

awarded for the difficulty in living or mobility that results in those

:33:30.:33:34.

conditions and that all these regulations do is restore the

:33:35.:33:38.

situation to where it was in late November before we had these two

:33:39.:33:43.

court judgments. This is not a new policy, this is not a spending cut.

:33:44.:33:48.

This is simply restoring the benefit to what was intended when it was

:33:49.:33:52.

first introduced under the Coalition Government. Does my right honourable

:33:53.:33:59.

friend agree that any welfare payment, especially one that

:34:00.:34:01.

provides a tiered level of cash payments to people living with

:34:02.:34:06.

enormously diverse range of fiscal mental conditions does require clear

:34:07.:34:10.

assessment criteria, clarity of law and what these new regulations will

:34:11.:34:13.

do is restore that precision back to the law which will benefit audiences

:34:14.:34:20.

of the system? I completely agree with my honourable friend who has

:34:21.:34:24.

huge expertise in this area. We do need clarity, particularly be

:34:25.:34:28.

vulnerable people who are receiving PIP deserve clarity and I can

:34:29.:34:34.

reassure them and the House that all these judgments do, or the

:34:35.:34:40.

regulations do is restore us to the point which everyone knew they were

:34:41.:34:44.

at late last year and have been ever since PIP was introduced. We have

:34:45.:34:52.

heard on Thursday the Government issued these new regulations by

:34:53.:34:56.

which disabled people or people with a chronic condition would be

:34:57.:35:00.

assessed for eligibility to Personal Independence Payments. PIP helps

:35:01.:35:04.

disabled people to fund their living costs and the additional costs based

:35:05.:35:08.

by disabled people because of their condition. These regulations come

:35:09.:35:15.

into force in two weeks without consultation with Social Security

:35:16.:35:20.

advisory committee. This was because of the urgency of the issue. The

:35:21.:35:26.

Government is in effect overturning two tribunal rulings which allows

:35:27.:35:29.

chronic psychological distress to be included in the assessment. If the

:35:30.:35:34.

Secretary of State was so unhappy with the rulings, why did he not use

:35:35.:35:40.

his powers under sections 25 and 26 of the Social Security act and

:35:41.:35:48.

regulations 21 and 22 of the Social Security and child support

:35:49.:35:51.

regulations to challenge these rulings in the court? The effects of

:35:52.:35:55.

these actions not only undermine the judicial process but reduce

:35:56.:36:01.

eligibility to PIP supported by 164,000 people would develop a --

:36:02.:36:04.

debilitating mental health conditions including not being able

:36:05.:36:08.

to go outside their own homes. What discussion has the Secretary of

:36:09.:36:11.

State had disabled people's organisations ahead of bringing

:36:12.:36:15.

forward these regulations? What is his assessment of the effects of

:36:16.:36:19.

these cuts on the health and well-being of the people affected?

:36:20.:36:22.

Given that disabled people are twice as likely to live in poverty as

:36:23.:36:26.

non-disabled people as a result of the extra costs, how many disabled

:36:27.:36:29.

people will be driven into debt or face poverty as a result of these

:36:30.:36:34.

cuts? What is the Cuba to affect of these cuts would be cuts affecting

:36:35.:36:39.

half a million disabled people due to come into effect in April?

:36:40.:36:44.

Finally, why is the Government contradicting their own earlier

:36:45.:36:51.

argument in the 2015 Upper Tribunal case of HL versus the Secretary of

:36:52.:36:55.

State for Work and Pensions where they argued psychological distress

:36:56.:36:58.

should be included in PIP assessments?

:36:59.:37:06.

Prime Minister famously said they needed more support. Why want the

:37:07.:37:16.

government on their Let me deal with some of the points raised. We are

:37:17.:37:22.

appealing against a judgment as well. Because of the lack of clarity

:37:23.:37:32.

that would be caused by leaving the regulations in limbo after the

:37:33.:37:36.

tribunal decision, it is better to move quickly. Also, I should see the

:37:37.:37:41.

tribunal itself said that the assessment criteria were not clear.

:37:42.:37:47.

If they believe that, I am more than happy to accept that. I am taking

:37:48.:37:55.

the opportunity to clarify the regulations. She talks about the

:37:56.:38:01.

effect on disabled people. I agree with. That is the central core of

:38:02.:38:12.

what we are trying to do. Over two thirds of those with this component

:38:13.:38:21.

get the extra payment. That is why this is a better benefit than DLA.

