Questions and Answers with Scottish Civil-Rights Campaigner Dr. Anthony Cox

The ABC is continuing its series of Q&A’s and this time it is with leading Scottish civil-rights campaigner Dr. Anthony Cox. Tony’s story mirrors our own experiences and recently in a letter to the Prime Ministers offices we pointed out the frustration that many people feel in dealing with Jobcentre Plus.

With the ending of the reign of Ian Duncan Smith at the DWP, and the recent release of the  Panama Papers, an incident which has rather turned around the ‘strivers and shirkers’ argument used by the government against the jobless - we have pointed out that the public are going to feel rather more strident about venting their frustration on the DWP and its staff. That an association such as the ABC, that can mediate on behalf of claimants could save the country money - millions of pounds in fact - stopping complaints against Jobcentre Plus and the DWP entering the formal complaints system, as well as giving frustrated benefit claimants and outlet to approach with their grievances. The DWP recently took on an extra 180 staff to deal with complaints, where the majority of these issues are found at tribunal against the DWP and their contractors. There needs to be a better, cheaper and fairer way, of resolving these problems.   

With many people worse off under Universal Credit, and with benefits being capped or frozen, trouble could well be brewing in the near future.  The logic behind our association we argued cannot be denied. The ABC in its simplest for is like a 'bus' or 'train users group' representing those claiming state pensions and benefits. 

We found inspiration talking to Tony, whom we found, warm, compasionate and who has inteligent and very well reasoned arguments. These 'clashes' would not be taking place is we had a fairer more honest system in place.   

Tony it has been great to speak to you today; you have a very accomplished academic background. Why not tell us our audience a bit more about yourself?

Like many of my contemporaries at Arbroath Academy in the 1970s, I couldn’t wait to leave school. At that time we saw little point in getting O levels in subjects such as French or even English, as most of us knew we’d end up in a jute mill, engineering factory, fishing boat or building site. After leaving school, I began work in a jute mill, then switched to an apprenticeship as a slater on the roofs, and was eventually offered an apprenticeship in an oil related engineering firm. Whilst it was beginning to be difficult to get a decent trade at that time (1979), within a few short years the situation became a lot, lot worse. After serving my apprenticeship I became a full time political organizer, as secretary of the Youth Trade Union Rights Campaign (YTURC). My main role at this time (1984-1988) was organizing opposition to Tory attempts to introduce compulsory labour schemes aimed at younger people, which culminated in the April 1985 mass youth strike, involving 250,000 participants. In the late 1980s I decided to try my hand at higher education, and graduated from Edinburgh University with a joint honours MA in English lit/History. After deciding to continue my studies to PhD level, I was approached by historians at Trinity College, Cambridge to present a seminar paper on my research interests in the history of the Dundee jute industry and its links with the Indian subcontinent. Following this invitation, I was encouraged to move to Cambridge to complete my studies there, and was then invited to submit an 80,000 word manuscript to the Trinity College fellowship competition. I was stunned when I learned that I had actually been elected as a fellow of the college, and it appeared that I was destined for a career as an academic historian. I did, though, feel increasingly alienated from my new privileged life at Cambridge. I did not really feel that I belonged, and came to feel increasingly unhappy at the prospect of the Oxbridge career path that seemed to be opening up before me. After five years as a fellow, I gladly returned to Scotland, convinced that my experiences at Cambridge would stand me in good stead when attempting to secure a post as a historian. However, after 2-3 years, it became apparent to me that I would never be able to secure a job in my chosen field. After being treated as little more than a scrounger by the DWP, when my savings had run out and I was short of money and opportunities, I decided to establish myself as a self-employed writer, tour guide and lecturer.

How did someone with such a background come to be working with those on benefits? Did you ever feel this was a ‘calling’ or did you like us have poor experiences with the DWP, and simply want to bring about change to the system?

Like many other people, I have had bad experiences at the hands of the DWP. When I returned to Scotland in the early noughties, I started to write a book based on my research, which was necessary in order to make myself more employable as a historian. I was repeatedly told by my job centre ‘advisor’ that I should not be writing a book whilst I was signing on. Instead, the DWP attempted to force me on to a 13 week ‘training course’ aimed at improving my CV writing skills. At this point, I looked into the possibilities of going self-employed, without any help from the DWP, and was eventually able to sign off. I remember on one occasion, shortly after I had started signing on, receiving a pep talk from my advisor who told me in no uncertain terms that I should not view receipt of the paltry sum of JSA as a ‘right’, but rather as a ‘privilege’. I took serious umbrage at this skewed view, and still do. I remember thinking at the time, ‘if I wasn’t writing a bloody book……’

Can you tell us a bit more about the Scottish Unemployed Workers organization and the Dundee’s Fairness Commission? How did these organizations get started and what do you hope to achieve in the long-term?

