Latest news with #HelenWhately
The Guardian
19 hours ago
- Health
- The Guardian
What has the Covid-19 inquiry discovered about care homes in the pandemic?
Over the past four weeks, the Covid-19 inquiry has examined how the care sector was affected by a lack of testing and protective equipment and by the decisions that led to a surge of infections. Among the core participants were bereaved groups who said 'their loved ones who died cannot raise their voices so they seek truth and accountability on their behalf'. The former health and social care secretary's evidence was the most highly anticipated of this stage and ultimately disappointing for bereaved groups who said it was 'full of excuses and completely devoid of accountability'. Hancock said sending untested hospital patients into care homes to free up bed space was the 'least worst decision that could have been taken at the time'. He insisted that 'he still can't find a better option' and said it was in line with the guidance from medical experts at the time. The policy was blamed for causing outbreaks of Covid in care homes, with one civil servant saying the 46,000 deaths in the sector were a 'generational slaughter'. Hancock placed the blame firmly on Public Health England, saying its recommendations had not kept up with the reality of the unfolding situation. 'I got so frustrated with PHE I abolished them,' he said. 'There wasn't enough testing, there wasn't enough PPE. The public health authorities had the wrong attitude and the wrong doctrine. All of these things needed fixing and one by one we did everything we could to fix them.' Helen Whately, the care minister at the time, said hospital patients being discharged into care homes 'shouldn't have happened' and care homes should not have been expected to 'serve the NHS in this'. The inquiry heard that many care homes experienced 'clinical abandonment' during the pandemic. In some of the most distressing evidence heard by the inquiry, a care home owner and manager from Wrexham described the unfolding chaos and how staff struggled to provide care without adequate PPE and testing. Helen Louise Hough claimed she was told that her residents 'would not be considered for ventilation' if they became seriously ill with Covid and she could not get her local GP to attend in person to provide care. In one particularly harrowing incident, she said the home's first resident to die with Covid was left gasping for breath and begging for help in her final hours after Hough had been denied a prescription for oxygen. Her husband, Vernon, witnessed the resident's distress and later took his own life as the toll of the pandemic wore on. Many staff members worked long hours and stayed in an attic and in a caravan on site to reduce the risk of bringing the disease into the home. But with testing unavailable in the early weeks there was no way of telling who had Covid. Caroline Abrahams, of the charity Age UK, said 'being in a care home turned out to be almost the worst place you could be during a pandemic'. Members of bereaved groups spoke powerfully about the impact of being unable to visit their relatives for months at a time, in many cases missing out on seeing them in the last weeks of their lives. Jane Weir-Wierzbowska, of Covid-19 Bereaved families for Justice, said her mother, who had dementia, deteriorated rapidly when her visits stopped. She could only look on from outside her room – talking through a mobile phone wrapped in a bin bag and placed on her mother's shoulder – as she neared the end of her life. 'I just felt like I'd let her down so badly and that guilt is with me always,' she said. The inquiry heard that dementia patients suffered the most from the ban on visits and there was a disproportionate amount of excess deaths in this group. People with dementia accounted for a quarter of all Covid-related deaths in England and Wales. Residents also described the distress caused by long periods stuck in isolation to try to stop the spread of Covid – one woman said she was placed in solitary for 65 days and felt like 'a caged animal'. Joanna Killian, the chief executive of the Local Government Association, said the trauma of separation was 'inhumane and can't happen again'. Laws such as the Care Act 2014 and the Equality Act 2010 were eased during the pandemic to help the care system manage the pressure of the pandemic. But Helen Wildbore, the director of Care Rights UK, said this meant that 'people's rights became negotiable and sidelined' and individual needs were neglected. She said the pausing of routine inspections removed vital impartial oversight of care, and enforced supervision during visits meant it was harder for people to report abuse or neglect. Disability rights groups said 'no government should have legislated to allow local authorities to cease meeting pre-existing eligible needs' and that disabled people felt their lives were less valued.