:38:22.:38:28.

That is what was happening under the previous regulations which I am now

:38:29.:38:34.

restoring. Her questions were predicated on the questions that

:38:35.:38:39.

this was a cut. It is simply not a cut. It is not entirely honest of

:38:40.:38:44.

her to see it as a cut. If she looks at the fact of the case, she will

:38:45.:38:52.

recognise that people claiming PIP, specifically claiming people

:38:53.:38:56.

claiming PIP with mental health conditions are better off with PIP.

:38:57.:39:01.

What we are doing is making the benefit clear. Making the change

:39:02.:39:08.

that the benefit is being paid and that that is better for people,

:39:09.:39:12.

particularly with mental health conditions. There can be no

:39:13.:39:18.

accusation of dishonesty in this chamber. No further explanation is

:39:19.:39:37.

required. Rightly, the government is spending money on supporting those

:39:38.:39:45.

with long-term disabilities. This should be done in conjunction with

:39:46.:39:49.

charities and stakeholders, utilising their expertise. He is

:39:50.:40:00.

exactly right. There was extensive consultation when PIP was first

:40:01.:40:06.

introduced about the design of what is inevitably a very complex

:40:07.:40:12.

benefit. What we have seen, as I have just explained, is considerable

:40:13.:40:17.

improvement in the awards particularly to those with mental

:40:18.:40:21.

health conditions. What the government's changes do is restore

:40:22.:40:28.

that better situation than people knew in the past. These changes will

:40:29.:40:37.

exclude disabled people from vital financial assistance and sends a

:40:38.:40:41.

dangerous message to the public that people who suffer with mental health

:40:42.:40:52.

problems are less crucial than people with physical disabilities. I

:40:53.:41:03.

ask that the Minister clarify if this matter will be brought to the

:41:04.:41:09.

House. Finally, I ask if a debate can take place as a matter of great

:41:10.:41:13.

urgency to give the House the opportunity to scrutinise the

:41:14.:41:27.

proposals. Matters of what will be debated are matters for the usual

:41:28.:41:33.

channels. Her first question was based on the misapprehension that

:41:34.:41:40.

people with mental health conditions are doing worse under PIP as it is

:41:41.:41:45.

currently run. It is factually not the case. The government overall

:41:46.:41:51.

spending ?11.4 billion in people with mental health conditions. More

:41:52.:41:56.

than any previous government has paid out. And specifically also the

:41:57.:42:02.

overall we are spending ?50 billion a year on disability benefits. Every

:42:03.:42:06.

year in this Parliament, we will be spending more than was spent in

:42:07.:42:12.

2010. That is how we are meeting our commitments to disabled people,

:42:13.:42:18.

which I take very seriously and the whole government takes very

:42:19.:42:26.

seriously. Are there lessons for the framers of the regulations to avoid

:42:27.:42:29.

them being effectively rewritten by the tribunal is? There are always

:42:30.:42:36.

lessons for anyone who writes regulations. Benefits regulations

:42:37.:42:41.

are complex because the need to be very sensitive because we are

:42:42.:42:46.

dealing with vulnerable people, in this case were dealing with disabled

:42:47.:42:49.

people who have extra living costs or difficulties with mobility. It is

:42:50.:42:58.

one of the roles of the courts to point out where it has gone wrong.

:42:59.:43:03.

The courts have said they were not clear. The government is clarifying

:43:04.:43:12.

them. That is to everyone's benefit. The Prime Minister has said there

:43:13.:43:16.

should be parity of esteem between mental and physical health

:43:17.:43:21.

conditions. By overriding the court on this matter, 160,000 people who

:43:22.:43:26.

otherwise would have been getting support through PIP now will not get

:43:27.:43:40.

that support. Did the Prime Minister agreed to this? She is wrong to say

:43:41.:43:45.

that 160,000 people will not get PIP because of this. She knows that this

:43:46.:43:52.

is not whether you get PIP or not, this is a matter of their being two

:43:53.:44:01.

other descriptors. I am not the Prime Minister. She is simply wrong

:44:02.:44:11.

when she says that this will deny people PIP. As she knows, PIP is

:44:12.:44:17.

given for the difficulty in living costs or in mobility costs. There

:44:18.:44:22.

are 12 different attributes that are considered. Mise court cases were

:44:23.:44:38.

different. I would like to thank the Secretary of State for his

:44:39.:44:50.

clarification. Can he assure us that the government is committed to

:44:51.:44:52.

supporting people throughout the process? We are engaged in a PIP

:44:53.:45:02.

improvement project. She is right to ask the question about consistency.