The SUWN was established over five years ago. It was established by my partner, Sarah Glynn, and was recognised by the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC). It was conceived very much as a network connecting different types of welfare and community organisations. Through its website and regular newsletters the SUWN was able to keep the wider progressive movement informed of latest developments in the field of welfare reform. The nature of the organisation did, though, go through a transformation as a result of the experience of the Scottish indyref of 2014. During the campaign, we had begun the work of organising advice stalls outside Dundee Job Centre, and we were bowled over at the appalling stories we heard from many vulnerable people. We also began registering new voters, both YES and NO, and were responsible for signing up over 1,000 people in the space of two weeks before the deadline for voter registration in August 2014. We also began a research project at this time, which aimed to collate the extent of sanctioning of the unemployed in Dundee. Many of the stories we unearthed were truly horrific, and when the referendum ended we found that many indy supporters were keen to become involved in our campaign. From September 2014 through to April 2015, the main focus of our campaigning was aimed at reducing the rate of sanctions in Dundee, which had earned the unenviable soubriquet, ‘Scotland’s Sanction City’. We later learned that between January and March 2015 alone, the sanction rate in Dundee had fallen by 40%, and we would claim a degree of credit for this change, as we moved towards an advocacy based model of welfare work. We had a group of between 15-20 people who were willing to represent unemployed people in meetings with the DWP and assessments for PIP and ESA. Our method of work was very simple: every person entering the Job Centre was given a ‘know your rights’ leaflet and every person who left the job centre was asked if they were having any problems with the DWP? The stalls themselves also became a major focus of activity in their own right, as a place where info was shared and solidarity organised. Many people have commented that it lifted their spirits to find people outside the job centre who greeted them with a smile and who treated them like human beings, in stark contrast to the way they were generally treated by DWP staff. We are also repeatedly told that we should be outside the job centre even more often than we are, because sanction activity and instances of gross disrespect are much rarer when we are on duty.

You must have seen many people who have been sanctioned or turned down for disability related benefits. What are the effects on people in your personal experience? Can you tell us more?

We have dealt with literally hundreds and hundreds of cases in the last two years, but one of the clearest memories I have is of one of the first cases I took up at Dundee job centre in the summer of 2014. It involved a man in his late fifties, originally from the east end of London, and who had been paid off as a merchant seaman when his ship had docked in Dundee some years previously. He was a tall man, but when I met him he was little more than a bag of bones. He explained to me that he had been successively sanctioned and was now without any means whatsoever. He had no heating or lighting in his home, no food and had had nothing to eat for days. As we stood discussing his plight, he suddenly collapsed, and I had to help him to his feet, and whilst I did so I remember thinking, in horror, just how little this large man weighed. I took him to my home nearby and made him ham and eggs on toast. He broke down in tears of gratitude, whilst I shed tears of rage. When I accompanied this man into the job centre to take his case up, I was surrounded by security guards and threatened with physical ejectment until a woman with a small child, who as sitting waiting on her own appointment, intervened just as the G4S goons were about to move in on me. Despite official intransigence we were able to help the cockney seafarer with a Scottish Welfare Fund grant, and he is now doing much better. He’s still on the dole, and undergoing a Work Program placement, but at least there’s more than skin on his bones now. If we had not met him, I hate to think what would’ve become of him, something that also applies to many of the cases that we come across.

We gather Dundee Jobcentre has quite a reputation for sanctioning people. Do you have any explanations as to why that is?

We have managed to considerably reduce the sanctions rate, and whilst sanctioning still takes place it is much less common that it was back in 2014. We are now being bombarded with many cases of people being removed from ESA and being denied PIP, and with many cases of people being forced on to various workfare schemes. Our campaigning is now aimed at making Dundee a ‘No Workfare City’, and we are working alongside local trade unions, with the support of the local chamber of commerce, to make this a reality.

Are sanctions still being applied at the previous draconian levels or are you seen an easing off, as appears to be happening in the South?

This question has already been answered.

You have been in a couple of high profile confrontations with the DWP that has seen charges against you. This all sounds pretty serious? We are pleased to see that you won your cases, however we must ask, how did these matters arise and why was such action taken against you taken in the first place?

