Tribunal for benefits assessor caught calling claimant ‘fat’

 I think Alan Barham is a despicable character and deserves what he gets, however, I truly believe all of these assessors should be in the dock and banned from working in the medical profession again! I can’t describe in words how I felt when I read an ESA report on my husband, the lies that the ATOS nurse told made me almost burst a gasket! I reported her to the NMC but nothing was done and nothing would have been done about Alan Barham hadn’t he have been exposed on television for all to see! – Govt Newspeak

The assessor was recorded in Northampton by an undercover reporter 

A disability benefits assessor from Northampton told an undercover reporter a claimant was “too fat” to wipe her bum, a tribunal heard. Alan Barham was caught making the remarks about a disability benefit applicant on Channel 4’s ‘Dispatches: The Great Benefits Row’, broadcast in April 2016.

The former paramedic also bragged about making £20,000 a month and said he filled in applicants’ forms before even assessing them. Barham now faces being barred from working as a paramedic if the panel finds that his practice is impaired by misconduct. Insulting language He admitted using the insulting language and taking a photograph of an assessment belonging to an unknown service user on his phone.

The recordings were made by an undercover reporter posing as a trainee assessor at the Northampton offices of Capita. Barham was also recorded saying the applicant had a ‘disability known as being fat’. In another incident, he told the undercover reported that he had denied a claim to a one-legged man.


Capita, ATOS and their ilk do more than take the piss!


‘Oh god, there’s the money’ Barham said: “So you would think that something as significant as a leg missing would be, ‘oh god, there’s the money’. “But when you get to the nuts and bolts of it, he does everything really.” A spokeswoman for the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service said Barham’s comments were “disparaging and offensive”.

Barham claims he is being “scapegoated” by the outsourcing company and that filling in PIP forms before assessment, known as “pre-population”, is standard practice. He insists he was only following instructions and guidelines laid down by Capita. Subtle observations In the Dispatches documentary played to the HCPTS, Barham stressed the importance of subtly observing applicants, without letting them know. He said: “Most of its informal [observations] you catch them out on. “They’re informal, that’s why you don’t have to say anything. “They’ll tell you everything that they want to tell you, is wrong, you can completely dismiss it more often than not. “You’ll get your whole assessment done with watching what they do.” The hearing continues.

Read more


Labour’s Barry Gardiner was left gobsmacked by yet another Tory MP’s pathetic excuse for food banks

Labour’s Barry Gardiner was left gobsmacked by yet another Tory MP’s pathetic excuse for food banks [VIDEO]

Barry Gardiner was left taken aback, live on the BBC, by a Conservative MP’s comments about food banks. They follow on from Jacob Rees-Mogg saying that food banks were “uplifting”, and that they showed what a “compassionate country” we are. But Gardiner was having none of it, as he said food bank use “shames us” all.

Food banks: “modern living”. If you’re a Tory.

Gardiner was appearing on BBC Radio Four‘s Westminster Hour on Sunday 17 September, alongside Conservative MP for Mid Norfolk George Freeman and Lib Dem Layla Moran, MP for Oxford West and Abingdon. But when the discussion turned to food banks, Freeman had some choice comments about their use.

Freeman was asked [0.20] about Rees-Mogg’s comments, and whether they were a “sufficient response”. Freeman replied [0.22]:

I don’t think he was trying to say what has been implied… that food banks are… a great thing and we want more of them… Food banks went up 10 times under Tony Blair…

But Freeman then seemed to imply that we should just accept food banks. He said [0.50]:

It’s been part of modern living. The cost of living has gone up… there are some issues… there are very different sorts of people with different problems…

Gardiner nails it in one minute

Gardiner, however, seemed incensed by Freeman’s response. He snapped back [1.45] that:

In the fifth richest country in the world, it shames us as a society that we have people who are in work and dependent on food banks…

He went on to reference the Ken Loach film I, Daniel Blake, saying that the scenes depicted in the film are a reality for people in the UK and that is “not right”.

The Reality

Food banks are a reality for potentially millions of people in the UK. As The Canary has documented, since the Tories first came to power in 2010:

  • The number of three-day food packages sent out by the Trussell Trust rosefrom 40,898 to 1,182,954 by 2016-17. That’s an increase of 2,792%.
  • And the real figures are much worse. The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Hunger estimates that more than half of the emergency food issued comes from organisations independent from the Trussell Trust’s figures.
  • An Oxford University study has confirmed a “robust link” between the stripping down of the welfare state and food bank use.
  • Trussell Trust food banks in areas where Universal Credit has been rolled out have seen a 16.85% increase in referrals to them.
  • Almost 70% of Trussell Trust food bank referrals were due to low wages and benefit delays or changes.