:45:03.:45:09.

I know there is a concern across the House about delays. Because of the

:45:10.:45:16.

PIP improvement plan, claims are now been cleared at over five times the

:45:17.:45:21.

rate they were in January 2014. The delays that have been in the system

:45:22.:45:28.

are being reduced and we are addressing the issue of consistency.

:45:29.:45:33.

One of his predecessors resigned a year ago because of cuts to the

:45:34.:45:40.

disabled. It doesn't seem he understands be strong feeling

:45:41.:45:44.

amongst so many other vulnerable people, that they will be in the

:45:45.:45:50.

firing line again for cuts. We receive e-mails constantly from

:45:51.:45:55.

those affected and organisations over the way the disabled are being

:45:56.:45:59.

hit out time and time again. And happy to assure them and the

:46:00.:46:06.

honourable gentleman that what I'm talking about today is not a cut. We

:46:07.:46:12.

are not going to have any new welfare cuts this Parliament, apart

:46:13.:46:16.

from those that have already been legislated for. This decision we

:46:17.:46:24.

have taken is not a cut. It's clear that different medical conditions

:46:25.:46:27.

will have different impacts on people is living and mobility. Does

:46:28.:46:32.

he agree that we must recognise the simple fact if we are to continue to

:46:33.:46:36.

target resources on those who are most vulnerable and most in need? I

:46:37.:46:44.

do and that was the purpose of the original design of PIP. It's better

:46:45.:46:48.

than disability living allowance which it replaced precisely because

:46:49.:46:52.

it reflects the reality in individuals lives that some will

:46:53.:46:57.

have more difficulty in going about their daily business because of a

:46:58.:47:02.

disability and the PIP benefit is specifically designed in a very

:47:03.:47:07.

careful and complex way to achieve that and it does. At one of the

:47:08.:47:17.

things ministers have to do... The rules are clear. If everything is

:47:18.:47:23.

working so well, why are my advice surgeries full of people who are

:47:24.:47:29.

awaiting further assessments for a very long time who are being denied

:47:30.:47:36.

them when they have been long-term disabled, who are being caused

:47:37.:47:40.

massive amounts of distress by the process, and who feel utter despair

:47:41.:47:48.

at having to half anything to do it at? There is an improvement plan

:47:49.:47:53.

which let's us know that things need to improve. I hope the honourable

:47:54.:48:04.

lady can be reassured by the fact we are recruiting a team of health

:48:05.:48:12.

professionals to help us scrutinise this. We will be trialling audio

:48:13.:48:20.

recording of selected assessments from the beginning of next month to

:48:21.:48:25.

understand better how the assessments can be improved.

:48:26.:48:36.

From both providers? Bat point was made by a number of NGOs and by

:48:37.:48:50.

colleagues on both sides of the House. I have constituents who

:48:51.:49:00.

cannot leave their homes because of a physical disability or our mental

:49:01.:49:04.

disability. Why should one be entitled to receive support via PIP

:49:05.:49:10.

and not the other? They both will be entitled to PIP as it will be

:49:11.:49:20.

assessed. The only difference... Each individual has different levels

:49:21.:49:25.

of difficulty. It is often the case that cognitive impacts for people

:49:26.:49:30.

who are blind will not have a fluctuating condition, which is

:49:31.:49:34.

clearly less amenable to treatment than some other conditions. It is

:49:35.:49:38.

the level of some difficulty in someone's daily life, either they

:49:39.:49:42.

have a physical or mental health problem that matters in terms of the

:49:43.:49:47.

