This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'DWP's Basic Assumptions (1)'.

 
 
 
DWP Central Freedom of Information Team
Annex A 
 
e-mail: freedom-of-information-re
 
xxxxx@xxx.xxx.xxx.xx
 
Our Ref: VTR  783
 
 

DATE:  10th December 2012
Annex A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dear Mr Newman 
 
 

Thank you for your e-mail of 19 November requesting a review of the handling of the response 
to your Freedom of Information request.  
 
I can confirm that I was unconnected with the earlier reply to your initial request under FoI and 
that I have considered your request afresh.  
 
In your request of 16-18 October you asked for:-  
 
 
 Q1: What aspects of the ‘system’ were presenting this barrier? The  
fact that there was no WCA did not prevent people job hunting if  
they so wished – the only barriers were enough genuinely supportive  
employers and work that had been suitably adapted. The existence of  
equality legislation does NOT in itself guarantee compliance.  
 
Q2: 
What evidence is there to support the phrase “MANY people”  
(implying the vast majority) rather than say “some people”. The  
report quoted does not make this clear.  
The report referenced  
(http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/hwwb-is-work-good-for-you.pdf) does in  
fact conclude that  
“The likely benefits (of work) outweigh any potential risks, it  
equally points out that this statement is very much “In general,  
provided due care is taken to make jobs as safe and ‘good’. [It  
explains ‘good jobs’ as those “with appropriate accommodations and  
adjustments”], clearly recognising that “normal” (unadjusted) jobs  
will not be suitable. It emphasises this key point in also saying:  
“The provisos are that account must be taken of the social context,  
the nature and quality of work, and the fact that a minority of  
people may experience contrary effects. Jobs should be safe and  


should also be accommodating for sickness and disability”. I would  
like to see the effort DWP has put into creating these ‘special’  
jobs – putting the horse correctly before the cart as it were.  
 
Q3: 
What evidence is there of the additional steps you have taken  
to ensure jobs are safe and ‘good’? Again legislation in itself  
does not guarantee compliance and DWP would have responsibly  
established true levels of compliance prior to proceeding with a  
plan based heavily on this assumption. Note I am looking for  
independently established, conclusive evidence, NOT just a DWP  
opinion.  
This report also contains a number of qualifications not mentioned  
in the VTR3452 response or generally by DWP:  
• There is a disclaimer pointing out that the views in the report  
are not necessarily shared by DWP, yet you are referencing its  
findings.  
 
Q4: 
Please clarify; do you accept its findings in full or not? If  
not, where are DWP’s provisos recorded?  
• The report states “Although the broad conclusions of this review  
are clear, several important issues need further clarification” and  
7 such issues are listed.  
 
Q5: 
For each, what work has been done to progress them in parallel  
to its other findings and where can the results of this work be  
examined?  
What information is available to show that DWP has rigorously  
pursued these issues alongside the qualified conclusions the report  
draws? 
 
Q6: Where is the risk analysis recorded that considered the  
consequences of declaring someone FFW whose health as a result  
deteriorated, perhaps resulting in early death?  
 
 
 
 
My review decision 
 
Your request for internal review asked: 
 
Q1: 
     I have read the report you said answers this request at 
     http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a-new-deal-for-welfare-empowering-people-to-work-full-
document.pdf, 
     but IT DOES NOT. 
     It too talks about traditional barriers to employment, but NOT what 
     they are/were. To repeat, what aspects of the ‘old’ system stopped 
     a disabled person who wanted to work from working? If there is no 


     information to support this assertion, it cannot be true. As you 
     have said, very many disabled people WANT to work – so what EXACTLY 
     was stopping them – please don’t just say “the system” without 
     explaining what you mean. 
      
     Q2/Q3: 
     The reference I provided makes the point that to successfully help 
     disabled people back in to work, the work itself will often have to 
     be adapted and that simply dumping them on the job market without 
     this recognition will not work. The author refers to these as 
     “good” jobs. Which of all of the various back-to-work initiatives 
     have SPECIFIC responsibility for adapting jobs in line with the 
     report’s conclusion? This is completely different from supporting 
     the individual. 
     The WCA process can easily declare a person FFW against their own 
     judgement. The report makes the point that “a minority of people 
     may experience contrary effects”, i.e. their health will suffer as 
     a result. I am trying to establish here what recognition DWP has 
     made of this risk and what steps it has taken to mitigate it. Due 
     to the potentially dire consequences of an error, if this 
     recognition has been made it will certainly be recorded. If it is 
     not, you only need say so. 
      
     Q4: 
     Just a correction – the disclaimer DOES NOT state that DWP accepts 
     its findings. It says unequivocally that the views expressed ARE 
     NOT necessarily the official view of DWP – rather a case of having 
     it both ways to avoid accountability. 
      
     Q6: 
     Important to note that despite the potentially dire consequences of 
     an error being highlighted in this report, DWP did not consider it 
     necessary to undertake a formal risk assessment.
     
 
 
 
I have reviewed the information provided in the DWP reply of 13 November 2012 and can 
confirm that all information held by the Department within the scope of his request has been 
provided, I therefore uphold the original reply sent to you by DWP. 
 
If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number 
above.   
Yours sincerely,  
 
 
DWP Central FoI Team 
 

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
 
Your right to complain under the Freedom of Information Act 
 
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review you may apply directly to the Information 
Commissioner’s Office for a decision. Generally the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have 
exhausted our own complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information 
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF www.ico.gov.uk