A growing stain

Freeman also claimed [1.12] that Tory policies are “creating jobs, giving people a living wage and… build[ing] security into the workplace”. But so far, these policies have seen:

  • More than 14 million people in the UK now living in relative poverty. But officially, only 1.6 million people are unemployed.
  • The number of children living in poverty rising by 400,000 between 2010-11 and 2015-16 to four million.
  • 66% of children who live in poverty coming from working households.
  • Nearly half of all poverty in the UK being directly linked [pdf p1] to disability.

Freeman can claim all he wants that government policies are the best way to tackle food bank use and poverty. But the evidence suggests otherwise.

As Gardiner alluded to, the reality is that food bank use is a growing stain on UK society. And it’s one that isn’t going to be easily washed away.


£35 billion pa in welfare goes unclaimed and DWP deceit over this!

dwp deceit welfare take up

DWP has released this week new figures and charts as above for the amount of social security benefit that goes unclaimed and the above shows over 4 million families did not claim what they were entitled to in just four social security benefits.

What the DWP report does NOT say is they are overtly attempting to deceive with their headline figures and amounts – and the real total figure of welfare that goes unclaimed is THREE TIMES HIGHER than these partial DWP figures.

The four headline social security benefits the DWP uses only show an aggregate of around £11 billion per year unclaimed when the actual figure for all welfare is £35 billion and three times this deceitful DWP headline amount.

DWP has chosen to release different figures too than they did last time so here is a like-for-like comparison or as best as can be done between these figures and the last ones DWP released.

Last year I issued a post based on DWP figures for 2013/14 that came to £90 million per day being entitled to in all ‘welfare’ (social security benefit and tax credits) yet going unclaimed – a total of £33 billion per year.

Today I update that and in just the four headline social security benefits the DWP published for 2015/16 which are just a small part of overall welfare unclaimed we see an overall increase of £850 million per year as the table below reveals.

Table 1

ntu201314 to 201516

Apologies for the substance over style nature of the crude tables above yet they reveal when a factual comparison is made between the years 2013/14 and 2015/16 that:

  • Income Support / ESA sees £510 million per year MORE going unclaimed
  • Pension Credit sees £40 million per year LESS going unclaimed
  • Job Seekers Allowance having £170 million per year LESS unclaimed
  • Housing Benefit seeing £550 million MORE going unclaimed.

Collectively on these four headline benefits alone a further £850 million went unclaimed in 2015/16 than it did in 2013/14.

Last year I released the figures for 2013/14 which revealed that in total for all ‘welfare’ around £33 billion per year went unclaimed and I quote from that below:

This DWP report only chose to report on a few social security benefits which I summarised in a table (below)

To compare like for like with Table 1 above which are mean figures we firstly need to say the mean in the 2013/14 figures for these four social security benefits alone was £13.83 billion and now that has increased by a further £850 million – an increase of 6.15%

Hence when we extrapolate the overall £90 million per day in total welfare that goes unclaimed despite being entitled to becomes £95.54 million per day and yearly from £33 billion to £34.89 billion per year.

So much for the fabled ‘benefit scrounger!’


It has known to me and politicians of all parties for decades that there is always a significant non take up rate of means tested benefits.  Now we see that this is circa £27 billion per year and a further £8 billion per year being unclaimed in tax credits making 35 billion in total welfare.

Universal Credit

Universal Credit is supposed to be a one-stop-show where you only have to claim for any benefit or tax credit and you get everything you are entitled to (including Pension Credit in a few years time) and so amounts going unclaimed should be eradicated under UC. This not a penny more not a penny less principle of UC is why UC cannot work in theory because Government will need to spend £35 billion more per year in welfare and I first stated that issue over two years ago here(which also includes sources to tax credits unclaimed).

When anyone says that Universal Credit is good in theory and/or it is only the implementation of it that is wrong or that is should be delayed then this £35 billion per year added cost of it should be thrust under the noses of such commentators.

