Last week saw yet another pronouncement from the latest UK Work and Pensions Minister on reform of welfare to work - this time about the bonuses to be paid to private companies if they manage to get people off benefits and back to work. They face a pretty uphill struggle in large parts of Wales, where there are fewer jobs, poor public transport and little affordable childcare, and high levels of ill-health and disability.
For sure, some people who have common health conditions can (and do) work - if the jobs are available and reasonable adjustments are made. But in an area where any advert for a decent job attracts hundreds of applicants, as did a recent advert for apprecenticeships with Valleys 2 Coast housing, someone who needs any 'adjustment' to be able to work is going to find themselves in the pile of rejected applications.
With a real threat of loss of benefit hanging over people who don't get a job, are we about to see large numbers of Welsh people forced to go to the south east of England to take up jobs, children left to fend for themselves while single mums are forced to work? The people of Wales need to wake up to the damage that this 'get tough' approach could bring, unless we have the jobs and support services to go with it.
Monday, 3 March 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Hello Victoria.
This matter is one of the bees that currently inhabit my bonnet.
I have blogged extensively on this matter and have attempted to enlighten the local blogmosphere with some quite disturbing facts regarding the Government's Pathways to Work scheme and their close involvement with the private sector insurance industry.
There is a particular Welsh connection to this disgraceful situation.
One of the 'architects' of the new scheme is Prof. Mansel Aylward, a good old Merthyr boy, who is well known for his involvement in the DWP and with the American Insurance Company, UNUM.
UNUM have been credibly described as an "outlaw company who have operated in an illegal fashion for many years" and have been fined many millions of dollars in the USA for their illegal activities. They have also been described as having operated "claims denial factories".
Their NYSE share price is at an all time low, due to their record, and consequently they have to find new markets for their products. The UK seems to be it, with the Welsh NHS as a particular target.
It should be noted that the same Prof. Mansel Aylward has been appointed by Edwina Hart AM, Health Minister, as the appropriate person to undertake Health Service reconfiguration in the Rhondda Cynon Taf area. In fact he has been eulogised by Huw Lewis AM as a person of "stature and integrity" and "huge experience" to reconfigure the Health Service provision for the whole of Wales.
Of course, Huw fails to mention the area from which this "huge experience" is gained. He also fails to mention the cosy relationship between Prof. Aylward and UNUM.
The undermining of the DWP and NHS by the private sector is currently taking place before our very eyes with the full support of our elected representatives.
You have been warned!!!
If you have a spare moment,kindly call in at my blog:
www.yourpaljohnny.blogspot.com
for plenty more information on these connections.
Have no fear that the disabled will have to move to the South East of England in order to find work. They will just have to remain in Wales scraping by on what is euphemistically called "Job Seeker's Allowance", at a lower rate than Incapacity Benefit, once they have been "migrated" there as a result of medical reports modelled on those provided by the UNUM method of claims denial.
Your pal.
johnny.
You might be interested in some research that Professor Aylward has been doing with colleagues, which concludes that: 'Introducing conditionality on IB claims ... is
likely to have a negative impact on the people claiming this benefit, by imposing a further burden on who are people already living in deprived circumstances, who are unwell, have insufficient education and training,
and are living in an area where there are few job opportunities.'
He also says that 'conditionality may be an effective approach for those who are closest to the labour market, [but] it will
fail the most disadvantaged and marginalised members of society.'
Not sure if he changed his spots or if his views have been misrepresented - but i think these are powerful and important conclusions that surprise surprise havent had the coverage they deserve.
Hello Victoria.
Thanks for the tip. I would be very grateful if you could provide a link or reference for Prof. Aylward's conclusion that:
"Introducing conditionality on IB claims...is likely to have a negative impact on the people claiming this benefit".
From this statement, it would appear that Prof. Aylward has had a Damascene conversion, or something, as the whole ethos of the Pathways to Work Scheme is to impose a new UNUM style 'conditionality' on every claimant in order for them to receive Benefit.
Maybe he is trying to cloud the issue of his intimate associations with the "outlaw" insurance company, UNUM whose methods of claims denial he has introduced into the DWP.
It would appear that I have opened a can of fog and smoke with very few mirrors with my continued asking of the same old awkward question regarding Governmental associations with the "outlaws" UNUM.
The responses that I have received to date, from a variety of Secretaries of State and Ministers, are a uniform denial that Government have "no formal associations", "made no commercial payments to....", "no commercial associations with....." and in the case of Peter Hain MP, "I do not think it appropriate to comment on what has been said about UNUM's operation, either in Great Britain or overseas". I wondered why.
Despite these denials, I have a document from within UNUM that clearly shows that Dr. Peter Dewis, UNUM's Customer Care Director, is carrying out review services on behalf of the DWP yet apparently receives no payment from them. Hardly a professional arrangement, I'm sure you will agree.
This obviously arouses further suspicions of a cover-up and a clear desire for Government to distance themselves from UNUM within the public sphere.