PIP assessment. The Secretary of State will be aware that since

:49:48.:49:52.

joining this place I have been a strong campaigner for parity between

:49:53.:49:57.

mental and physical health. It is not a binary discussion between

:49:58.:50:02.

mental and physical health, but the point of PIP is that it promotes

:50:03.:50:07.

targeted health for people with mental health conditions and is it

:50:08.:50:09.

not the case that more people are getting payments under PIP for

:50:10.:50:16.

mental health conditions than ever was the case for DLA? I pay tribute

:50:17.:50:22.

to him for the good work he has done in this House for mental health.

:50:23.:50:30.

Core tenant of the PIP design is the tenants between mental and physical

:50:31.:50:35.

health conditions. I think the whole house should welcome this move. It

:50:36.:50:40.

is a better benefit than DLA. Growing PIP out in the way we are

:50:41.:50:45.

and attempting to improve the assessment process is the best way

:50:46.:50:50.

we can help people with all kinds of disabilities, but specifically those

:50:51.:50:54.

with mental health conditions. I received an e-mail over the

:50:55.:51:04.

weekend. My constituent's rights, someone who has been diagnosed with

:51:05.:51:12.

PTSD, I am angry about his remarks. Considering the stigma mentally

:51:13.:51:16.

disabled people already had to suffer, this is beyond the pale.

:51:17.:51:19.

Does the Government recognise the offence these remarks make and

:51:20.:51:25.

doesn't it associate itself and apologise for them? It is the

:51:26.:51:30.

honourable men member for Mid Norfolk who has apologised for those

:51:31.:51:36.

remarks. He has also done a lot of work on mental health issues. He has

:51:37.:51:41.

a personal history and a family history which makes him particularly

:51:42.:51:46.

sensitive to mental health issues and since he has apologised, I would

:51:47.:51:50.

hope the House would access that apology. The for those who deal with

:51:51.:51:59.

vulnerable situations, it is horrible to hear these cuts when

:52:00.:52:05.

they are clearly not. Can I ask the Secretary of State to describe where

:52:06.:52:09.

from the ?15 million -- ?50 billion budget where it will be paid for

:52:10.:52:16.

this increase? Since the purpose of the announcement and the regulations

:52:17.:52:21.

that the Government is doing is not to have to look for cuts elsewhere,

:52:22.:52:26.

then I am happy to say to my honourable friend that we can avoid

:52:27.:52:32.

that. We have a welfare budget and we are spending more on disability

:52:33.:52:37.

benefits than any previous Government has done and we are proud

:52:38.:52:43.

of that fact. We have tabled a prayer on this to force the debate

:52:44.:52:47.

and I thank the Leader of the Opposition for supporting it.

:52:48.:52:54.

Constituent me about how the impacts -- amendments will impact on her.

:52:55.:53:00.

She receives low rate mobility and servers from ADHD, depression and

:53:01.:53:04.

social phobia. Her life is affected by her mental health. She cannot

:53:05.:53:08.

plan the route of the journey and followed the route of their familiar

:53:09.:53:11.

journey. Why does the Government want to deny her the mobility

:53:12.:53:18.

component of PIP? She is not having any changes to the rules that have

:53:19.:53:30.

been in place. These are rules that were passed by a Government of which

:53:31.:53:41.

he was a member. I am grateful to the Minister for offering some

:53:42.:53:45.

clarity on this issue. On one specific point, I wondered if he

:53:46.:53:49.

could confirm that people who need help managing their medication

:53:50.:53:52.

continued to receive the support to do so. Not only will they come under

:53:53.:54:01.

the appropriate descriptor for PIP, but one of the things that hasn't

:54:02.:54:06.

been mentioned yet is that they receive support from the NHS as

:54:07.:54:12.

well. We have a health care system precisely to advise people issues

:54:13.:54:17.

like medication, so the state is already doing something to help them

:54:18.:54:21.

and clearly that is necessary and it will continue to be a very important

:54:22.:54:32.

part of the system. The proposed changes will affect around 160,000

:54:33.:54:39.

people, could prevent people accessing the financial support they

:54:40.:54:43.

need to get to health or job appointments, get to pay for fuel

:54:44.:54:46.

and heating, take their children to school, see friends and family

:54:47.:54:51.

clippings that are essential for their daily lives and recovery. If

:54:52.:54:55.

the Secretary of State is so confident that he is right and mind

:54:56.:55:02.

is wrong, he meet with mind macro and discuss with them who is right

:55:03.:55:06.

and who is wrong and then we can come back to the Chamber and get an

:55:07.:55:19.

assurance. -- MIND -- to have one. I have spoke with MIND on this matter

:55:20.:55:23.

and mail coming to speak to us again soon. I pointed out to them before

:55:24.:55:33.

in the course of this urgent question. Nobody is losing any

:55:34.:55:40.

benefits that has originally been awarded to them by the DWP. That is

:55:41.:55:47.

the fact that perhaps most needs to be got across to those receiving the

:55:48.:55:57.

benefits. I read into the detail and to that end, the camera Secretary of

:55:58.:56:00.