All governments seek to promote the benefit scrounger narrative to dissuade people from claiming; it is a standard strategy of every Conservative and Labour government and always has been.  Greatly enhanced from 2010 undoubtedly and with unchallenged assertions that we as a country cant afford the ‘burgeoning’ welfare bill when in the UK we actually spend 10% less on welfare as a percentage of GDP than the OECD average – a fact nobody bothers to check or frankly wants to find.

This leads on to one final point that because of the nature of UK housing a high proportion of ‘welfare’ claimants live in social housing and we find that social landlord welfare teams are not effective at all.  A charge the Teflon coated social housing sector will of course refute but a charge that the facts demonstrate and in doing so the social landlords are cutting off their noses to spite their faces.

Even that assumes social landlord welfare teams are good at their job and disguises the fact they only tend to deal with the easiest of cases and provide just a basic level of advice and – in the main – DO NOT for example attend tribunals with tenants given the necessary long time involvement this means (and despite national overturn on appeal rates of 2 in every 3 for benefits denied.)

An even bigger charge which the facts support is that social landlords are not even getting the simplest and shortest time-involvement benefit cases right as there has been a 28% increase in the numbers of social tenants who are entitled to Housing Benefit yet do not claim.  HB is the CORE benefit for social landlords and the easiest for them to help their tenants claim yet has a 28% increase in non take up numbers.

Social landlord and council welfare teams

How often do you read social landlords saying our ‘benefit maximisation teams’ claimed £1 million back for our customers last year and similar claims?  Such benefit maximisation teams / welfare teams are clearly not working as they are NOT reaching those who do not claim and even the core benefit concerning landlords in Housing Benefit has seen the non take-up increase by £550 million per year!

Dig a bit deeper into Housing Benefit non take up and you find a staggering 28% increase in the numbers of social tenants who are entitled to yet not claiming Housing Benefit

Table 2 – HB non take up by sector and number of persons (HB5)


You can see that in 2025/16 some 590,00 social tenants do not claim HB when that figure was just 460,000 in 2013/14 – a 28% increase and a 130,000 mean increase in the number of social tenants who can but don’t claim Housing Benefit.

The trend for SRS shows successive falls from 2009/10 to 2014/15 yet then reverts back sharply with this 28% mean increase in 2015/16 and which is up to 70,000 more social tenants at the upper end of the scale at 670,000 in 2015/16 than it was before the onset of wide scale benefit maximisation teams in 2009/10 at 600,000.

Something is severely amiss here!  You cannot excuse the figures by saying the social landlord has fewer non take-up claimants of HB than the private sector.  The PRS landlord does not do welfare maximisation and local councils who are landlords and who are not landlords such as Liverpool do welfare maximisation across all tenures.

DWP does not include tenure breakdown of Pension Credit (or JSA or ESA or IS) and we know that social housing has over 3 times the number of tenants being eligible for PC that the private rented sector does so the non take-up rates of Pension Credit are very much a concern for social landlords and an issue they are failing on.

I have heard anecdotal evidence of a fair number of Housing Association welfare teams being shrunk or removed altogether and albeit a much smaller number of councils getting rid of their welfare maximisation teams.  No factual data exists for this anywhere yet the above factual increases in welfare that goes unclaimed supports that anecdotal evidence.

Cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face comes to mind


Citizens Advice renews its call for Universal Credit to be paused

Citizens Advice has reiterated its call for the roll-out of Universal Credit to be paused and problems with the benefits fixed, as new figures from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) show one in five people applying for Universal Credit are waiting longer than six weeks for their first payment.

Further DWP research, published on September 15 2017, shows people on the new benefit are falling into rent arrears, with over two in five saying this was due to problems with the benefit.

In August the equivalent of 12 per cent of people applying for Universal Credit turned to Citizens Advice for support.

Chief Executive of Citizens Advice Gillian Guy said, “These figures confirm Citizens Advice research showing that Universal Credit risks pushing people further into serious debt.

“The DWP’s own evidence shows more than one in five people applying for Universal Credit are waiting over six weeks for their first payment, and that many people say they are falling behind on their rent as a result.

“It is clearer than ever that the government must pause the roll-out of Universal Credit and fix the problems with this benefit.”