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Liz Kendall faces fresh benefits backlash
Liz Kendall is facing backlash over her planned benefit cuts after MPs warned that slashing universal credit (UC) payments would push more disabled people into poverty. On Tuesday, the influential Work and Pension Committee said it was alarmed by Ms Kendall's proposed changes to UC, which will see top-up payments to new claimants who are disabled halved from £423.27 to £217.26 a month from 2026. The committee, chaired by Labour MP Debbie Abrahams, warned that slashing the benefits risked forcing more disabled people into poverty. The reforms risk reducing payments for people with severe mental health conditions, the committee said, because their condition may not qualify for a full UC payment. Ms Abrahams said that the Government's own analysis showed that the reduction in the UC health top-up payment would push approximately 50,000 people into poverty by the end of the decade. However, Helen Whately, shadow work and pensions secretary, said: 'Politicians should be trying to get welfare spending under control, not handing out even more cash. It's a sobering fact that the British Government spends more on sickness benefits than on defence – this cannot be allowed to continue.' UC is Britain's main benefit and it replaced a myriad of other payments, such as jobseekers' allowance, child tax credits and housing benefits in 2012. Claimants who are disabled can claim a top-up payment in addition to standard UC, but the Government is hoping to change this amid fears too many people are claiming it on spurious grounds. Welfare battle Ms Kendall had been battling rebels from her own party to push through a watered-down version of her welfare reforms. Following a government policy reversal and a series of major concessions to Labour rebels, it eventually passed at the start of the month. As part of her reforms, Ms Kendall, who is the Work and Pensions Secretary, has sought to address Britain's ballooning welfare spending, which is estimated to reach £378bn by 2029-30 – almost double the £210bn paid out to claimants in 2013-14. Yet concessions made to the bill are expected to wipe out a third of the £5bn they had been expected to save taxpayers, piling further pressure on the Treasury. Ms Kendall warned earlier this month that once workers start receiving the health element of UC, only 3pc a year manage to get off the benefit again. Despite this, Ms Abrahams said: 'There are still issues with these welfare reforms, not least with the cut in financial support that newly sick and disabled people will receive.' Ms Abrahams has been a staunch critic of the Government's welfare reforms bill alongside other Labour rebels, including Meg Hillier and Rachael Maskell, who had pushed for changes to the bill. The fallout over the bill is far from over, as Ms Abrahams told Sir Kier Starmer at the Liaison Committee that the 'fear and anxiety' felt by disabled people following the Government's welfare reform bill 'cannot be underestimated'. In a tense exchange between the Left-wing MP and the Prime Minister last week, Ms Abrahams said the reforms were 'far removed from Labour values' and warned that the Government 'must do better'. A recent report from the Office for Budget Responsibility warned that the UK's national debt is on track to spiral from just under 100pc of GDP to 270pc in the next 50 years if nothing is done to reduce the benefits bill. A government spokesman said: 'Our welfare reforms will support those who can work into jobs and ensure there is always a safety net for those that need it. The impact assessment shows our reforms will lift 50,000 children out of poverty – and our additional employment support will lift even more families out of poverty. 'The reforms will rebalance universal credit rates to reduce the perverse incentives that trap people out of work, alongside genuinely helping disabled people and those with long-term health conditions into good, secure work – backed by £3.8bn in employment support over this parliament.'
Times
4 days ago
- Business
- Times
More than 600,000 graduates are claiming benefits
More than 600,000 graduates are claiming benefits, according to newly released official figures. In response to a parliamentary question from the Conservative MP Neil O'Brien, the UK Statistics Authority revealed that between March to May this year 639,000 people with a level six qualification — equivalent to a degree with honours — or above were claiming universal credit, making up 12 per cent of those being paid the benefit. The figures came from the Office for National Statistics' Labour Force Survey, which also found that 88 per cent of graduates were in employment last year compared with 68 per cent of non-graduates. There was an economic inactivity rate of almost 10 per cent among graduates and an unemployment rate of 3 per cent. The median real-terms salary for graduates aged under 65 was £26,500, the study found — an increase of £500 compared with the previous year. Graduates were more likely to be in work according to the survey, which was released last month. The unemployment rate was 5.6 per cent for non-graduates. The inactivity rate — a person outside the labour force who has not been seeking work — stood at almost 30 per cent for non-graduates. These figures include the long-term sick, students and people who have taken early retirement. The Conservative Party said that graduates were suffering because of Labour's policies. Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: 'Today's graduates face the triple jeopardy of low-value degrees, a labour market crippled by Labour's job taxes and competition with AI for entry-level roles. 'The government needs to grip this challenge. Their failure to reform welfare and economic mismanagement threatens the future of a new generation. Meanwhile, the taxpayer is footing the bill for unpaid student loans and graduates on benefits.' The annual survey by the Higher Education Statistics Agency revealed that Medicine and dentistry graduates earned nearly £10,000 more than the average university leaver after 15 months, at £37,900. The lowest salaries were paid to graduates from media, journalism and communication subjects, at almost £25,000. The number of graduates on universal credit will fuel concern over so-called 'Mickey Mouse' degrees with high dropout rates and poor job prospects. Before Labour took office, Rishi Sunak promised a crackdown on courses that were 'ripping young people off' by offering degree places that did not increase their long-term earnings potential. He said that one in eight university places would be scrapped. At the time, Labour criticised Sunak's remarks, accusing his government of 'trashing' the sector. Since taking office Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, has increased tuition fees to £9,535 — the first increase in eight years — and increased maintenance loans. A government spokesman said: 'We remain committed to our principles to reform the welfare system — those who can work should work, and if you need help into work the government should support you.'
