Second leaked DWP whistleblower document shows welfare sanctions targets are widespread

March 25, 2013 8:05 pm

On Friday we showed you a shocking letter (leaked by a DWP whistleblower) that revealed the DWP’s secret targets for sanctioning welfare recipients in action.

As we were posting the letter, Iain Duncan Smith was still insisting on the floor of the Commons that no such sanctions targets exist. That letter proved he was wrong.

We asked on Friday for evidence of sanctions targets in other job centres – and several people have contacted us with their stories of similar actions in other parts of the country. If you have proof – please let us know.

Here’s another document we’ve been sent, which talks about the new sanctions regime, and says that “unless we improve we will be put under special measures”:

  • thiswayup

    Isn’t lying to the House a breach of the Ministerial code punishable by instant sacking?
    So how long is IDS still in the job, or will he retroactively get rid of that legislation as well?

  • AlanGiles

    Yet another reason for Byrne, Miliband and co to be deeply ashamed of their behaviour a week ago when they gave a nod and a wink to the loathsome Duncan-Smith to get his retrospective law through Parliament. A bit like a soft magistrate giving a violent old lag a suspended sentence, and we all know how keen both Labour and Conservative are for that popular lady Laura Norder.

  • Monkey_Bach

    The reason this kind of thing happens is because David Freud wanted Jobcentres and Work Programme providers to try different methods, or “innovations” as Freud called them, to see what got people off benefits best. Managers were given a huge amount of latitude to “interpret” and “reinterpret” rules and regulations, which led some to abuse their positions as indicated above: claimants began to be lied to, bullied, threatened unjustly, or deliberately enticed to “incriminate” themselves by word, gesture, or some other means, enabling them to be “sanctioned” as a consequence for completely trivial infractions. Rules changed on a day to day basis as the DWP winged it and made things up as it went along: nobody knew for sure on a day to day basis what was actually expected of them and many innocent guileless souls suffered terrible pain and misery by mistake, as a result, completely undeservingly and needlessly

    Overwhelmingly Liam Byrne personally backs such a harsh approach, not because he is innately cruel but because he is an amoral, ambiguous creature who believes that now, at this point in time, during the current climate of fear and upheaval, that the public favour calamitous and heartless treatment of working age benefit claimants.

    We know this.

    But even with a terrible, unenlightened, and cruel government in power with a weak and uncertain opposition giving them it easy ride at least innocent citizens enjoyed some protection against injustice by recourse to an appeal process and by making a case in the courts as a final recourse… well they did… until last Tuesday evening, that is, when Labour became a passive party to this:

    http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/wingsland/civitas.htm

    What would the Party’s founding fathers have thought of the above?

    Has the leadership no honour whatsoever?

    No courage?

    No sense of shame?

    That’s a resounding “no” then is it?

    Eeek.

    • AlanGiles

      What bothers me is that LL writes, in all innocence about “shocking letters” and Duncan Smith denying things to be true when he knows otherwise.
      Perhaps some people are genuinely naive, but in the case of Byrne and Miliband they cannot be unaware, since it is on public record, that Duncan-Smith lied on his CV, and over his expenses, and is well remembered for Betsygate.

      He may have been an officer, but he never was and never will be, a gentleman.
      If Smith would be that paltry about his CV, do the Labour front bench really find it that surprising that his integrity is so low on more serious matters?

      I suppose in the case of Byrne and Smith, where personal financial honesty is concerned, it is a case of “birds of a feather” but in all honesty if Labour’s top table is so ready to believe the bluster of the failed Tory leader, they ought to leave major decisions to people who have the experience and maturity to know when a mediocre politician is being economical with the actualitie’

      • Monkey_Bach

        IDS may be telling the truth. He is a credulous and hugely stupid man with only a loose grip on reality and may honestly have no real idea in respect to what the heck is going on it Jobcentres or the DWP.

        More serious in my opinion is the fact that Jon Cruddas, after all of his critical articles about New Labour and subsequent welfare reforms, injustices and dangers, tamely abstained from voting against the Jobseekers Bill, as ordered, just like the other quislings. Where have all the heroes gone? Eeek.

  • MonkeyBot5000

    “unless we improve we will be put under special measures”

    That made my day.

    On the one hand it’s bad that they have targets for sanctions, but on the other hand, they might get punished for missing an arbitrary target over which they may have no control – just like jobseekers.

    Anyone who has ever had to deal with the sneering half-wits that make up 90% of job centre staff can’t help but take a little schadenfreude at them getting a little of their own medicine. At least they know they won’t just get their wages stopped because some minor bureaucrat doesn’t like the way they filled out a form.

  • Moose

    WE have got to admit, however, that this homeless, destitute place of no provision to which the unexploitable and the expendable are being consigned to die more quickly than everyone else was not created by Ian Duncan Smith or any other member of the Conservative Party, nor has its body count even yet been doubled from the 40,000 that Gordon Brown left in it. These are the Labour Party’s killing fields. WE are the murderers.