State confirm my understanding that far more people with mental health

:56:01.:56:04.

issues will be eligible for PIP than ever were under the old DLA? He

:56:05.:56:13.

makes a correct point that I have made several times. PIP is a better

:56:14.:56:17.

benefit than DLA for many reasons but perhaps the most important is

:56:18.:56:23.

that it is more available to people with mental health conditions. It

:56:24.:56:27.

always has been and the rules we are putting emplacement sure that it

:56:28.:56:31.

continues in the way that it always done. Why is the Government

:56:32.:56:38.

contradicting their earlier arguments in 2015 Upper Tribunal

:56:39.:56:44.

case of HL versus Secretary of State the DWP when they argued that

:56:45.:56:47.

psychological distress should be included in PIP assessments?

:56:48.:56:57.

Psychological distress is included in PIP assessments. It always has

:56:58.:57:00.

done nothing changes as a result of these regulations. Can I thank the

:57:01.:57:08.

Secretary of State for the reassurances we have received so far

:57:09.:57:11.

given the correspondence I received, Minister confirm that these

:57:12.:57:15.

regulations will not result in anybody receiving less money than

:57:16.:57:18.

they were awarded by the deeply dug -- DWP and there is no intention to

:57:19.:57:23.

make new savings? Nobody will receive less money than they were

:57:24.:57:29.

originally receiving in their award from the DWP as a result of the

:57:30.:57:34.

regulations we have introduced. With learning disabilities,

:57:35.:57:40.

schizophrenia, autism highlighted by my honourable friend, I am -- they

:57:41.:57:45.

are more likely to be anxious about the assessment and have difficulty

:57:46.:57:49.

in conveying them edition and my constituents are telling me they are

:57:50.:57:52.

subject to a more aggressive assessment process. Does the

:57:53.:57:56.

Secretary of State Sharma considers that these people will be

:57:57.:57:59.

particularly vulnerable if these proposals are not reduced carefully?

:58:00.:58:04.

We are introducing them carefully and I agree that people who are

:58:05.:58:11.

likely to suffer anxiety should not be made unnecessarily anxious. That

:58:12.:58:14.

is why I am at pains to reassure them, the House and everyone else

:58:15.:58:20.

that this is not a policy change, a cut, nobody will receive less

:58:21.:58:23.

benefit than they were originally awarded by the DWP. I commend the

:58:24.:58:32.

Secretary of State for his response. Can he, through the improvement plan

:58:33.:58:39.

process of PIP, give assurances to Mike constituents who find it

:58:40.:58:43.

difficult to travel to assessments that they will be supported? I can.

:58:44.:58:52.

We already will visit people who need that particular service and we

:58:53.:59:00.

will continue to do so. The reality of the situation is the disability

:59:01.:59:06.

benefits system, whether PIP or its predecessor benefits have never been

:59:07.:59:09.

sufficiently sensitive or flexible to the needs of people with mental

:59:10.:59:14.

health illnesses and the court rulings in relation that we are

:59:15.:59:22.

discussing today was one small step of interpreting existing

:59:23.:59:25.

regulations, not new ones, to make that a little bit better. Does he

:59:26.:59:29.

not recognise that by rushing out these new regulations come he is

:59:30.:59:32.

changing and interpretation and existing one and in doing so he's

:59:33.:59:37.

going to make people with mental health problems and bonuses a lot

:59:38.:59:40.

more anxious and a lot more unfairly treated? He makes an important point

:59:41.:59:48.

but I don't agree with his assessment, particularly because

:59:49.:59:55.

what the tribunal said was that the regulations weren't clear enough.

:59:56.:59:58.

