Benefit Sanctions – Major New Inquiry Launched

Thursday 12 April, 2018 Written by 
Benefit Sanctions – Major New Inquiry Launched

The DWP Select Committee is today launching a new inquiry into benefit sanctions: how they operate, recent developments, and what the evidence is that they work - either to deter non-compliant behaviour or to help achieve the policy objectives of getting people off benefits and into work.

Rt Hon Frank Field MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “Sanctions are an important part of any benefits system but they need to be applied proportionately and fairly and to account for individual circumstances. I’ve seen deeply troubling cases in my constituency that suggest these objectives are not always being achieved. We will be reviewing the evidence to see if sanctions policy is working properly and if not, we will recommend improvements.” 

Sanctions, which take the form of docking a portion of benefit payments for a set period of time, can be imposed for breaching benefit conditions like attending a work placement, or for being minutes late for a Job Centre appointment.

Media reports of the Committee’s last inquiry into benefit sanctions in 2015 Benefit sanctions policy beyond the Oakley Review, described “copious evidence of claimants being docked hundreds of pounds and pitched into financial crisis for often absurdly trivial breaches of benefit conditions, or for administrative errors beyond their control.” There have also been serial reports in the media of extreme instances of the use and effects of sanctions – people hospitalised for life threatening conditions or premature labour being sanctioned for weeks or months for consequently missing a benefits appointment, or being unable to afford the transport to a distant job placement and being sanctioned for failing to attend it - and speculation over the degree of discretion Job Centre Plus staff have in these instances.

The  inquiry will look at recent sanctions policy developments, like the “yellow card” system which gives claimants 14 days to challenge a decision to impose a sanction before it is put into effect. The system was announced in late 2015 although there is still no date for introducing it. 

The inquiry will also consider the evidence base for the impact of sanctions, both that emerging from newly published statistics, and the robustness of the evidence base for the current use of sanctions as a means of achieving policy objectives.  Previously published in the Department’s quarterly statistical summaries, the Benefit Sanctions Statistics will now be a separate quarterly publication. 

In 2016 the NAO released a report on the subject; and in February 2017 the Public Accounts Committee published its report “Benefit sanctions”. The Government accepted the recommendations of that PAC report and described progress on implementation in the January 2018 Treasury Minutes Progress Report:

·         The Government initially agreed to undertake a trial of warnings for a first sanctionable offence. This recommendation has not been implemented.  

·         The Government agreed to monitor variation in sanction referrals and to assess the reasons for such variation. The Department’s research on variation is due to be completed in March. 

·         The Government agreed to monitor the use and take-up of protections for vulnerable groups. The Department is “still considering the best way to qualitatively assess the use and effectiveness of protections for vulnerable claimants”. 

·         The Government agreed to improve data systems, including on linking information e.g. earnings and sanctions 

·         The Government initially agreed to work with the rest of Government to estimate the impacts of sanctions on claimants and their wider costs to government. This recommendation has not been implemented. 

 The Committee invites evidence on any or all of the following questions, from benefit recipients with experience of the system, or experts in the field, by Friday 25 May 2018:

  1. To what extent is the current sanctions regime achieving its policy objectives?
  2. Is the current evidence base adequate and if not, what further information, data and research are required?
  3. What improvements to sanctions policy could be made to achieve its objectives better?
  4. Could a challenge period and/or a system of warnings for a first sanctionable offence be beneficial? If so, how should they be implemented?
  5. Are levels of discretion afforded to jobcentre staff appropriate?
  6. Are adequate protections in place for vulnerable claimants?
  7. What effects does sanctions policy have on other aspects of the benefits system and public services more widely? Are consequential policy changes required?
  8. To what extent have the recommendations of the Oakley review of Jobseekers’ Allowance sanctions improved the sanctions regime? Are there recommendations that have not been implemented that should be?

1 comment

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

Join
FREE
Here

GET STARTED

ABCorgdotnet Over 57% of Complaints About Councils Upheld by Ombudsman Last Year - Association of Pensions & Benefits Claimants… https://t.co/hhimKKAsWV
23hretweet
ABCorgdotnet SNP Spends Just Under £400m Plugging Westminster Welfare Cuts - Association of Pensions & Benefits Claimants CIC https://t.co/92l2gM4PVa
23hretweet
ABCorgdotnet Rebecca Evans Says Universal Credit “is hitting the most vulnerable in Wales” - Association of Pensions & Benefits… https://t.co/2H3OZ1yD3h
ABCorgdotnet Insolvency Statistics – January to March 2018 Shows Significant Increase - Association of Pensions & Benefits Claim… https://t.co/1WelCe80Ol
ABCorgdotnet The Mcvey Universal Credit Row Exposes Problems In Ministerial Accountability - Association of Pensions & Benefits… https://t.co/ml2lYgiyIj