Changes to the Work Capability Assessment may save a bit of public money – but improving public health would be transformational, says economist Louise Murphy
The government recently announced that it is considering changes to the Work Capability Assessment, which is used to assess how people with disabilities and health conditions are treated within the benefits system – determining how much support they receive, and, crucially, whether these recipients should be required to look for work.
In some ways, a discussion on this topic is long overdue. The current system effectively – and over simplistically – labels people as being either fit for work or unable to work. This could definitely be improved, to better encompass the complex range of health conditions people face and the way in which these can fluctuate.
It’s also clear that, with benefit expenditure related to ill-health and disability set to be 40 per cent higher in 2027-28 than in 2021-22, and health-related economic inactivity on the rise, a plan to help as many people back into work as possible is urgently needed.
The changes are also clearly motivated by efforts to cut public spending
However, while the government’s proposed reforms to the Work Capability Assessment may purport to tackle this issue, its changes are also clearly motivated by efforts to cut public spending, by reducing the amount paid in means-tested, health-related benefits.
For example, the majority of people who currently receive means-tested, health-related benefits are classed as needing a higher benefit entitlement with no requirements to look for or prepare for work at all: three quarters of the 3.2 million claimants at the end of 2022 fell into this category.
The government’s proposed changes are evidently intended to make it much harder for people to be placed in this high benefit entitlement category, by changing qualifying criteria related to four measures: mobility, continence, getting about and social engagement.
A true solution would need to encompass improved healthcare provision to prevent people getting ill in the first place
In addition, the government is also considering getting rid of a current caveat in the assessment, which allows people to qualify for the higher benefit level if there is evidence that their mental and/or physical health will be severely impacted without it.
However, simply making it harder for people to receive disability-related benefits isn’t an adequate or a long-term answer to the problem of health-related inactivity.
A true solution would need to encompass improved healthcare provision to prevent people getting ill in the first place, alongside support to help claimants who are able to work find good-quality employment.
Disabled workers are no more likely to work remotely than the overall population, and many low-paid jobs cannot be done remotely at all
We should also be cautious about overstating the impact of recent increases in the number of people who work from home. While homeworking may allow some people with disabilities or health conditions who weren’t previously able to work to do so, we must remember that disabled workers are no more likely to work remotely than the overall population, and that many low-paid jobs cannot be done remotely at all.
Given the size of the challenge the UK faces on rising ill health, the need for welfare reform will almost certainly feature in the coming Autumn Statement, and will likely be a big talking point in future election campaigns too.
But the discussion must focus not just on saving money, but on improving public health, and on ensuring that people in receipt of health-related benefits who are able to work receive the help and support they need – and that those who aren’t able to work don’t risk losing out.
Louise Murphy is an economist at the Resolution Foundation
Image: Pexels
