DWP should have legal duty to look after vulnerable benefits claimants, say MPs
A legal duty to look after vulnerable people who are claiming benefits must be introduced at the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP), a group of MPs has said.
Ministers should introduce the statutory duty to prevent people from dying or coming to harm as a result of mistakes in the welfare system, the Commons Work and Pensions Committee said in its latest report.
The committee's latest recommendations come after several high-profile deaths of vulnerable people following their interaction with the benefits system.
Among those named in the report is Errol Graham, who starved to death in 2018, months after his disability benefit payments were stopped.
Meanwhile, Debbie Abrahams, the committee's Labour chairwoman, suggested an 'unhelpful media narrative' about benefits claimants and 'cost-cutting drives' continues to sow distrust in the DWP.
The report comes at a time when the Government is pushing for reforms aimed at reducing the number of welfare claimants by getting more people currently on benefits into work.
'Cost-effectiveness and efforts to move people into work had been prioritised, or been perceived to be prioritised, over providing genuine care and support to vulnerable people,' the report said.
At the same time, claimants have reported 'feeling undeserving of support, or fearful of the DWP'.
A 'deep-rooted cultural change' is needed, according to the report, which recommended a change in the law so that the DWP has to help claimants who are vulnerable get help from other branches of Government, like the health service.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall should make a statement in the House of Commons setting out a new approach to safeguarding once the ongoing benefits review is finished, the MPs said.
A statutory duty of care would be a 'significant undertaking for the DWP', the report acknowledged, but it claimed the current approach is not working, and there are a 'stubbornly high' number of cases where vulnerable clients have come to harm.
Some 240 internal reviews have been started by the DWP since the 2020-21 year, into cases where there has been serious harm, or where there are allegations that the department's actions have led to death or harm.
However, the committee suggested the 'true scale of deaths and serious harms of vulnerable claimants is currently unknown'.
Ms Abrahams said: 'That people continue to face harm after dealing with the DWP is a self-evident failure of safeguarding in the system.
'Until recently, getting people back into work to cut costs had been prioritised over providing support and care for vulnerable people.
'We heard evidence that the process itself of engaging with the DWP itself too often led to mental distress. Where this led to not being able to get financial support, many had paid the ultimate price.'
While the committee members had been 'heartened' by evidence they heard from the Work and Pensions Secretary on moves to improve safeguarding, Ms Abrahams added: 'We've heard that, whilst some have been lifted by the system when it works well, this can depend on claimants' confidence that the system will help them.
'Too often, we heard their trust has been smashed by continual cost-cutting drives and an unhelpful media narrative.
'Many fear coming forward and expressing that they need additional support due to their circumstances and they fall deeper into vulnerability and despair as a result.'
The report also contains a warning for ministers about moves to cut costs in the benefits system.
'Incorrectly applied, policies intended to drive claimant behaviour and deliver value for money, such as sanctions and deductions, can create and exacerbate vulnerabilities,' it said.
Mark Winstanley, chief executive of the charity Rethink Mental Illness, gave his support to the committee's recommendations.
'For too long, vulnerable people living with mental illness have suffered devastating harm and lost their lives due to failures in the benefits system,' he said.
'If implemented, a statutory duty for the DWP to safeguard vulnerable claimants would be a crucial step towards real accountability, something we and other committed campaigners have advocated for.
'Like our NHS, the benefits system was set up to support those in need, yet without legal safeguards a punitive and harmful approach has gone unchecked, with little transparency on whether lessons have been learned from past tragedies.
'The Government has pledged to renew its focus on safeguarding – this must include a statutory duty for the DWP to safeguard vulnerable claimants that prioritises the wellbeing of people affected by mental illness in every policy and decision.'
A DWP spokesperson said: 'This Government is committed to protecting the people who use our services and fixing the broken welfare system we inherited so it works for those who need it.
'That's why we are currently consulting on a new safeguarding approach, and our reforms will improve people's lives and rebuild trust, by establishing an approach that genuinely supports vulnerable people.
