On 30th June, we submitted our response to the UK Government Pathways to Work consultation. Whilst there are some positive elements within the Green Paper, we express our reservations about some of the proposals and provide some recommendations for ensuring that people living with long term health conditions and disabilities continue to be financially protected.
Firstly, we argue that it is important to acknowledge the third sector as a key partner in supporting people with long term conditions and disabilities to navigate the benefits system and gain paid employment if appropriate. If the proposals in the Green Paper were to go ahead, demand for such third sector services would likely increase at a time when many are experiencing considerable financial challenges. As such, we state in the response that third sector partners should receive fair and sustainable funding to respond to such considerable changes in the benefit system.
Secondly, we strongly disagree with the proposal to delay access to the health element of Universal Credit until the age of 22. This appears arbitrary and does not reflect the reality of many young people who are unable to work, or limited in the work they can do, due to a health condition or disability.
In addition, the way that the Green Paper has been framed, as a way to reduce social security spending in the long term, will likely generate fear amongst many benefit claimants. This could decrease the likelihood that some people will feel able to positively engage in potentially beneficial proposals if introduced. We urge the government to rethink their communications approach to this Bill as a matter of urgency.
In a similar vein, much of the language used throughout the Green Paper serves to reinforce common stereotypes about people with long term health conditions or disabilities who claim benefits. In our response, we reference comments from See Me Scotland, one of our members, who are concerned about stigmatising language in related media coverage of the proposals and urge the government to shift their narrative.
Finally, we agree with the proposal to remove Work Capability Assessments as an element of the benefits system that has historically contributed to the fear and suspicion felt by some benefit claimants. However, the failure to fully clarify how the health element of Universal Credit would work for Scottish claimants means that organisations that operate in Scotland, including many of our members, are unable to provide sufficient scrutiny of the proposals in the Paper. Further clarity is required from the government as a matter of urgency.
Read our full response here: VHS Response Pathways to Work June 25
For more information about this response, or any aspect of VHS policy work, please contact our Policy and Public Affairs Lead, Sarah Latto, on sarah.latto@vhscotland.org.uk.
