Welfare Reform Bill

I want to make a few brief points. As I understand it, our main concern—certainly it is mine in supporting the amendment—is people who will be subject to community treatment orders under the new Mental Health Bill, when enacted. These people will be subject to all sorts of conditions and controls, despite our efforts on Report of that Bill. In particular, they are likely to have to present themselves for compulsory treatment at specific times and specific places on a regular basis. Referring back to my comments in the earlier debate, that would be a major challenge for these people. They may also have their residence and conduct controlled. The great majority of these claimants will almost certainly be suffering from a psychotic illness—either that or a very severe personality disorder. The psychotic patients—the great majority—will be on powerful medication, which is likely to have pretty unpleasant side-effects, including profound tiredness, loss of libido and a variety of physical symptoms. We know that people with mental illnesses are the disability group most committed to employment if they can get and hold a job. It is not that they do not want to work; they are more concerned than anyone else to be normal, or as near normal as they can be. So we do not have a problem with most of them—I would not say all of them—in terms of scrounging. As I see it—I shall put this very briefly—the best way forward is threefold. A claimant with a formal diagnosis of a severe mental illness, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, who will be under treatment, should be included in the support group. In my humble opinion, it is very hard to disagree with that. Every mental health trust must have employment placement officers and psychological therapists in every community team, although I know that that is not the responsibility of the Minister. Trusts are moving in that direction—this year, my trust in east London is to appoint an employment specialist and a therapist in every team—so it is now happening. In my view, the DWP should continue its ongoing work with employers to ensure that they have an enlightened view about the need for openness in employment so that their employees with these sorts of problems are prepared to talk about them, and employers should give time—if necessary, working time—for people to have the evidence-based psychological therapy that they need. There are specific action points that will deal with those people. Members of the Committee do not want inaction, as we have had in the past; but I, at any rate, have grave concerns about people with severe mental health problems being caught up in all those demands. Therefore, the only way to proceed seems to be to have them in the support group but with very active efforts being made to get them into employment.