'As we deliver our Plan for Change, we encourage people to have their voices heard through our consultation so we can build a safeguarding approach that works better for all.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
38 minutes ago
- The Sun
Putin could attack Nato by 2030, alliance boss warns as ‘Europe needs to build its own Golden Dome defence system'
VLADIMIR Putin could launch an assault on NATO by 2030, an alliance chief has warned. Mark Rutte, NATO's secretary general, has urged Europe to build "its own Golden Dome defence system" to protect countries from Russia's looming threat. 6 6 6 The NATO head said that the alliance would need to take a "quantum leap" in building up its defence systems as Putin's war machine is "speeding up, not slowing down." Speaking at the world-leading policy institute, Chatham House, he urged European leaders to increase their air and missile defence capabilities by a staggering 400 per cent. Europe should also be prepared to protect its skies, as Russia 's war on Ukraine has shown the despot leader "delivers terror from above". He said: "The fact is, we need a quantum leap in our collective defence. "The fact is, we must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defence plans in full. "The fact is, danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends." In an urgent plea to leaders, he called for militaries to be armed with thousands more vehicles and tanks, and millions more artillery shells. He also insisted allies double their resources supporting military power including logistics, transport and medical aid. Terrifyingly, Rutte also hinted at a potential triple threat - with Mad Vlad teaming up with despot leaders in China, North Korea and Iran. Russia currently produces in three months what the whole of NATO produces in a year, he said. Russia's ambassador to the UK 'blames Britain' for Ukraine's daring drone attack & warns of 'WWIII risk' China is also modernising and expanding its military, with its battle force expected to increase to 435 ships by 2030. He warned: "Wishful thinking will not keep us safe. We cannot dream away the danger. "Hope is not a strategy. So NATO has to become a stronger, fairer and more lethal alliance." The alliance chief's comments came as he pushed for NATO members to commit to ramping up defence spending at a key summit of the western military alliance later this month. Rutte is urging NATO members to commit to 3.5 percent of GDP on direct military spending by 2032, and an additional 1.5 percent on broader security-related expenditure. The proposal is a compromise deal designed to satisfy US President Donald Trump, who has demanded that allies each spend 5 percent of economic output on defence, up from a current commitment of two percent. Rutte said he "expects" leaders to agree to the proposal at the summit of the 32-country alliance on June 24-25 in The Hague. 6 6 "It will be a NATO-wide commitment and a defining moment for the alliance," he said in his speech. Russia condemned Rutte's comments before he took to the stage, denouncing NATO as "an instrument of aggression". NATO "is demonstrating itself as an instrument of aggression and confrontation", Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters in Moscow. This follows Rutte's meeting with the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer - their second Downing Street talk since the Labour leader came into power last year. Starmer's government this year pledged to increase defence spending to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2027, but has not yet set a firm timeline for further hikes. Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced Canada would hit two percent this year. US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth said last week the allies were close to an agreement on the split five-percent target. "That combination constitutes a real commitment, and we think every country can step up," he said on Thursday. Space rockets & hypersonic interceptors…Trump unveils half-a-trillion dollar Golden Dome air defence to be ready by 2029 DONALD Trump has unveiled plans for a high-tech "Golden Dome" missile defence system, which the president claims should be operational by the end of his term in office. The futuristic concept announced by Trump would see American weapons put in space for the first time ever. Trump had already signalled his intent to set up a Golden Dome following his return to the White House, calling missile attacks the "most catastrophic threat facing the United States". The idea is modelled on Israel's Iron Dome defence system, which uses radar to detect incoming missiles and calculates which ones pose a threat to populated areas. But the Golden Dome would be an infinitely bigger project, not least because the United States is more than 400 times larger than Israel. During his announcement in the Oval Office yesterday, Trump said his new Golden Dome would be "capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from the other side of the world". NATO members have been scrambling to bolster their defence capabilities since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Trump's return to the White House in January, and question marks over his commitment to European security, has added urgency. Rutte warned: "Danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends. "We must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defence plans in full." He added that if countries cannot commit to 5 percent for defence spending "you could still have the National Health Service, or in other countries, their health systems, the pension system, etc, but you better learn to speak Russian. I mean, that's the consequence". Britain announced plans last week to build up to 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines and six munitions factories to rearm the country in response to what it said were threats from Russia. 6
Telegraph
43 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Just how psychopathic are surgeons?
