ATOS - leaked report shows "DWP is holding Atos to extremely tight tolerances"

That may be one of the outcomes of Litchfield's review, as it has been picked up as a defect. It seems a lot of misunderstandings have arisen, and long delays (with reduced benefit) experienced by applicants, because the interview was so inaccurate.

The report gives the example of someone who had such poor mobility they couldn't get out of the house. The interviewer asked if how far away were local shops, then entered in their report that the applicant was perfectly capable of walking that distance.

The trouble is that DWP has confused disability with health condition, and clearly perceives most complainants as work shy rather than genuinely disabled. There is very little proper understanding of disability.

Hence it seems to be assumed that there should be frequent re-assessments looking for signs of recovery or improvement. Litchfield's report points out that long term disability should be reviewed every five years. The DWP are reviewing many long termed disabled as frequently as every six months, because they insist you can recover from disability.

The whole thing has clearly been managed on the basis of deep rooted prejudice against people perceived as workshy. The staff involved have been quite blinkered about real need.

Hence even if the Government intentions are genuinely constructive, even remotely compassionate, one thing is for certain, interpretation by the DWP has been cruelly prejudicial.

The only way out of this is large scale sacking of DWP staff - let them taste their bad attitude at the receiving end.

As to the Coalition Government, it tries to make out it is strong government, but this sort of bullying of the weak and disadvantaged while failing to deal wioth blatent abuses at the top is not only weak government but BAD government.

That may be one of the outcomes of Litchfield's review, as it has been picked up as a defect. It seems a lot of misunderstandings have arisen, and long delays (with reduced benefit) experienced by applicants, because the interview was so inaccurate.

The report gives the example of someone who had such poor mobility they couldn't get out of the house. The interviewer asked if how far away were local shops, then entered in their report that the applicant was perfectly capable of walking that distance.

The trouble is that DWP has confused disability with health condition, and clearly perceives most complainants as work shy rather than genuinely disabled. There is very little proper understanding of disability.

Hence it seems to be assumed that there should be frequent re-assessments looking for signs of recovery or improvement. Litchfield's report points out that long term disability should be reviewed every five years. The DWP are reviewing many long termed disabled as frequently as every six months, because they insist you can recover from disability.

The whole thing has clearly been managed on the basis of deep rooted prejudice against people perceived as workshy. The staff involved have been quite blinkered about real need.

Hence even if the Government intentions are genuinely constructive, even remotely compassionate, one thing is for certain, interpretation by the DWP has been cruelly prejudicial.

The only way out of this is large scale sacking of DWP staff - let them taste their bad attitude at the receiving end.

As to the Coalition Government, it tries to make out it is strong government, but this sort of bullying of the weak and disadvantaged while failing to deal wioth blatent abuses at the top is not only weak government but BAD government.