  • Amber_Star

    Liam Byrne had Labour abstain for nothing. The Tory Lords have binned Byrne’s ‘prize’ for abstaining: i.e. sanctions quotas will NOT be investigated during any review. So much for Byrne’s explanation on Labour List about the importance of getting an independent investigation into this. Very poor judgement by Byrne, was it not? Perhaps he needs reminding of rule one: Never Trust a Tory.

    • AlanGiles

      “The Tory Lords have binned Byrne’s ‘prize’ for abstaining:”
      I suspect that it was a fig-leaf to hide behind his covert support for the measure. as Monkey says Crudas abstained, which is a bit odd for somebody who is so opinionated and “for” the ordinary man.

      TBH I just do not trust or believe either Duncan-Smith or Byrne – to borrow Eddie Mair’s words they are BOTH “a nasty piece of work”. Both of them should be up a side street selling dodgy used cars.

  • Dave Postles

    Quite honestly, I can’t see a way back for Labour.

  • http://twitter.com/diarychecker Bad Penny

    I work in a jobcentre and have today been dragged in before the manager to explain why I have referred 0% for possible sanction when other officers are running at a 1-2 per day. Threats of action were made to me.

    • http://www.facebook.com/geraldine.cox.100 Geraldine Cox

      the government says there are no targets to be met if there is no law stating this then you are not doing anything wrong if they dismiss you take it to a tribunal because you have been dismissed unfairly the law is on your side there is no legal sanctions to be targeted ,then take to the media and stand up for those who are sanctioned for no reason.

  • peter goggins

    OH SORRY .. I though the Labour party supported the ‘welfare reforms’ .. Just a brief personal story … Having left Uni 2 years ago I found myself signing on .. I have a long term chronic illness.. I was ill time and again .. so I was given a 2 month sick note .. I had my benefits STOPPED and I have been HUNGRY for weeks with no heating NO money .. quite seriously ill and told .. I have to appeal a ‘decision’ by ATOS .. even though the doctor says I am unfit for work

    so YOU LOT on here are in la la land if you thik Labour are our friends ,.. I wrote to labour party about this ..= NO ANSWER = why >? because they SUPPORT IT!!!

  • peter goggins

    Labour support this policy.

  • peter goggins

    Labour support this policy I am being cencored by the site mods .. what a joke this ‘discussion’ is

  • Pingback: Steve Topley gets bail thanks to Nottingham solidarity campaign | Notts Black Arrow()

Latest

  • Featured Miliband announces plans to scrap the Lords – and introduce an elected Senate of Nations and Regions

    Miliband announces plans to scrap the Lords – and introduce an elected Senate of Nations and Regions

    In a speech to Labour’s North West regional conference in Manchester, Ed Miliband will announce that a Labour government would abolish the House of Lords and replace it with an elected Senate. That has (broadly speaking) been Labour policy for some time. But there’s a twist. Miliband wants this new Senate to be a representative body made up of those from all of Britain’s Nations and Regions, as part of a new constitutional settlement to be decided by a constitutional […]

    Read more →
  • News Miliband speaks out on anti-semitic abuse targeted at Luciana Berger – and calls on social media companies to act

    Miliband speaks out on anti-semitic abuse targeted at Luciana Berger – and calls on social media companies to act

    As we reported last week, Labour MP and Shadow Minister Luciana Berger has been the victim of a sustained torrent of disgusting online anti-semtic abuse. Ed Miliband has hit out at Berger’s abusers today, calling on social media companies to be more proactive in tackling sustained, orchestrated abuse. He told Jewish News: “The anti-Semitic abuse that Luciana Berger has experienced over recent days is utterly appalling and has absolutely no place in our country. We must have no tolerance for this vile […]

    Read more →
  • Comment The debate about building ‘the homes we need’ has to go beyond numbers

    The debate about building ‘the homes we need’ has to go beyond numbers

    Big numbers abound in housing debates and rightly so. Two-hundred thousand new homes – the number the Labour frontbench has committed to building annually – is a response to the housing crisis that is starting to approach the scale we need. But the debate about building ‘the homes we need’ has to go beyond numbers. To make the point, look at the extreme case of ‘buy-to-leave’ homes that are bought off-plan as investors’ latest fancy and sit there empty in […]

    Read more →
  • Comment The mansion tax is a progressive tax and Labour in London should support it

    The mansion tax is a progressive tax and Labour in London should support it

    For those of us who believe in progressive taxation the last few weeks in London Labour have been pretty dismal. We seem to have an array of Labour MPs (mainly wannabe London mayoral candidates) and council leaders rushing to the press denouncing the proposed mansion tax as a’ tax on London’ (or if they were more honest a tax on the rich parts of London). Yes the promotion of the Mansion Tax has been inept and it would more accurate […]

    Read more →
  • Comment It’s time to put the Green Belt back on the table

    It’s time to put the Green Belt back on the table

    The UK’s housing crisis has finally been recognised across the political spectrum as an issue that needs urgent attention. Yet despite this consensus, political inertia on housebuilding has seen subsequent governments fail to create policies that address the issue coherently and strategically. Labour’s recent Lyons Review demonstrates a commitment to house-building, with a target of constructing 200,000 homes a year. Yet while the Review recognises that the housing crisis is not evenly spread, requiring different solutions in different places, there is […]

    Read more →