These are the people we trust to hold a sharpened knife above our bare bellies and press down until they see blood. We let them tinker with our hearts, brains and bowels while we lie unconscious beneath their gloved hands. Surgeons live in a world of terrifying margins, where the difference of a millimetre can be the difference between life and death. That level of precision demands an extraordinary calm, or what you could also call a cold detachment. But what happens when that same self-possession curdles into something darker? In recent weeks, two surgeons have made headlines for all the wrong reasons. In France, Joël Le Scouarnec was sentenced for abusing hundreds of children – some while they lay anaesthetised in his care. In the UK, plastic surgeon Peter Brooks was convicted of the attempted murder of fellow consultant Graeme Perks, whom he stabbed after breaking into his home in Nottinghamshire. Today, Brooks was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 22 years at Loughborough Courthouse. It would, of course, be absurd to taint an entire profession with the acts of two individuals. But it does resurface a long-standing, uncomfortable question: might the very traits that make a surgeon brilliant also mask something far more troubling? 'When people hear the word psychopath, they tend to think of serial killers and rapists,' says Dr Kevin Dutton, a psychologist and the author of The Wisdom of Psychopaths. 'But the truth is that certain psychopathic traits – focus, emotional dispassion, ruthlessness, self-confidence – can predispose you to success, and in an operating theatre, they really come to the fore.' Dutton has spent much of his career trying to prove that 'bad psychopaths' – people who have these characteristics but who can't regulate them – are the ones who commit crimes. A 'good psychopath', by contrast, is someone who can dial those qualities up and down at whim. He recalls one neurosurgeon who was regularly brought to tears by bits of classical music, but who also said, 'Emotion is entropy. I have hunted it to extinction over the years.' Similarly, a cardiothoracic surgeon told him that once a patient was under, he no longer saw them as a person – just a piece of meat. 'Once you care, you are walking an emotional tightrope,' says Dutton, 'but if you see the human body in front of you as a puzzle to solve, then you are more likely to save their life.' 'There's a ruthless part of me' Gabriel Weston, a London-based surgeon and the author of Direct Red: A Surgeon's Story, describes her profession as one that requires you to 'flick off a switch'. Sent to boarding school at a young age (much of British surgery is the product of elite schools), Weston learnt early how to detach emotionally – a skill she found served her well in the theatre. 'If you asked my family, they'd say I'm very emotional in that I cry in films or at art or literature,' she says. 'But there's a ruthless part of me. I use that in surgery – and in other parts of life where emotion just gets in the way.' Over time, Weston learnt to distinguish between two kinds of surgeons: those who switch their feelings back on once they leave the operating room, and those who never do. 'They don't just have psychopathic traits,' she says. 'They live in that space permanently.' They can also come with a reputation for being not just difficult, but dangerous. Harry Thompson*, a British abdominal surgeon, describes a world of towering egos and simmering aggression. 'If you think about it, all surgeons were in the top five of their class,' he says. 'They are all very competitive, and many play sports: they want to prove they are better than everyone. And if you are at the forefront of major surgery, you think you are invincible. It's a boiling-house environment of jealousy, envy and hatred.' He recalls one consultant who stabbed a plain-clothes policeman with a disposable scalpel after being stopped for speeding en route to the theatre. Another smashed a ward office clock when a nurse arrived five minutes late. Physical assaults were, he says, more common than you would think. 'I was in one operation when a student, John, was an hour and a half late, because he overslept. The surgeon thumped the student's head against the theatre wall until he was unconscious, screamed, 'Nobody move!' then started kicking him. No one ever saw John again.' Nor is the patient always spared. 'When I was training, I saw one surgeon thump a patient for removing a drain from his own bottom after an operation because it had become painful,' says Thompson. 'The patient only admitted this (in tears) after the surgeon had made the nurses and junior doctors line up and interrogated each one in turn about who had done it.' Thompson used to work with Simon Bramhall – the liver surgeon who made headlines and was later struck off for branding his initials onto patients' livers using a laser. 'Simon had always been a bit mad,' says Thompson. 'He was fascinated by the programme Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased) and he always wore a white suit [like the character Hopkirk], tie, shoes and socks.' As for tattooing his patients' organs: the initials were discovered by his colleagues only during a second surgery when his once-subtle etching was now grotesquely enlarged by liver damage. While Bramhall's actions sparked public outrage, some in the medical community were nonplussed. Perhaps because this is a far more commonplace occurrence than we realise: an article in Harper's Magazine cited examples of anonymous ophthalmic surgeons who had lasered their initials onto retinas, and orthopaedic surgeons who had etched theirs into bone cement. 'Why would you do that? Ego, of course,' says Dutton, 'and it isn't incidental in surgery. It's selected for. From the moment you start training, you have to fight – quite literally – for your space at the operating table.' 