Welfare Reform Bill

moved Amendment No. 30: 30: Clause 8 , page 6, line 17, at end insert— ““( ) make provision as to the qualifications of the person undertaking the assessment;”” The noble Lord said: I shall speak to Amendment No. 42 as well. Amendment No. 30 amends Clause 8 and Amendment No. 42 amends Clause 9. As the Committee will see from the Marshalled List, they both say that provision should be made, "““as to the qualifications of the person undertaking the assessment””." The amendments seek to clarify the skills and experiences of the assessors. It is of course critical that assessors are sufficiently trained so that they can successfully assess the limitations a disability imposes. Unfortunately, even the research of the Department for Work and Pensions suggests that this is not the case, and that assessors are especially lacking in experience with mental disabilities and learning difficulties. Do the Government intend to raise the standards of training of their assessors? If not, will this not be a significant obstacle to the rollout of the ESA? It would be sensible, in view of many of the variations of disabilities, to ensure that a claimant with a mental disability is assessed by someone properly qualified in those types of disability. Do the Government have any intention of assigning different assessors to claimants with disabilities in their field of expertise, or will there be a totally random system of allocation? Not only is there a strong argument for claimants with various disabilities to be assessed by assessors with appropriate and specific experience, but the two tests also seem to need a very different set of skills and training. Whereas the first assessor will need medical experience to understand fully the disability that they are measuring, the second will need considerable experience in rehabilitation and training to know what support options are available for the claimant and how much improvement can be expected from them—in other words, how close they are to the job market. Can the Minister confirm that the two tests will be undertaken by two such different people? Where does the health professional approved by the Secretary of State, mentioned in AmendmentNo. 111, fit in? Is he to have direct contact with the claimant, or is he to advise the assessors or the decision-makers? Or, indeed, the decision-maker; I have not quite established whether there will be a single national decision-maker or whether they will be regional, or perhaps there will be one in each office. I do not know how these decision-makers will fit into the picture, but I am sure I shall be told sooner rather than later. While I understand that the decision-maker, whoever he is and wherever he sits, makes the final decision, I cannot believe that he is expected to be a medical polymath without a full understanding of either employment needs or medical therapy. How can work-related interviews result in achievable and useful goals? I look forward to the Minister’s response for assurance on these points or an explanation of why my concerns are needless. I believe that this will be the first occasion on which the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan of Drefelin, has spoken from the Dispatch Box, and I congratulate her on her promotion. I beg to move.