.
Low Commission: how the land lies one year on
There is a growing body of evidence that LASPO and other changes are leaving vulnerable people struggling to get the help they need, says James Sandbach
Agreat deal has happened since the Low Commission published its report, Tackling the advice deficit in January 2014. While it is possible to report some positives, such as the Ministry of Justice’s new scheme to support litigants in person, the situation for front-line advice has continued to deteriorate, and with it the options of citizens to resolve social welfare law problems. So, the commission is publishing a follow-up report this March to reflect new research findings and take the agenda forward. Getting it right in social welfare law, will look at developments since last year and the strategic challenges these raise both for the next government and the advice sector.
We look at the overall landscape for advice and redress, and ways to incentivise better decision-making by government and other agencies involved in social welfare law. Our ‘systems-thinking’ starting point is that redress helps government and public bodies get things right, while also helping citizens access their rights. However, the precondition for this is a well functioning system of information and advice – both real and virtual – which starts with citizens’ capability (created by public legal education), which is supplemented by specialist casework and advice tools to deal with more complex matters and avert further escalation of social costs.
While it is difficult to draw big-picture conclusions from current data trends, some current statistics are concerning to us, such as:
•the sudden collapse of welfare appeal volumes after consistent year-on-year rises, combined with additional complications over mandatory reconsideration and assessment backlogs;
•the rise in arrears, eviction and possession proceedings and enforcements against private tenants;
•the decline in judicial review volumes and ongoing reforms in this area to restrict access;
•the increase in litigants in person in the family courts;
•the decline in the number of people able to access specialist advice through Citizens Advice Bureaux and other non-profit providers.
We found huge issues around decision-making and redress procedures for Employment and Support Allowance and other key disability benefits. In particular, the dysfunctional nature of the mandatory reconsideration process – the new Department for Work and Pensions internal review mechanism – and flawed medical assessments, combined with poor quality information and guidance from Jobcentre Plus, and the contraction of and pressure on specialist level advice and support to claimants from the advice sector, are all great cause for concern.
The impact of Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) on advice sector capacity is now becoming clearer, and it is profound. Both the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee have now criticised the design of civil legal aid reforms, which they both suggest lacked attention to the underlying evidence base. The Justice Select Committee is also investigating the impact.
The not-for-profit sector has faced not just the LASPO reforms, but cuts to local government funding, and uncertainty over the future of significant lottery funding (Advice Services Transition Fund). Front line agencies are increasingly running out of road. We are concerned that shifting funding patterns are incompatible with sustainable services.
We think greater consideration should be given to the further integration of advice with health and social care services, which are themselves coming closer together in light of the Care Act 2014. The Care Act duties around information and advice could potentially be a positive development for the advice sector, but there is much work that needs to be done and there are complex policy dynamics around public health, mental health, and preventative services – all areas which advice touches on.
In the UK, some commissioners of local health and care services have pioneered the provision of advice services as part of community and primary care, as well as some in mental health settings. These advice initiatives have been funded in the expectation that such social interventions might be expected to improve recipients’ health. Overall the research evidence – ranging from the British Medical Journal to Sir Michael Marmot’s work on public health – supports this reasoning, indicating clearly that social welfare law problems are routinely associated with ill-health. However, such provision is patchy across the country and there is a need for a more systemic link between health and advice commissioning.