In a report published last week, ( Citizens Advice analysed over 50,000 cases where it has helped people with their debt problems and found that for those on Universal Credit:

79 per cent have priority debts such a rent or council tax, putting them at greater risk of eviction, visits from bailiffs, being cut off from energy supplies and even prison – compared to (69 per cent) on legacy benefits such as Jobseekers Allowance or Housing Benefit.
Two in five (41 per cent) have no money available to pay creditors as their monthly spend on essential living costs is more than their income.
Typically people on Universal Credit only have around £3 a month left to pay creditors.
It is urging the government to ensure no one applying for Universal Credit waits longer than six weeks for an income, and that anyone who needs it gets a payment within two weeks that they do not need to repay.

Universal Credit was introduced in 2013, aiming to simplify the benefits system, to make transitions into work easier, and make every hour of work pay. It’s there for people on low incomes or not in work to help them meet their living costs.

Universal Credit is for people both in work and out of work, disabled people and those with a health condition, single people and those with families, people who own their homes and people who rent.

It replaces six means-tested benefits and tax credits with one benefit. This is paid in arrears, as a single household payment, on a monthly basis.

It is designed to use Real Time Information from HMRC to respond to changes in income, gradually reducing the UC payment as earnings increase to ensure work pays. The six benefits it replaces are:

Income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA)
Income-based Employment Support Allowance (ESA)
Housing benefit (HB)
Income Support (IS)
Child Tax Credits (CTC)
Working Tax Credits (WTC)
Universal Credit is being rolled out gradually across the country, one job centre at a time. Everywhere in the country either operates a ‘live service’ or ‘full service’.

Live service areas are places where a limited version of Universal Credit is in place only for certain people (eg single adults not in work), so as to test the system on on those with simpler claims. ‘Full’ service has been developed to upgrade and build on the first, ‘live’ system.

From May 2016, full service Universal Credit began to be introduced across the country, in a small number of local authorities initially, which meant all new claimants of the six different benefits being replaced are required to apply for UC.

Live service roll-out is now complete, but full service roll-out is ongoing and due to accelerate significantly from October 2017. All areas will eventually become full service by 2022.

There are currently 533,000 people on Universal Credit in England and Wales, with around 50,000 new claims each month.

* Citizens Advice


Iain Duncan Smith a Social Justice Warrior! He’s Taking the Piss!

Iain Duncan Smith’s Centre for Social Justice drops the ball with latest report

The Centre’s attempt to address Britain’s productivity gap contains a glaring and ideologically motivated omission with its failure to consider the role of unions


As the minister who brought in the Universal Credit and sowed misery among people with disabilities, there are millions of people who would see Iain Duncan Smith’s attempt to portray himself as a warrior for social justices as a bad joke.

However, while saying so involves being much fairer to him than he ever was to those who felt the impact of his policies while at the Department for Work & Pensions, the Centre for Social Justice he chairs has on occasion put out some moderately interesting ideas.

Its latest missive “The Great British Break Through” – did it really need the cheap attempt to hang off the coat-tails of The Great British Bake Off? – argues that the potential of the bottom 20 per cent of workers is being wasted, a situation it describes as “shameful” and a major contributor to the desultory productivity that constrains economic growth, not to mention wages, in the UK

“The message in this report is simple; investing in transport infrastructure, digital networks and technical skills is important, but unless you target policy to support the least advantaged in society, we cannot return productivity growth to pre-crisis levels,” says Mr Duncan Smith.

Who could disagree with that? Or with ideas such as rethinking professional and technical education to make it work better, and doing more to support further education (FE) colleges, for long seen as being the unloved stepchild of the British education system.

A call for greater investment? Give that man a hand!

However, when it comes to the report’s prescriptions for what ails UK plc, and its most disadvantaged people in particular, it’s hard to escape the fact that the report has a glaring blind spot. It fails to pay regard to the role modern trade unions could, and do play, in enhancing productivity, wages, and the life chances of those at the bottom of the workplace pile.

The Independent says IDS thinks bosses should be “killing” their workers. And it’s not far wrong

Research by the former Department for Trade & Industry in 2007, for example, found that union representatives saved up to 616,000 productive working days that might otherwise have been lost through work related injury.

Collective bargaining leads to improved wages, which also leads to improved productivity. There is a reason many employers – like the Centre – have adopted the voluntary National Living Wage, set by the Living Wage Foundation, and become accredited Living Wage employers. Paying it, as opposed to the Government’s lower minimum wage, leads to lower rates of absenteeism, and better quality, more productive work.