'I find it very freeing not to be pleasant' Dutton researched which of the various disciplines within the profession had the highest rates of psychopathy, and the results are revealing. Number one is neurosurgery (which is bad luck for any fans of Grey's Anatomy), followed by cardiothoracic or heart surgery and then orthopaedic. 'The last one is brutal as you have to smash people's bones,' says Dutton. 'Cardio more than anything is about life and death, but neurosurgery is particularly interesting to me. I think it's because this is the only branch of surgery where, if something goes wrong, you leave the patient permanently crippled or blinded or incapacitated, so only very few people can take such a calculated risk under pressure.' And though these traits are often seen as typically male, women are by no means exempt. Weston says the most difficult surgeon she ever worked under was a woman. 'She was very attractive and well-liked – mostly for being gorgeous and good at her job – but privately she made my life hell. Maybe she didn't like another woman being on the team but she did that horrible thing that women do of presenting this incredibly benign face while being very cruel in private. For months, she blamed me for mistakes that weren't mine, stole credit for my diagnoses, and made me feel like my surgical skills were terrible. She was truly villainous.' And yet, Weston admits, the operating theatre offers her a rare freedom: 'If you are a woman who is quite tough and unsentimental, surgery is a really amazing environment in which you can be yourself. There are many areas of my life – mainly motherhood, but also writing – where there is an expectation that I will be softer than I am. Like Simone de Beauvoir, I find it very freeing not to be pleasant.' Perhaps there is something in all of this (criminal and violent behaviour aside) that we, as patients, secretly find reassuring. We don't want our surgeons to hesitate. We don't want them to be emotional or anxious. We want them to be brilliant: laser-focused, supremely confident, even terrifying if that's what it takes to save us. In life, we dislike arrogance. On the operating table, many of us yearn for it. 'I had one boss,' says Thompson, 'a French surgeon. He used to say: 'There are the porters, the nurses, the managers – and then there are the surgeons. Above them, God. And above God? Me.''
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Rachel Reeves to reinstate winter fuel payments for nine million pensioners
Rachel Reeves has announced plans to restore winter fuel payments for all pensioners with an income of less than £35,000 in her biggest U-turn since taking office. In one of her first acts as chancellor, Reeves stripped ten million people of the benefit, worth between £200 and £300 per year, in an effort to balance the books. The decision was met with widespread criticism from cabinet ministers and backbenchers, and was blamed in part for Labour's poor performance in the local elections last month. The chancellor announced that the payments will be reinstated for nine million pensioners, with money clawed back from higher income households at the end of the next financial year. The Treasury said that only about two million pensioners would miss out. It is not clear how the government will pay for the move. Ministers admitted the new threshold would cost the government £1.25 billion — wiping out all but £250 million of the planned £1.5 billion worth of savings from restricting the benefit this year. However, the government insisted that even after the U-turn the policy would save £450 million. The Treasury said Reeves would set out how the shortfall will be covered in the autumn budget amid warnings that it would require tax rises in other areas in order for the chancellor to hit her fiscal rules. Ministers said that the cost of the change would not be paid for through additional borrowing. The delay to explaining how the policy change will be paid for is likely to lead to accusations that the chancellor is making an unfunded pledge, something she has repeatedly insisted she will not do. The government argues that it is right to defer the announcement until the autumn budget, when decisions on tax and spending are made. Reeves insisted that her original decision had been the right one. Economists pointed out that the fiscal picture is significantly worse now than it was then. She said: 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the winter fuel payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. This will mean over three quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, said Starmer was attempting to 'clear up a mess of his own making'. 'This humiliating U-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter,' she said. Under the plans, the payments will be restored to all pensioners this winter. The government will then recoup the money from those earning more than £35,000 automatically through their tax bills. The announcement will be seen as an attempt by Reeves to clear the decks before the spending review on Wednesday. The review will allocate £113 billion on infrastructure such as public transport schemes and nuclear energy. It will also increase the NHS budget by about £30 billion a year and boost investment in the Ministry of Defence. However, there are likely to be some significant losers, as unprotected departments face real-terms cuts. Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is still in negotiations with Reeves over her budget amid a row over police funding. The chancellor has offered the home office a real-terms increase in police funding. However, Cooper argues that this is not enough to cover the cost of meeting the government's flagship pledge to recruit 13,000 more neighbourhood police officers.
