The removal of the social security safety net Sue Watson

Recently I attended an event at Bradford City Hall on the topic of ”large’ families, poverty and welfare reform’. It was a very well attended event with a wide variety of people representing many facets of our society.

One group ‘Hope Rising Action Group’ had keynote speakers telling us their lived personal experiences of the benefit cap and how this and other changes to the welfare system were affecting them day to day. You couldn’t help but be saddened by their stories and angry on their behalf. How brave they were telling us what their lives are like.

I fail to understand why our fearless leaders cannot see the correlation between draconic changes to the welfare system and the rise in poverty amongst those both in and out of work who have the misfortune to be caught up in this madness.

Changes to the welfare system in 2008, we were told, were necessary to reduce the welfare bill. Many would agree that a more rigorous and simpler application process would improve the system. Unfortunately it seems to have become more complicated and confusing not easier and I would hazard an educated guess that more money has been spent in processing all these changes and no actual savings have been made.

My own experience of the welfare system is a mixture of ‘bad’ and ‘very bad’ with inconsistencies over DWP staff giving me incorrect information and often being contradictory depending on who you spoke to, confusing letters that bore no relation to me at all and a sense that it was my own fault that I was in a situation where I needed to apply for social security. I didn’t choose to be diagnosed with a medical condition that meant I had to give up my work which I loved (I was a self-employed aromatherapist) but life can take unexpected turns and twists and you have to do the best you can to cope.

Eventually I got fed up of getting exactly nowhere with regard to the problems I had with the Employment Support Allowance and contacted my MP to see if he would help. Within a few days of him getting involved I was telephoned by a senior decision maker who went through my situation and agreed that I had been incorrectly placed in the WRAG and should have been placed within the support group of the ESA from the start. I was very grateful to my MP but also very angry that his influence was necessary.

When I speak to people who are also in the social security system the problems they face are much the same as mine. One topic that comes up time and time again is that DWP staff haven’t had sufficient (or the right) training to deal with all the changes that have occurred. It must be maddening for them as well and perhaps that is why, as I’ve been told, they can often be rude and dismissive.

We now have Universal Credit that is being rolled out in various parts of the country and yet, again, there are problems being reported with this new benefit. Wouldn’t it make sense to pause the roll-out and look into and sort out the problems so that a future roll-out would be less difficult for all concerned?

Unfortunately, I can’t see the situation getting better any time soon. Social security used to be a safety net for people who needed help, for whatever reason, and now I think that the safety net has been removed leaving many in desperately difficult situations.

Sue Watson is a member of the Dole Animators, a group who made a film about their experience son welfare reform in 2013

@doleanimators

Reflections on the ‘large’ families, poverty & welfare reform conference Nancy Evans

Blog: ‘Large’ families, poverty and welfare reform conference

Being an academic-in-the-making is all about going to conferences and learning new things. As part of my PhD into women’s experiences of benefits stigma, I have already been to a fair few. But this conference – which took place in Bradford in November 2017  – was a little bit different to the previous ones I have attended. As well as the usual academics, what made it so powerful and unique was the inclusion and participation of people whose lives are directly affected by poverty and welfare reform.

The conference’s focus on ‘large’ families was owing to the disproportionate impact that recent changes to the benefits system have on low income larger families (3+ children). Dr Tracey Jensen’s keynote provided a compelling account of how ‘large’ families have been constructed within the media and policy debates as a problematic group, particularly in the last decade, which she argued serves to justify and generate public support for policies like the Benefit Cap and ‘2-child limit’. Tracey highlighted that despite their actual statistical underrepresentation in the UK (only 14% of families have 3+ children and only a tiny minority of these are ‘supersize’ familes), ‘large’ families have become a subject of intense fascination and have become hyper-visible in the media. While ‘celebrity supermums’ are celebrated as something to aspire to, those in poverty and in receipt of benefits are presented as selfish, irresponsible and undeserving. Sensationalist tabloid stories and ‘poverty porn’ programmes such as Benefits Street, can be seen to continually embed these stigmatising ideas about supposed ‘benefit broods’, which arguably generates public support for punitive welfare policies.

The harrowing realities of such policies were really brought to life by the voices of those affected. In the first keynote of the day, we heard from Hope Rising, a group of parents and activists from Bradford, with direct experiences of poverty and recent welfare reform, particularly the Benefit Cap. The group members bravely recounted their stories, which revealed the severe constraints that the Benefits Cap has placed upon them and other families like theirs. A commonly-reported experience was feeling ‘trapped’ with the difficult choices they are forced to make between food, electricity, clothing and rent, where parents often go without food in order to feed their children. They also highlighted that the fear of becoming homeless as a result of the Cap can lead parents to desperate measures, such as remaining in abusive relationships and turning to crime. Members of Hope Rising chose to remain anonymous and use pseudonyms, perhaps a reflection of the stigma associated with welfare, which can act as a barrier to speaking out against poverty-related injustice.