Iain Duncan Smith shafts claimants in Universal Credit scandal

Unionised workplaces lead to better wages, better quality work.

They can also assist with training: Analysis from Labour Force Survey revealed that in 2013 the training rate for union members was 70 per cent higher than the rate for non-union members (38.9 per cent and 22.9 per cent respectively). There are many more stats like that you can find if you care to look.

Which is rather the point.  Why does the Centre’s report pay so little heed to this? Could it be the same sort of ideological motivation that led it to gush about the Thatcherite economic revolution while paying little heed to the social injustice that flowed from it? It does at least recognise that its de-industrialisation damaged the North disproportionately, and that an overall rise incomes and productivity served to mask the problems of that part of the country.

The Tories have found a new way to strip disabled people of their independence

There are other gaps. The call for investment in further education is well made. But part of the reason it is necessary to make the point is the neglect of the Government Mr Duncan Smith was once a part of.

As University and College Union general secretary Sally Hunt notes, whilst businesses need to ensure their workers fulfil their potential, the government must ensure the sector is properly resourced if it is to play a role in doing that.

It also increasingly costs money if individuals want to up skill by calling upon its services. That’s fine if you have it, not so easy if you don’t, and the people Mr Duncan Smith says he wants to help usually don’t have it.

Ken Loach gave ‘callous’ Tories both barrels in his BAFTA speech, and right-whingers can’t handle it

The problems that his Centre identifies are real: While Britain’s high levels of employment are welcome, and  policymakers should seek to sustain them, it clearly is failing the bottom 20 per cent of its workers. Even if (as the report suggests) we switch to new ways of measuring productivity, it wouldn’t change the fact that this country’s is lousy, as is its record on investment.

Minister looking at making it harder for sick and disabled to claim benefits [From 2013]

However, when compared to the recent document put out by the Institute for Public Policy Research’s Commission for Economic Justice, which called for sweeping economic reform, the Centre’s effort at fixing what ails UK plc is narrow, and focused on being what Mr Duncan Smith would regard as being politically, or at least ideologically, correct.


Tory cuts to legal aid are locking hundreds of thousands of people out of justice

Domestic violence victims are among those to suffer after the number of firms offering legal aid fell by 20% in the last five years

Domestic abuse victims are among those to suffer

Hundreds of thousands of people are being locked out of justice because of Tory cuts to legal aid.
New figures show the number of firms offering legal aid has fallen by 20% in the last five years making it harder for people who need legal help on issues including family break up, a range of housing problems, and challenges to welfare benefits assessments

Over the same period the number of people granted legal aid for civil domestic violence claims such as protection orders, which safeguard victims from their abusers, has fallen 16%.
Amnesty International have accused the government of creating ‘two-tier justice’ system.

The number of legal aid providers in England and Wales has fallen from 2,991 to 2,393.

In Wales the number of providers has fallen by almost a third, with the South West and North West also seeing dramatic falls of 28% and 27% since the introduction of the Government’s Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) in 2012 which removed many areas of law from legal aid.
In February the government promised to publish details of a review into the Act ‘in a few months’ however no such information has yet been published.

When pressed by Shadow Justice Minister Gloria De Piero on the status of the review the government failed to respond Labour have commissioned Labour Peer Lord Bach QC to conduct their own review into the impact of the Government’s cuts to legal aid and his report will be published later this month.

Shadow Justice Minister Gloria De Piero MP said: “How much you earn shouldn’t make a difference to whether you can get legal advice on a bad landlord or a protection order against an abuser, but it’s clear that the Government’s cuts to legal aid are making it harder for people to access justice. Ministers must stop dragging their feet and get on with their review into legal aid.

“Labour has commissioned Lord Bach to help find solutions to stop justice only being available to the privileged few.”
Law Society Head of Justice Richard Miller said: “Behind these figures are hundreds of thousands of people who can no longer obtain legal aid for matters such as family break up, a range of housing problems, and challenges to welfare benefits assessments. This data also calls attention to the fact that increasingly it is no longer economically viable for solicitors to do this work.

“We published our own reckoning of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) in June this year and underscored how the cuts have led to many people facing court unrepresented, in cases where lawyers would have resolved the issues without involving the court, via mediation or negotiation. In our report we highlighted advice deserts where people who are eligible for legal aid are no longer getting the help that parliament said they should be getting.
“Legal aid is a lifeline for the vulnerable and failure to get early expert legal advice can result in problems escalating dramatically, when they could have been nipped in the bud.”