The DWP and firms like Maximus and ATOS are not used to being challenged, and when they are they often react very aggressively. I was arrested at Arbroath Job Centre in January 2015, and when the case eventually came to court in June and November of that year all of the allegations against me were systematically demolished by my lawyer. I had been accused of shouting and swearing at the top of my voice in the job centre whilst I was in representing a highly vulnerable woman with learning difficulties who was being forced to use the computerised Universal Job Match (UJM) system, which was totally inappropriate for her, particularly as she suffered from severe dyslexia. When faced with the prospect of repeating these allegations in open court, all of the DWP witnesses declined, and one of the security guards actually stated that as far as he was concerned no crime had taken place and he couldn’t see what all of the fuss was about. In our view it is about intimidation, and it hasn’t worked. Indeed, we believe it has backfired big time, as it has given us even more credibility in the eyes of many unemployed people who have been treated in the same shameful manner as I have. I am now awaiting another trial, again for threatening behaviour, following my arrest whilst representing another vulnerable woman at a ESA work capability assessment (WCA). I am confident that this second trial will go in the same way as the first and that I will be cleared of the charges.

Are the police treating unemployed workers fairly? If not, how could the situation be improved?

The police appear very keen to play the role of the DWP’s ‘little helpers’. We have had the police called on us on a number of occasions, and we have noticed that they are very ready to respond to all and any callouts from the DWP, in stark contrast to their refusal to treat the complaints of unemployed people against the DWP with any degree of seriousness. On the last occasion I was arrested, the police did not even bother to gather any evidence or ask any questions of myself, the unemployed woman I was representing, her partner or other witnesses: I was quite simply approached, asked my name and when I answered I was informed of my rights and taken into custody for 27 hours before being released. And, whilst the police have the legal right to act in this manner, which is shocking enough, we do not believe this can be construed as impartial policing. Indeed, we believe that this is an example of partial, politicised policing, and that the SUWN in general, and myself in particular, are being targeted by the DWP, their various agencies and the local police.

An interesting question to a historian. Ian Duncan Smith has resigned as we all know, what do you think Scottish people think of him and what was his legacy, or should I not ask?

IDS is gone, but not forgotten: he may have cried ‘crocodile tears’ over the plight of the long-term unemployed but his legacy remains in the shape of the most punitive form of so-called welfare provision that we have witnessed since the days of the ‘New Poor Law’ in the nineteenth century.

The DWP Select Committee are calling for submissions on the future of Jobcentre Plus. If you asked of three things that need to be changed immediately, what ought to be on your list?

1) An immediate end to ALL sanctions.
2) An immediate end to ALL compulsory labour schemes: keep volunteering voluntary.
3) The immediate devolution of all aspects of Scottish welfare policy: thus allowing welfare provision north of the border to become the ‘threat of a good example’ and a model for the rest of the UK.

I think we can agree the UK is actually quite a political hotchpotch. More of an accident of history without so much as written constitution, something that seems to perplex our American Cousins for sure! In your opinion have the policies of the DWP damaged the relationship between Scotland and England and Wales? Has it made a future break-up of the UK more or less-likely, or is there no effect to speak of?

There is no doubt that welfare became one of the defining issues of the Scottish independence referendum in 2014. Tens of thousands of new voters from some of the poorest backgrounds came onto the electoral register, many for the first time, in order to vote against what they saw as blatant class rule by the Westmonster elites. Whilst the official YES campaign was slow to recognise the significance of the ‘class question’ to the issue of Scottish independence, the electoral registration campaign conducted by the wider YES movement effectively brought the anger and desperation of the housing schemes in from the streets and onto the television studios and airwaves. It was the massive fillip given to the YES campaign by working class Scotland that almost brought about major constitutional change, and this constituency remains as alienated as ever from the Westmonster elites. The ‘Smith Commission’ was meant to heal the wounds that were opened up during the course of the indyref campaign, but the extra powers given to Holyrood amount to very little: the Scottish government will shortly have oversight over the administration of PIP and the Work Program. Whilst these new powers are to be welcomed, they fall far short of what was promised by the, increasingly desperate, leaders of all of the Westminster parties in the final days leading up to the poll. We would contend that there is little point in having a Scottish government at all, if that government cannot look after the basic economic interests of its most vulnerable citizens, and, instead, is forced to implement policies that go completely against the grain of the Scottish political consensus. The present Tory government should remember that it was the legacy of Margaret Thatcher, and not any decision made by Alex Salmond, which was responsible for bringing about the independence referendum of 2014. Eighteen years of Tory rule made the conservative brand toxic north of the border, and devolution was designed so that Scotland could never again be treated as some sort of neo-colonial guinea pig. The Tories would do well to heed the warnings of history otherwise the break-up of Britain will happen much sooner than even the most optimistic of YES supporters would dream of.