What we are doing is clarifying them. We are clarifying them in a

:59:59.:00:04.

way that restores the attention to the original intention that has

:00:05.:00:07.

always been there for the benefit. That should provide certainty to

:00:08.:00:15.

people, not uncertainty. I recognise the Government is returning the

:00:16.:00:19.

scope and funds but does not the focus on these vulnerable people

:00:20.:00:22.

were challenging needs highlight the need for more integration and more

:00:23.:00:30.

funds for social care? My honourable friend makes a good point on this

:00:31.:00:36.

and he's right about greater integration. It is why we have

:00:37.:00:41.

created a work and health unit so that the first time my department

:00:42.:00:45.

and the default of health working together on a daily basis for the

:00:46.:00:52.

very many people whose needs fall partly in health and partly because

:00:53.:00:57.

of the benefit system just we can provide a more integrated personal

:00:58.:01:05.

-- and sensitive service to them. So many of my constituents have had to

:01:06.:01:08.

go through the reconsideration process and all the way to a

:01:09.:01:12.

tribunal to be awarded the number of PIP points they should have been of

:01:13.:01:17.

awarded in the first place. Though -- does the Secretary of State had

:01:18.:01:20.

plans to introduce support for disabled people who are awaiting the

:01:21.:01:26.

outcome of tribunal decisions? He makes the point about people who

:01:27.:01:32.

appeal. Only 6% of PIP judgments are appealed, so the number is very low.

:01:33.:01:38.

We are seeking to improve the system by making sure that more health

:01:39.:01:43.

information is available earlier in the assessment process which I'm

:01:44.:01:50.

sure will help his constituents. I had been following the exchanges

:01:51.:01:54.

closely in much that my constituents want to know their MP has understood

:01:55.:01:58.

things correctly. Can he understand by understanding from what has been

:01:59.:02:03.

said that 25% of PIP claimants now get the highest rate compared to 15%

:02:04.:02:11.

under DLA and that more mental health conditions qualify for PIP

:02:12.:02:19.

than ever did before under the old DLA system? My honourable friend is

:02:20.:02:24.

correct. In both of those assumptions. I am happy that he can

:02:25.:02:30.

share them with his constituents. Harris Moss -- specifically, I can

:02:31.:02:33.

add that there were more PIP claimants with mental health

:02:34.:02:37.

conditions claiming the mobility component. 27% of PIP -- PIP

:02:38.:02:43.

claimants can better 9% on DLA which is another improvement. I have had

:02:44.:02:53.

surgery is faced with constituents who are increasingly anxious by

:02:54.:02:59.

these changes., Secretary of State confirm what assessment the

:03:00.:03:02.

Government has undertaken on the impact of these cuts on the already

:03:03.:03:06.

vulnerable mental health status and well-being of claimants and will he

:03:07.:03:09.

make that assessment available to the House? The analysis is available

:03:10.:03:19.

and I can only emphasise to the honourable lady's constituents and

:03:20.:03:26.

the Shadow Secretary of State who is chuntering that this is not a change

:03:27.:03:30.

in policy. This is not a cut. Nobody will receive less benefit than they

:03:31.:03:37.

were originally awarded by the DWP. I can hear people chuntering on both

:03:38.:03:43.

sides. Not something I remember doing when I was on the backbenches.

:03:44.:03:51.

You sat next to me on those benches and I remember. We have an excellent

:03:52.:03:55.

Secretary of State and one of the most caring in the Government and

:03:56.:04:01.

I'm sure what the Government is doing is correct. As the honourable

:04:02.:04:05.

gentleman opposite said, it does give members the opportunity to

:04:06.:04:10.

highlight that the process of assessment is not working for a

:04:11.:04:13.

number of our constituents. I am fed up with singer constituent every

:04:14.:04:16.

week who clearly should have been awarded it and not getting it. Can

:04:17.:04:21.

he say more on how we will improve that situation? I am grateful for

:04:22.:04:42.

your remarks. In terms of the PIP improvement service, we are trying

:04:43.:04:45.

to improve all aspects of it, but the accuracy of the assessments, the

:04:46.:04:51.

speed of the assessments and I think the early provision of more health

:04:52.:04:57.

information will improve the situation hugely, not least for his

:04:58.:05:01.

constituents and others. They find it a stressful process. I would

:05:02.:05:08.