Nobody wants to talk about it and that indicates to me, at least, that there is something about this that they would wish to hide. They all deny any involvement with UNUM but just the following few links clearly show evidence to the contrary:
http://www.unum.co.uk/Home/Corporate_Information/Press_Releases/2005/Brighter_Future_for_UK_Disabled_People.htm?UPCC=True
http://www.compassonline.org.uk/article.asp?n=563
http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Wessely_Woodstock_and_Warfare.htm
When I saw that Edwina Hart AM had commissioned Mansel Aylward to reconfigure Health Service provision in Rhondda Cynon Taf and that Huw Lewis AM had further suggested that Aylward should reconfigure the whole of the Welsh Health Service I felt that a great illusion was about to take place.
I attempted to broach the subject on Huw's blog and was a little surprised to learn that my comments concerning the associations between Aylward and the "outlaws" were deemed to be defamatory and he refused to address the matter.
Obviously, this was an attempt to frighten me off but having been researching these matters for quite some time and being quite sure of my facts, I am strengthened in my resolve to get to the bottom of this puzzling situation.
Maybe you and your colleagues could ask a few pertinent questions, as and when convenient, as I am quite sure that the Welsh public would not be particularly happy to know that their Health Services are about to be reconfigured by an associate of "outlaws".
I'm pretty sure that the lack of coverage is deliberate as the MSM all seem to be unwilling to properly investigate this matter.
Interestingly enough, the short BBC TV report about UNUM, linked from my blog, appears to have had absolutely no follow-up at all. Again, I wonder why.
I'll be glad to keep you informed of any developments and would be grateful for any assistance that you are able to lend.
Your pal.
johnny.
Hello Johnny,
Here is the link to the report i mentioned: http://www.epolitix.com/NR/rdonlyres/03C6EAF4-BACB-40A2-9461-7775C7742ABC/0/ConditionalityinContext.pdf
My view is that we should not get hung up on particular individuals because there are plenty of other people who share these views e.g. David Freud to name but one.
Hello Victoria.
Thanks for the link. It's the Welsh connection again!
I can understand your reluctance to get 'hung up' on particular individuals but one individual in particular is a common denominator in all of these 'health' based initiatives in the DWP. Yes, that's right our old pal Mansel.
His influence in these matters knows no bounds. It would appear that all roads lead back to Mansel Aylward.
He has been responsible for many 'papers' concerning his promulgation of the relatively new BioPsychoSocial 'science' theories.
It should be noted that these theories do not form part of the mainstream of medical thought at this time.
Of course, these theories fit in well with Government's desire to find reasons and excuses to migrate (a very significant word) claimants from Incapacity Benefit on to Job Seeker's Allowance. It's a simple matter of money saving.
Mansel has been successful in introducing these theories into the DWP's thinking during his time there as Chief Medical Adviser.
The whole training and evaluation system of the so-called Examining Medical Practitioners is virtually all Mansel's own work.
Many of these theories depend to a great extent on what Mansel euphemistically calls 'organic' and 'inorganic' illness. In simple terms, if he can see it, it's 'organic', if he can't, then it's 'inorganic' and tends to used to the detriment of the claimant.
This stance clearly enables the DWP to remove claimants from IB and 'migrate' them to JSA despite the fact that there are no suitable jobs available. Despite there being no expectations of any of these 'suitable' jobs becoming available in the forseeable future this consequently 'justifies' these 'migrations' and saves loads of money.
Some interesting facts have come to light regarding the audit system of DWP medical reports.
If a report is questioned and is sent for audit, the auditor is required to stop at the first failure of the report to comply with the relevant criteria and ends the audit there and then. The report is then filed as a fully compliant report and is endorsed NFA, No Further Action. This is despite the possibility or probability of further failures of compliance being found.
The initial failure is then 'played down' and a variety of excuses would then be offered to justify the claimants removal from benefit.
The final arbiter, of course, would be Mansel or his successor, who would dismiss any complaint with the well worn cliche that the report is 'fit for purpose' or 'not so flawed that it would confuse'.
I am personally aware of a number of cases where these tactics have been applied.
I'm afraid that Mansel Aylward has much to answer for in the introduction of these clearly questionable methods.
I have put this matter to professional auditors and they have scoffed in derision. I have been informed that, at best, it is a partial audit and as such has little use, unless, of course you have something that you wish to hide.
His intimate associations with UNUM are worthy of further investigation and comment, particularly bearing in mind their past history of illegal operations.
I am quite disappointed but not surprised to see the negative reactions to my awkward question regarding Governmental associations with such a company as UNUM as this just makes me very suspicious of their motives.
With regard to others such as David Freud, I think that Freud has been brought in to make his statements more on the basis of his name and forebears rather than his expert knowledge on the subject of Incapacity Benefit entitlement.
It has to be noted that he has completely failed to produce a scrap of evidence to support his assertations that two thirds of claimants should be removed from IB. It's all just spin.
Mansel's recent appointment by Edwina Hart AM to reconfigure health care provision is clearly another cost saving exercise as so much of Mansel's career has revolved around the money and not the service.
Your pal.
johnny.
Post a Comment