Rachel Logan, Law and Human Rights Programme Director at Amnesty International UK, said: “The Government’s relentless cuts to legal aid have left thousands of society’s most vulnerable people without essential legal advice and support.
“The UK is in the process of creating a two-tier civil justice system: one which remains open to those who can afford it but is increasingly closed to the poorest and those most in need of its protection.

“The Government needs to urgently get on with its long-promised review of the impact of the cuts before the system is broken beyond repair. It’s well past time for a thorough and transparent look at what’s gone wrong, and how to fix it.
“If Theresa May really wants to deliver a country that works for everyone, then there needs to be access to justice for all – not just for those who have the deepest pockets.”

A Government [liar] spokesperson said: “Maintaining access to justice remains absolutely vital and continues to be at the heart of our reforms.
“Legal aid resources are focused on those who most need legal advice or help. We are also making wider changes which will make it easier for domestic violence victims to qualify for the financial support they need to pay for legal representation.
“In addition, the introduction of the Domestic Violence and Abuse Bill will ensure that no stone is left unturned in protecting and supporting victims and children.”


My sister is expecting to lose her job because of her disability, but it’s not like she can turn to the DWP for help

Colleagues have joked about her body, told her to get someone to take her to the toilet and accused her of exaggerating her disability

At her assessment, which was done by Capita on behalf of the DWP, they mentioned PIP, a weekly payment for those living with a disability Corbis
Over the past few years I have watched my intelligent, thoughtful, hard-working, funny younger sister be gradually beaten down by the system. Following a car accident it was discovered she had a rare form of cancer. Two surgeries in quick succession robbed her of the front half of her core muscles, her navel and some bladder control. Rather than pity herself for the things she could no longer do, she focused on rebuilding what she could and being able to return to her employer of nine years. Her view being that she was alive, could walk, could work, and thus luckier than many others.
The hospital said nothing about potential financial assistance for aids to support her disability at home and the workplace. My sister’s experience is not unique. She first became aware of what help might be available when she was evaluated by an occupational health assessor before returning to work.

The occupational health assessor said adjustments could be paid for with a grant to the employer from the DWP’s Access to Work (ATW) scheme. At her ATW assessment, which was done by Capita on behalf of the DWP, they mentioned PIP, a weekly payment for those living with a disability. She applied for PIP (having been disabled for 10 months already) and was told she needed to be assessed first. Explaining she’d already been assessed by the DWP, she was told “that was an ATW you need a PIP assessment”. The provider of PIP assessments? The exact same company: Capita.
Returning to work was little better. It helped to occupy her brain but the £60m+ turnover company were slow to make adjustments, and made it clear that they would only do what they considered reasonable and delayed her return. Colleagues have joked about her body; told her to get someone to take her to the toilet and accused her of exaggerating her disability. Except for scarring and the missing navel it’s all internal. The accusation of exaggeration is inaccurate – her medical in/out-patient visits are at 228 and counting.

Almost 80 per cent of disabled people’s health ‘has worsen under PIP’

She has complained, raised a grievance, involved workplace relations organisation Acas and is going to tribunal. The prohibitive legal costs mean she’ll have to represent herself. Her expectation is that she will be forced out of her job this year with little prospect of another. A long-standing employer, even with grants, who aims to be “an employer of choice” is reluctant to make changes – what hope does she have with another employer?
The fundamental issue with disability support is the complicated, disjointed way it is managed by the DWP and companies deciding what is reasonable. The Government needs to simplify it.

The DWP need to cut out the expensive middlemen (I’m looking at Capita) and establish an assessor at hospitals. Medical professionals can then refer their patients to them at the point they become disabled.

This person would have immediate access to relevant medical details, with the ability to arrange one appropriate assessment for PIP and any workplace. If we implemented this, the individual wouldn’t suffer any significant loss of assistance because they wouldn’t have to jump through so many administrative hoops.
On top of that it should be made compulsory that employers should have a proportion of disabled staff. The Government shouldn’t allow companies to decide what is reasonable. Like any voluntary code of conduct, a company will avoid expense they deem “unnecessary”.
If the DWP would like some assistance with overhauling this terrible system I can recommend someone familiar with it. 

And add me to that list – Govt Newspeak