ANTI-POVERTY campaigners have warned that hundreds of thousands of families are facing hardship after being wrongly sanctioned.

Almost two million sanctions against claimants have been imposed across the UK, according to data released by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) since the controversial measures were introduced by Iain Duncan Smith in 2012.

But since the regime began, a total of 575,881 of these 1,824,877 decisions have been challenged with 285,327 overturned – a staggering 49.5 per cent. Claimants were on either Employment Support Allowance (ESA) or Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA).

Last night, John Dickie, director of Child Poverty Action Group in Scotland, said the figures indicated how “punitive” and “unfair” the regime was and warned that many more claimants had sanctions imposed unfairly but had not appealed them.

“People are being sanctioned wrongly, and that is having a damaging impact on them, their health and their families’ well-being,” he said.

“It shows how unfair the regime is. What’s also very worrying is that there have been many decisions wrongly made, but have not been challenged or appealed.

“Many people don’t understand they have been sanctioned and are unable, or lack the support, to go through the process of appeal.”

Emma Ritch, executive director of women’s campaign group Engender, said the figures revealed a system that was de-humanising – and one that had affected women particularly badly.

“We should have a social security system that guarantees an adequate standard of living to every Scot,” she said. “Instead, we have a dehumanising and institutionally mistrustful muddle.

“Women are twice as dependent on social security as men, and the slew of cuts that have been badged as “welfare reform” have mostly come at the expense of women.

“Sanctions mean mothers going hungry to ensure that their children can eat, women struggling without adequate sanitary protection, and reducing women’s capacity to escape domestic abuse,” she said.

Sanctions can be imposed for a range of minor breaches, such as being late or missing a JobCentre appointment, job interview or not applying for the required number of jobs.

The Government justifies the regime by saying the measures are intended as an encouragement for those out of work to make every effort to get a job.

However, critics say there is no evidence to indicate the regime helps address unemployment, and that it instead punishes those least equipped to find work.

The minimum penalty imposes sanctions for four weeks, meaning the claimant does not receive his or her benefit for that time.

However, the period can be extended. The most severe sanctions see benefits withdrawn for 13 weeks such as when, for example, an individual leaves a job voluntarily, rising to 26 weeks for a second “failure” and rising further still for a third.

SNP social justice and welfare spokesperson Eilidh Whiteford MP said: “The sanctions regime instituted by the UK Government is causing heartache and misery to hundreds of thousands of people across the UK – and the fact that half of all those challenged are overturned is deeply concerning.

“We have already heard the heartbreaking stories of claimants being sanctioned whilst in hospital recovering from a heart attack or other medical emergency, but these figures lay bare the ‘sanction now, ask questions later’ nature of the UK Government’s indefensible regime.

“With very nearly 50 per cent of reviewed cases being reversed, it is clear to see that these cruel and punitive sanctions are being slapped on people before proper consideration and understanding of individual circumstances have been established.

“Hundreds of thousands of people are being put through tremendous worry and stress for absolutely no reason. It also shows how important it this that claimants appeal when they believe they have been unfairly sanctioned.

“There needs to be an immediate review of the UK Government’s conditionality and sanctions regime, with an immediate halt to any new sanctions whilst it is carried out.”

In March MPs called for a full independent review of the sanctions regime in the next parliament amid growing fears of their impact on vulnerable claimants.

In a hard-hitting report, members of the House of Commons’ Work and Pensions Committee said there were increasing concerns that frontline civil servants were under pressure to achieve targets to apply a certain numbers of sanctions.

Dame Anne Begg, the former Scottish Labour MP and the committee chair at the time, said the system was particularly controversial as it withheld subsistence-level benefits from people who have little or no other income.

No-one from the DWP was available last night to comment.


The National View: Benefit sanctions are morally wrong and just don't work