Spectator
11-07-2025
- Health
- Spectator
Britain's mental health crisis isn't what you think
Britain has a widespread and collective mental health problem – but it's not what you might think. Specifically, it's that many people believe themselves to be mentally unwell when actually they are not. What's more, society and the state have been prone to taking them at their word on this matter for far too long. We've become aware of this unfolding problem recently as it's evolved into a veritable crisis. It's at once a financial crisis, one that now costs the taxpayer and the Treasury billions in welfare payments, while it's also a still-evolving human crisis. We're only now beginning to grasp the human cost of maintaining a mainly younger generation in a state of passive dependency, convinced that they are unable to deal with the necessary challenges of life – and all with the approval of those in authority. Wokery helped to popularise and cement the notion that all opinions and viewpoints are of equal worth We should then be grateful that the Conservatives have announced plans to tackle the immediate fiscal emergency at least. Helen Whately, the shadow and work and pensions secretary, says that those with common mental health conditions or some unremarkable behavioural patterns shouldn't be receiving sickness benefits. 'We cannot have a country in which one in four people believe they are disabled and believe that means that they should be receiving benefits from the state,' she told Radio 4, 'you shouldn't be receiving sickness benefits if you have a common mental health disorder, something like anxiety, mild depression and some behavioural conditions like ADHD.' She cited recent findings by the Centre for Social Justice that cuts in milder depression or anxiety could amount to £9 billion worth of savings. Whately's intervention is an audacious and wise one, but it won't be widely welcomed. This is because some still believe our mental health crisis is entirely authentic. While most rational people recognise that the benefits system in relation to mental health is dysfunctional, in that there is a large proportion of loafers and chancers gaming the system, and welfare fraud is nothing new, there is an ever-growing percentage who now resort to state support because they sincerely believe themselves to suffer from debilitating mental disorders. This latter development is genuinely new. While having or feigning physical injury or bodily impairment for financial indemnity is decades old, and one that can be subject to empirical testing or requires the application of deception, imagining yourself to be mentally unwell is often not subject to question, or even open to refutation. And it's very much a novel, 21st century problem. That we aren't witnessing the recognition of previously undiagnosed or overlooked medical conditions, but rather a change in our culture, a social contagion akin to the previous profusion of transgender ideology, is obvious by the fact our 'mental health crisis' epidemic followed in the wake of the lockdown years of 2020-21. That was a time when the development and socialisation of so many young people were devastatingly interrupted. It was also the years of furlough, when a new generation learnt that it was acceptable to subsist on state hand-outs and not have to face working with other people for a living. Yet the lockdown years were also visited on a generation fully in thrall to a therapeutic ethos of human fragility and now a burgeoning woke ideology. In drawing much of its intellectual ballast from the postmodern theory that knowledge is ineluctably relative, wokery helped to popularise and cement the notion that all opinions and viewpoints are of equal worth. The notion that 'perceived' judgements are as valid as objective assessment had already passed into law in this country with the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998, which defined a 'hate crime' as, 'Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice'. The primacy accorded to subjective perception, or 'lived experience', was subsequently elevated to new heights with the emergence of hyper-liberalism in the decades that followed, most conspicuously in the trans movement with the primacy it accorded to 'gender self-identification'. This frequently became merely a verbal event that required no physical alteration, only a performative utterance. Our 'mental health crisis' is but the latest manifestation of a society beholden to the conceit that subjective personal testimony is on a par with objective evidence. Automatically believing those who protest that they have mental health or 'neurodiversity' issues – the latest examples being the TV chef Greg Wallace and Guardian journalist Owen Jones, self-proclaimed sufferers of autism and ADHD respectively – will hardly do anyone any good. Nor will doing so benefit those who suffer from clinical medical depression or youths with actual, severe learning difficulties and educational needs. Our culture still cleaves to the notion that if someone believes something to be true, then we should accept it as true. Beyond making cuts right now, changing this mentality is the real challenge.
Telegraph
10-07-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Cut benefits for depression and ADHD, Tories demand
Benefits for depression and ADHD should be cut to save up to £9 billion, the Conservatives have demanded. Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said those with common mental health disorders or some behavioural conditions 'shouldn't be receiving sickness benefits'. It comes after the Centre for Social Justice called for the Government to withdraw Personal Independence Payments (Pip) and Universal Credit from those with milder anxiety, depression or ADHD. They estimated that such changes would save £7.4 billion by 2029-30, and that £1 billion of it should be redirected towards reinvestment in front-line mental health services. Ms Whately told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: 'We cannot have a country in which one in four people believe they are disabled and believe that means that they should be receiving benefits from the state. 'Clearly we can't afford that. So for instance we have said that you shouldn't be receiving sickness benefits if you have what is called a common mental health disorder, something like anxiety, mild depression and some behavioural conditions like ADHD and that has been the fastest-growing area of new benefit claims in recent years.' Better off working Recent analysis of government figures shows that a record 531 people per day were granted Pip payments, which can be given to those in work or who are unemployed, for mental health problems last year. Asked how many people would lose out, Ms Whately told the BBC: 'The Centre for Social Justice has been doing work on that and predicts that you could achieve between £7 billion up to £9 billion worth of savings because as I said that is the fastest-growing area of benefit claimants.' The CSJ also found that a non-working Universal Credit claimant receiving the average housing benefit and Pip for ill health would have an income of £25,000 in 2026-27. A full-time worker paid the national living wage will earn about £22,500 after income tax and National Insurance.
