MSPs yesterday heard moving testimony from disabled Scots who told of the emotional and financial stresses they experienced while applying for a controversial new benefit introduced by Iain Duncan Smith and which Scottish ministers want to scrap.
Among those giving evidence was Alison Arnott, a former physiotherapist who was forced to give up work after being severely hurt during an adult gymnastics class two years ago.
Arnott, who suffered a double brain injury during the trampoline accident in Falkirk, had to seek help to complete the application for the personal independence payment (PIP).
The Department for Work and Pensions began rolling out PIP in Scotland in January last year to replace disability living allowance, the existing main benefit that helps disabled people meet their basic daily living costs.
But Arnott’s application and appeal were both rejected, though an award was finally granted when she said she would take her case to a tribunal.
In a submission to the committee her father Norman Gray, who supported her at yesterday’s hearing, said: “Her injury has left her with a right-sided weakness in her arm and leg, some difficulties in managing herself and her household but more importantly an almost complete loss of short-term memory.
“These disabilities impinge directly on her ability to fulfil her role as a physiotherapist and after two workplace assessments she was deemed unfit for work within the Greater Glasgow Health Board.
“The Atos process has caused my daughter great stress and upset during the assessment period and much anxiety and upset in the award saga. I feel it is a process not fit for its purpose and ought to be reviewed to make it much more client friendly.”
Citizens Advice Scotland (CAS), which assisted Arnott through the claims process, wants the UK Government to halt the introduction of PIP as responsibility for the benefit is due to come under the control of the Scottish Parliament as part of the Smith agreement. The organisation believes moving disabled Scots on to PIP before control of the payments are transferred to Holyrood would be a “waste of time and money”.
CAS has argued that Scottish claimants would be switched to the new system, only to be moved again in two years’ time when control over the benefit is handed to the Scottish Government which wants to replace it.
Witnesses also told the committee of the financial implications of waiting for a decision on their PIP award.
Mairi MacGregor, who has ME, said she could not afford therapeutic activities like a physiotherapist or going to her local leisure centre for a sauna, which she said helped with her pain relief.
Moira Sinclair, who works full time, said if she was denied a PIP award she would no longer be able to afford to drive, which would prevent her from being able to keep her job. Sinclair said she was worried she would not be able to afford her mortgage or buy food.
Earlier this year Deputy First Minister John Swinney and Social Justice Secretary Alex Neil argued for swift progress to be made by the UK Government on the devolution of welfare powers in a bid to allow them to stop the roll-out in Scotland of PIP.
Neil said at the time: “Reflecting significant concerns across Scotland, I also believe that the roll-out of new Personal Independence Payments should be stopped and we should consider options for the future of disability benefits in Scotland, as they will be devolved in the near future. More generally, the UK Government should not take decisions on areas identified for further devolution without the Scottish Government’s agreement.”
Holyrood’s welfare reform committee has been investigating the impact of sweeping changes by the Work and Pensions Secretary on Scots claiming benefits.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here