Welfare Reform Bill

The hon. Gentleman will know that I have raised the issue of resourcing this programme both in the Chamber and elsewhere, and I am sure that discussions between the Minister and the Treasury are ongoing. Clearly, the important point is that the more people are empowered to go back to work, the more the Exchequer saves a substantial sum of money: the recycling possibilities are enormous. Let me move on briefly to amendment No. 89 and amendments Nos. 90 to 96, which relate to the work-focused health-related assessments. They are designed essentially to remove reference to ““work-focused health-related assessments”” and to replace that phrase simply with ““work-focused assessments”” for precisely the reason that I do not see why we cannot talk about work-focused assessments in the round. I have already made the point, but let me provide another example. Someone who has been a wheelchair user from childhood or, like one of my constituents, is a wheelchair user as a result of an accident, may subsequently be far healthier than someone who is not disabled. The problem is not the health assessment of a wheelchair user, but assessing that person’s capacity to engage in work-related activity and, ultimately, to work. That can have a lot to do with access to the workplace, as the building may require ramps, lifts and so forth. I genuinely do not understand why, when we are talking about work-focused assessments, which are crucial to the Government’s strategy, we have to tag on the ““health-related”” provision. Someone somewhere, it seems to me, has a bit of the old medical model in the system and I am urging whoever it is to relax a little and look more broadly at the obstacles that people face, because they are not always entirely health-related. Amendments Nos. 83 to 85 are designed to amend clause 10. As drafted, subsection (7) states that"““‘work-focused health-related assessment’ means an assessment by a health care professional””—" a point that has been made already. I reiterate that work-focused assessments should not be restricted to health matters, so those who make the assessments should not be restricted to health professionals: that follows as night follows day. Time is limited, so I shall move quickly to amendment No. 72, which also relates to clause 10. Subsection(7)(c) refers to assessing"““such other matters relating to his””" or her ““physical or mental condition””. Again, instead of referring to matters confined to that condition, why do we not make provision for factors that limit people’s ““capability to work””? In summary, all 16 of my amendments are designed to recognise that capability for work or work-related activity is not solely a health matter and cannot be solved only by medical or health professionals. The Government obviously subscribe to the social model of disability—hence the whole package of measures introduced over the past 10 years that have been all about empowering disabled people to remove the barriers that they face in work and elsewhere. That is what motivates the strategy. Clearly, the Opposition—and I mean both parties—subscribe to the social model of disability, so I feel sure that they will strongly support the sentiments that I have expressed. To conclude, the danger of not seeking to deal with the concerns that I have expressed through the amendments is that the Government will deny themselves the possibility of framing regulations that adopt a broader approach to meeting individual need. If they are not careful, they will be less successful in achieving the objectives that we all share.