The importance of listening to the voices of those affected by poverty and changes to welfare was also highlighted in the workshop I attended, with contributions from groups such as the Dole Animators,  ATD Fourth World and the Poverty Truth Commission. Interestingly, the Dole Animators,  a group of benefit claimants who produced a documentary about the realities of welfare reform, said that they initially chose to remain anonymous for fear of feeling stigmatised, but later opted to use their real names. They said being able to do so felt empowering in that it challenged the idea that they should feel ashamed.

What really resonated with me was the strength and agency shown by the various activist groups in responding to and resisting the stigma associated with poverty and welfare, which provides hope that the future might be different. They demonstrated that stigmatising portrayals of ‘the poor’ are not the only stories being told. Indeed, representatives from anti-poverty organisation ATD Fourthworld, discussed their collaborative project The Roles We Play, which provides a powerful counter-narrative, by demonstrating the invaluable contributions that people in poverty make within their families, communities and society as a whole. Rather than merely being about them, this project allowed those in poverty to tell their own stories and fight back against stigma.

Similarly, the work of the Poverty Truth Commission, whose motto is ‘Nothing about us, without us, is for us’, illustrates the importance of listening to the voices of people in poverty in order to bring about social change. Sarah, representing the Salford Poverty Truth Commission, discussed how the commission collaborates with civic and business decision-makers such as local councillors, MPs, housing associations and the Police, while also engaging at a grassroots level, in order to share the many stories of people with direct experiences of poverty. Sarah was hopeful that a ‘culture change’ was taking place between people in power and people with lived experience, as their work has had important outcomes in the local area. The group has been successful in providing a safe space for those in poverty to talk about the injustices they face, without fear of stigma.

I left the conference feeling on the one hand disheartened by the many stories of the hardship due to recent welfare reform  and the enduring powerful stigma attached to poverty and welfare, but also with a feeling of hope for the future. Above all, the conference revealed the power and importance of listening to and learning from the collective voices of those directly experiencing poverty, and the potential to build a national voice to combat the existing injustices of welfare reform and stigma.

Nancy Evans is a PhD student in the School of Law and Social Justice at the University of Liverpool. Her research is concerned with exploring women’s experiences of the stigma of welfare.

@Nancyclairee

Email: nancy.evans@liverpool.ac.uk

 

 

(really) listening to the experts by experience on poverty & welfare reform Sarah Batty

I have never cried at a conference before, but I was reduced to tears at Bradford’s conference on Large families, Welfare reform and Poverty as were many in the room. The keynote speakers were members of a new Bradford group called Hope Rising who shared devastating accounts of the impacts of welfare reforms, in particular the recently lowered Benefit Cap, on themselves and their friends. The speakers were extremely brave and their testimonies were delivered through their own tears. They told us exactly what it is like to not have enough money to buy food for your children or to pay your rent. For your children to be put in ‘isolation’ at school to punish them for not having the required school uniform that you simply could not afford. To have your sickness benefits stopped, and be found ‘fit for work’ in spite of your debilitating and well-evidenced health condition.

As a front-line advice worker, I am used to hearing about welfare reforms. Attendees included people like me; council staff and other professionals in administrative and helping roles. So, why was it so shocking and emotional to hear what the members of Hope Rising had to say?

Because it was so different. Usually, when interviewing people, we, the professionals, the ‘experts’ control the dialogue in order to find out in limited time the key information we need to look for practical solutions and give whatever support we are able to offer. At this conference, we had to listen to people tell their stories in their own way and on their own terms. This was very powerful. It was also very effective: a councillor with a particular brief for anti-poverty within the district was very moved and said she would take her new understanding of the situation back to work.

However, the room still grasped for solutions to help. Why don’t you apply for Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP), suggested a member of the audience, to cover your rent that is no longer covered by Housing Benefit you have been Benefit Capped. DHP is a cash-limited fund administered by councils to ameliorate the effects of several welfare reforms which cut people’s housing benefit, including the Bedroom Tax. There is insufficient money in the pot to help everyone affected, and councils make it very clear that DHP is a short-term measure for three to six months. There is no guarantee of being awarded DHP and the application process involves claimants explaining what they are doing to improve their financial situation and downwardly adjust their spending. One of the speakers from Hope Rising responded vehemently that it was extremely difficult to apply for and to gather the receipts required by the Council in order to scrutinise your spending patterns. This group member’s experiences are very similar to a process used by a Council where I work, where the application process creates administrative barrier clearly designed to deter people from applying.

Another solution proposed from the floor by people with experience of working in schools was that the speakers should ask their schools to give them the Pupil Premium