Avrupa Times (LONDON)-Joan Ryan MP has said the Government’s welfare changes affecting
access to the Motability Car scheme are _“not fit for purpose”, _as
thousands of disabled people across the country – including in Enfield
North – have seen their cars taken away from them.
Speaking during a packed parliamentary debate on the issue, on Tuesday
23rd February, Ms Ryan raised the specific case of a constituent, Ms
Cathy Walsh, who suffers from the disability called severe generalised
dystonia. Ms Walsh has been on Disability Living Allowance for 23 years
and was recently asked to reapply for the new Personal Independence
Payment (PIP). On Friday 18th December 2015, she was notified that her
application for the advanced rate mobility component of PIP had been
turned down and she would no longer be eligible for the Motability Car
scheme. Ms Walsh’s car, which had been invaluable in allowing her to
lead an independent life, was, therefore, taken from her at the
beginning of February.
Challenging the Government on how Ms Walsh had been treated, Ms Ryan
stated that the representative from ATOS Healthcare conducting the PIP
assessment had, in reference to the case notes, taken _“longer to
write the report than it took to undertake the assessment”. _In
addition, Joan raised the serious concerns of Ms Walsh’s neurological
consultant who had _“no idea how ATOS’ assessment [that Ms Walsh
could walk up to 200 metres unaided] could have been made”_ given
_“at best she can walk up to 20 metres and on a bad day significantly
less.” _On those terms, Ms Walsh has always had a very strong medical
case to qualify for the higher-rate mobility allowance.__
_ _
Ms Walsh’s _“car should never have been taken from her in the first
place”, _Ms Ryan said_. _“_Instead, she has had to go down the
extremely stressful route of a mandatory reconsideration and an appeal
to a tribunal,_ _which has only worsened her condition.” _
_ _
Given the evidence, and the other cases raised by MPs, Joan called for a
thorough review of what the Government has claimed to be a _“fairer
assessment process.”_ Significantly, after the debate - and in light
of the medical evidence provided by her consultant - Ms Walsh received
news from the Department of Work and Pensions that she would now receive
the higher rate mobility component of PIP. Ms Walsh will be eligible to
re-join the Motability Scheme, but it may be weeks before she has access
to a car.
JOAN RYAN MP, LABOUR’S MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR ENFIELD NORTH, SAID:
_“I am really pleased Cathy’s case has been looked at again, but she
should never have been put in this position._
_ _
_She deserves a full and frank apology from the DWP for the distress
this situation has caused her over the past two months._
_ _
_However, Cathy’s case is the tip of the iceberg. It is clear from the
debate that thousands of people are suffering due to this ill-advised
policy._
_ _
_The Government must conduct a full review to ensure that others do not
face the same fate as Cathy Walsh.”_
--ENDS--
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
RT. HON JOAN RYAN MP
EMAIL: [email protected]
NOTES:
1. The Hansard transcript of Joan’s speech can be found below and the
weblink to the debate in full can be found here:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm160223/halltext/160223h0002.htm#16022361000442
[1]
2. Severe generalised dystonia is a condition that results in
uncontrolled spasms, affecting Ms Walsh’s limbs and speech, which
means she has great difficulty moving unaided.
3. Motability is a registered charity set up by Royal Charter in 1977.
The charity oversees the operation of Motability Operations, a private
limited company which leases and sells motor vehicles and wheelchairs to
disabled people under a number of schemes.
4. Atos Healthcare is a private company which conducts assessments on
behalf of the DWP.
5. In a report on the issue of Motability from February 2016 the BBC
reported that _“nearly 14,000 disabled people who rely on a specialist
motoring allowance have had their cars taken away from them following
government welfare changes”_:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35476904 [2]
SPEECH BY JOAN RYAN MP:
JOAN RYAN (ENFIELD NORTH) (LAB): I congratulate the hon. Member for
Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Alan Brown) on securing the debate. I am here
today to raise the issue of my constituent Cathy Walsh, though her case
is representative of many others. She suffers from severe generalised
dystonia, a condition that results in uncontrolled spasms, affecting her
limbs and speech. She has been disabled since birth and has tremendous
difficulty moving unaided. With a seriously disabling disability, she
has been on disability living allowance for 23 years. On Friday 18
December, Ms Walsh was notified that her application for the
advanced-rate mobility component of PIP had been turned down, and she
was distraught—her car, which had been invaluable in allowing her to
lead an independent life, would be taken from her. That life-changing
decision was based on one assessment conducted over an hour. It took the
Atos consultant longer to write the report than it took to undertake the
assessment. Ms Walsh’s neurological consultant has “strong
reservations about the value of this assessment.”
I agree. Atos said that Ms Walsh was able to walk between 50 and 200
metres, but her consultant has “no idea how ATOS’ assessment could
have been made, it is clearly incorrect… At best she can walk up to 20
metres and on a bad day significantly less.”
On those terms, it is obvious that Ms Walsh has a very strong case to
qualify for the higher-rate mobility allowance. Instead, she has had to
go down the extremely stressful route of a mandatory reconsideration and
an appeal to a tribunal, which is making her condition worse. Her
independence has been severely curtailed, at least until the tribunal
decision is known, which could be months away.
Ms Walsh will have to rely on others even to help her cash the £2,000
transitional support cheque from Motability, as she cannot get to the
bank on her own. That raises another issue: why cannot this money be
transferred directly into her account? Even when the £2,000 has been
deposited, Ms Walsh will be in a state of financial limbo. If she wins
her appeal but decides to keep the money, she would not be able to
return to the Motability scheme for six months.
Let us assume that Ms Walsh wins her case and wants to return to the
scheme as quickly as possible, which she is keen to do. She would then
have to return most of the £2,000. I do not disagree with that in
principle. However, if the tribunal drags on for several months, Ms
Walsh will inevitably need to use some, if not all, of the transitional
payment to pay for other forms of assistance and transport. She would
then be in debt while having to go through the process of reapplying for
the scheme when her car should never have been taken from her in the
first place. The Government say that what we have now is a “fairer
assessment process.” Well, it does not feel fair to Ms Walsh. She is
deeply distressed. I do not think it is fair; her friends do not think
it is fair; and, more to the point, her consultant, who understands her
condition as well as anyone, thinks it is very unfair. If her treatment
is typical of the way in which thousands of other cases have been dealt
with, the process has not been fair to them, either. The Government must
be willing to conduct a thorough review of the process, which is not fit
for purpose in its current state. I look forward to hearing how the
Minister intends to resolve these issues.