Labour cuts to out-of-work disability benefits likely to have ‘devastating’ mental health impact, research finds

Next April’s cuts to out-of-work disability benefits are likely to have “devastating” consequences for disabled people’s mental health, and drive many into serious poverty, research into the impact of similar Conservative reforms has warned.

The Labour government’s cuts are also likely to impose major costs on other public services, such as the NHS, social care and other local authority support, the research says.

The research by public health experts at the University of Liverpool examined the impact of previous cuts to out-of-work disability benefits implemented by the Conservative government in April 2017.

The research paper has been described this week as “crucial” and “vital” by disabled people’s organisations (see separate story).

The new research* found that the 2017 cuts, pushed through parliament by Tory work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith as part of his Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, had a “serious” impact on disabled people who left work in that period.

It found that the reduction of nearly £30-a-week to the benefits paid to those placed in the work-related activity group (WRAG) of employment and support allowance (ESA) was linked to an extra 92,000 people with long-term conditions a year self-reporting “common mental disorders” such as depression and anxiety.

The researchers examined the impact of the WRAG cut on people with long-term conditions who had left their jobs and claimed ESA in the years after the act became law.

The WRAG cut – which meant claimants in that group received the same benefits as those receiving the mainstream jobseeker’s allowance – also led to 31,000 a year more disabled people in this group experiencing severe poverty.

And, because they only looked at the impact on disabled people who had left work and moved onto ESA, the researchers concluded that their results “probably underestimate the overall impact of the policy change”.

The researchers also concluded that the WRAG cut had no impact on the likelihood of sick and disabled people moving into work, a key reason for the Labour government pushing through similar cuts to the health element of universal credit, which will be implemented in just five months’ time.

They say in the paper: “We found no evidence that the policy improved the employment chances for people with a long-term condition or disability.

“Our results indicated that reducing benefit payments did not improve employment, and instead increased risk of severe poverty.”

The paper’s lead author was Professor Ben Barr, who specialises in applied public health research at the University of Liverpool’s Institute of Population Health.

He and his co-authors* warn in the new paper: “We do not know what the effect will be of the forthcoming plan to reduce the payment that new claimants for Universal Credit Health Element will receive; however it is similar to the 2016 reform that also reduced these payments.”

They conclude: “Although there is growing evidence that welfare reforms such as these can have major impacts on public health, they are introduced without any plans to monitor these impacts or modify them to minimise these effects.

“These adverse health consequences, alongside increased risks of poverty, are devasting for the individuals involved but also create a false economy of cost shifting.”

This is because the initial savings, they say, lead instead to major costs to other public services, such as the NHS and social care.

They add: “Our study shows that reducing payment levels for these benefits may have unintended but serious consequences for population mental health and increased poverty.

“These adverse effects may outweigh any costs savings from cutting benefits.”

And they warn that, rather than increasing the number of disabled people in jobs, the reforms could instead “reduce the social inclusion of people with disabilities” because the cuts increase levels of mental distress and poverty.

They add: “The UK government is introducing further reductions to these benefits.

“It is likely that these will not achieve their strategic objectives and will increase mental health problems and poverty amongst people with disabilities.”

The Conservative plans to cut WRAG payments were condemned in 2016 as “drastic”, “harsh” and “counter-productive” by disabled campaigners.

Duncan Smith and fellow ministers tried to justify the cuts by claiming they would “incentivise” sick and disabled people to find work, an argument described in the House of Lords at the time by disabled crossbench peer Baroness [Jane] Campbell as “deeply flawed and, frankly, quite offensive”.

She said the government was taking a “huge gamble with people’s lives and survival”.

Her fears, and those of other disabled campaigners at the time, appear to have been borne out by the new research.

The paper also points to previous research from 2015 – again co-authored by Professor Barr – which linked the coalition government’s programme to reassess people on incapacity benefit through the work capability assessment to about 600 suicides in just three years, and an increase of 290,0000 in the number of people with mental health problems.

That research – just like the new paper – showed no increase in employment among people with long-term conditions following the Duncan Smith reforms.

Asked if the research would be taken into account in assessing future policy decisions, and whether work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden was concerned about the findings, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) released a statement that failed to answer these questions**.

McFadden was yesterday (Wednesday) asked by Debbie Abrahams, chair of the Commons work and pensions committee, how he would use “evidence that is available, for example, from previous changes to welfare policy” in improving the department’s approach to “safeguarding” claimants (see separate story).

He told her that secret DWP reviews into claimant deaths, and the department’s serious case panel, “were not the answer to everything because they often happen after a tragedy has taken place, and I don’t just want it to be a rear view exercise, but I do think they are important in giving us the evidence of what has gone wrong somewhere and how should we learn from it.”

*The health, poverty and employment effects of cutting income replacement benefits for the disabled: A difference-in-difference analysis of the 2016 welfare reforms, by Benjamin Barr, Huihui Song, Roberta Piroddi and Philip McHale

**The statement is only included here as a footnote, as it ignored the questions put to the department by Disability News Service (DNS): “We want a welfare state that is there for those who need it and supports people into work, while delivering fairness to the taxpayer. We’re shifting our focus from welfare to work, skills and opportunities so more people can move out of poverty and into good, secure jobs as part of the Plan for Change.”

***The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP’s actions and failings, is published by Pluto Press

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…