challenge the assertion that PIP is back of the bit with mental health

:05:09.:05:12.

conditions as a constituent of mine has a diagnosis of bipolar disorder

:05:13.:05:16.

and used to receive DLA on the grounds of the need for continual

:05:17.:05:20.

supervision. It is not recognised under PIP and my constituent is not

:05:21.:05:26.

only losing her entitlement to PIP but her working tax credit which was

:05:27.:05:31.

past ported via DLI -- DLA. What reassurances does this give to my

:05:32.:05:40.

constituent and others like hers? I can only repeat the fax to the

:05:41.:05:47.

honourable lady that over two thirds of PIP recipients with a mental

:05:48.:05:51.

health condition get the enhanced rate daily living component. That

:05:52.:05:57.

compares to 22% who received the DLA care. As I explained on the mobility

:05:58.:06:05.

component, the relevant figures are 27% and 9%. The facts are

:06:06.:06:10.

incontrovertible. More people with mental health conditions are

:06:11.:06:12.

receiving PIP then used to receive DLA. It is a better benefit for

:06:13.:06:15.

people with mental health conditions than DLA was.

:06:16.:06:22.

My constituents will be relieved to hear what my boyfriend said about

:06:23.:06:30.

looking at the assessment process which goes on for far too long.

:06:31.:06:41.

Regarding a home visit, could they consider information from family and

:06:42.:06:47.

friends? We already do home visits. If there are cases where he thinks

:06:48.:06:51.

people should have had home visit and did not, then get in touch with

:06:52.:06:55.

me and we will look at the details of what is happening. Of the many

:06:56.:07:04.

constituents who have come to my surgery with problems regarding PiP,

:07:05.:07:13.

there is one which springs to mind. It was not somebody who wanted to

:07:14.:07:17.

sit at home and take pills, he simply was not able to get out

:07:18.:07:21.

there. How can the government possibly claim to want parity of

:07:22.:07:25.

esteem when it is enshrining disparity in this? It is obviously

:07:26.:07:31.

impossible for me to comment on an individual case where I have not

:07:32.:07:36.

seen the details, but the parity between mental and physical

:07:37.:07:41.

disabilities is embedded in PiP. That is the whole point of it. Far

:07:42.:07:48.

more people with mental health conditions are receiving PiP and

:07:49.:07:53.

used to receive DLA. It might be an uncomfortable truth, but it is still

:07:54.:08:01.

true. Can the Secretary of State firstly tell the House by the

:08:02.:08:07.

committee was bypassed in passing this recommendation? Can he tell us

:08:08.:08:12.

what consultations he has had with organisations that represent

:08:13.:08:17.

disabled people? People with mental health conditions who cannot follow

:08:18.:08:26.

the route of an unfamiliar route should be awarded the higher rate

:08:27.:08:32.

and not the lower one. I spoke to the chairman of the SSC and in front

:08:33.:08:39.

choir was invoking the procedure allowed. He and his committee still

:08:40.:08:46.

have the power to look at these regulations and make

:08:47.:08:50.

recommendations. They can do so. He will have observed that many people

:08:51.:08:56.

on all benches have spoken of the problems of uncertainty and how they

:08:57.:09:02.

affect many of those who have the mental health conditions we have

:09:03.:09:05.

spoken of. We are removing the uncertainty and meeting the desire

:09:06.:09:14.

to have clarity in the system. And restoring it to where it was before.

:09:15.:09:21.

It provides quick certainty for people. That is what many people

:09:22.:09:31.

won't. Port of or -- point of order. I wonder if you can guide the as to

:09:32.:09:38.

what is the appropriate step I should take? Last week at Prime

:09:39.:09:41.

Minister's Questions I asked a question to the Prime Minister about

:09:42.:09:45.

a petition being handed into Number Ten Downing St. The Prime Minister

:09:46.:09:49.

said she did not understand what I was talking about. My question is

:09:50.:09:57.

very specific. The petitioner said they had made an appointment to hand

:09:58.:10:07.

in the petition. I have subsequently been contacted by one of the

:10:08.:10:11.

petitioners to say they had made an appointment to go into Number Ten

:10:12.:10:15.

Downing St and were not allowed to hand position into Number Ten

:10:16.:10:22.

Downing St but outside the police officer took

:10:23.:10:23.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS