Clause 8
Welfare Reform Bill
1:30 pm
Jim Murphy (Minister of State (Work), Department for Work and Pensions; East Renfrewshire, Labour)
I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s partial bravery.
The other point that I wanted to make may seem small. It is not an issue for Government, or for the Committee—it is a matter for the House authorities. One of the issues for Members of Parliament who wish to provide objective information to their constituents is connected to the fact that we were lobbied yesterday by the sub-postmasters—entirely appropriately, given the genuine concerns that they feel. One of the things that has surprised me in the past is that our own post office in this building does not always carry the type of leaflets that our own constituents are encouraged to pick up and to rely on, respond to and fill in. If the post office here had such forms available, so that Members could see them in the course of their daily business in the Commons, that would be a small step in our own education in our constituents’ experience, and may also enable us to pass such information on in our constituency surgeries.
On the specifics of the amendments, at the moment we use the term personal capability assessment. Incidentally, I do not think that that is the appropriate term, but that is something that we can consider as the Bill passes through the House and through the other place. In many people’s minds it is a term that is connected to incapacity benefit, and one of the weaknesses of incapacity benefit has been that it has labelled people as incapacitated or incapable. The personal capability assessment has been seen as an intrinsic part of IB. In terms of how we describe this new assessment phase, it will be important to move away from that as well.
Currently, we use the term PCA to describe the medical assessment of entitlement to incapacity benefit. With ESA, we will use—at the moment—the personal capability assessment to describe a wider process. First, it will assess a person’s capability for work—and with it, their eligibility for ESA, and secondly, their capability for work-related activity—and with it, whether they should be a member of the support group. Thirdly, it will assess the health-related support that a person needs to improve their capability and move closer to appropriate work. I will add some detail to those comments and then, if hon. Members wish, I will give way.
Members of the Committee have suggested that the first two tests should be determined by the same assessment. That is the crux of the amendment before us. Although they are part of a single assessment process, they are assessing different concepts—work, and the ability to undertake work-related activity. Therefore, I want to talk through what happens when a customer applies for ESA.
Where it is clear from written evidence supplied by a customer claiming ESA that he or she has limited capability for work-related activity and should therefore be a member of the support group, we will not require that person to come in for a face to face medical examination. I am sure that hon. Members would agree that it would be wrong to ask customers with the most severe problems or conditions to attend a medical examination of that nature. Where it is not apparent from the written evidence that a customer should be in the support group, they will be asked to attend a medical examination at which the assessments for both limited capability for work and work-related activity will be carried out.
The eligibility criteria for limited capability for work will involve a similar process to that which we use to determine eligibility for incapacity benefit. We will use a benefit entitlement threshold that is satisfied when a person scores 15 points by satisfying one or more physical or mental descriptors. This 15-point threshold represents a level at which it is unreasonable to expect a person to work. It does not identify the level of functional limitation at which it would be unreasonable to require someone to engage in work-related activity. There is no direct relationship between someone having a high score in the test for limited capability for work and that person being an appropriate candidate for membership of the support group.
The assessment of limited capability for work deals with the threshold to entitlement to employment and support allowance and makes no determination about the capability for work-related activity. The descriptors used are designed to look at a wider and less severe level of functional limitation and do not involve the degree of sophistication that we are using for limited capability for work-related activity. I appreciate that this is to some extent detailed, but I will add more detail.
The points raised by hon. Members on both sides of the Committee before the interruption were similar to those that I, the Under-Secretary and others teased out through the process. We sought reassurances on the process and asked similar questions to those that were asked in our proceedings earlier today.
Mr. Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab) rose—
Mr. Boswellrose—
Mr. Murphy I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Mr. David).