Adult Disability Payment: Consultation on the Mobility Component

Section 4 – Other considerations

Alternative approaches

We understand from consulting with disabled people and stakeholders that many support using a points-based system for Adult Disability Payment. A majority of respondents to our 2019 consultation on Disability Assistance agreed (57% of respondents who answered) with our approach to use a points-based system to determine eligibility.

This was to ensure a smooth transition from PIP to Adult Disability Payment, rather than have two different sets of eligibility criteria. Some people consider one of the main challenges with a points-based system is that it only provides an indirect indication of the impact a condition has on a disabled person^[36].

The Scottish Government agrees that the way in which the points-based system was applied as part of PIP was not consistent in adequately assessing fluctuating, variable or mental health conditions.

We have already outlined several ways in which the points-based system under Adult Disability Payment can better meet the needs of people with a range of disabilities and health conditions. In addition, we have developed guidance and training to assist case managers to use the eligibility criteria to take a person-centred approach to decision-making.

This includes comprehensive information on how the descriptors should be applied when considering fluctuating, variable, and mental health conditions. Case managers also have access to practitioners. Social Security Scotland practitioners have professional experience in health and social care provision, which provides a comprehensive insight into assessing the impact of a condition.

Some stakeholders, such as the Disability and Carer Benefit Expert Advisory Group [37], have called upon the Scottish Government to ensure that the social security system is transformed in line with the social model of disability, taking a human rights-based approach.

Some people consider one of the main challenges with a points-based system is that it only provides an indirect indication of the impact a condition has on a disabled person^[38]. We have heard, for example, how people felt with PIP that they had fit into the boxes on an application form because of how the eligibility criteria works.

16. If there was an opportunity to consider alternative approaches to a points-based system to understand disabled people’s needs, what alternatives would you propose (if any)?

Please provide detail about:

• Why you think changes are necessary
• What changes you would suggest
• Which changes you would prioritise
• Could there be any unintended consequences

Please consider what specific changes to the eligibility criteria you think would be required.

16(a). If you proposed changes, what positive impacts could these have, and for who?

16(b). If you proposed changes, what negative impacts could these have, and for who?

16(c). If you proposed changes, which of these would you prioritise?

Please consider:

• The importance of individual changes to you
• Which changes you think could be implemented more easily
• How affordable those changes are likely to be given a largely fixed budget

Our approach to understanding disability is one which is person-centred, and looks at the barriers disabled people face.

We believe that the independent review should have the opportunity to consider the eligibility criteria for Adult Disability Payment from more than one perspective. This includes considering the best way to understand the needs of disabled people as part of both the eligibility criteria and more widely as part of the application and decision-making process.

17. Other than changes to the eligibility criteria, are there any changes you think we could make to Adult Disability Payment to support people’s mobility needs (if any)?

Please provide detail about:

• Why you think changes are necessary
• What changes you would suggest
• Could there be any unintended consequences

Please consider what specific changes other than changes to the eligibility criteria you think would be required. Please refer to page 13 of the consultation paper, which outlines the improvements we have already made to the application and decision-making processes.

17(a). If you proposed changes, what positive impacts could these have, and for who?

17(b). If you proposed changes, what negative impacts could these have, and for who?

17(c). If you proposed changes, how would you prioritise these?

Please consider:

• The importance of individual changes to you
• Which changes you think could be implemented more easily
• How affordable those changes are likely to be given a fixed budget

Deliverability of recommendations

Adult Disability Payment is the most complex social security payment that the Scottish Government has delivered so far. It has involved considerable collaboration and partnership working with disabled people to ensure that our systems, processes and services work for disabled people.

We are committed to a learning system of social security that is focused on continuous improvement. This will ensure that benefits like Adult Disability Payment work for disabled people, both now and in the future.

The Scottish Government still plans to deliver several other new benefits in the next few years including:

• Winter Heating Payment,
• Scottish Carers Assistance,
• Pension Age Winter Heating Assistance, and
• Pension Age Disability Payment.

Whilst we are well placed to undertake the work to design and build these benefits, a lot of work remains to be done. We know that some people and stakeholders would like us to accelerate our pace in delivering long-term change.

Potentially very small changes to any of our benefits can have a significant impact. This could involve making changes to application forms, letters, guidance for our case managers, training or more detailed changes to our systems.

Making more significant changes could take longer to implement, depending upon the scale and complexity of those changes. It is equally important to be realistic about the challenges of making significant changes when many people will be in receipt of Adult Disability Payment.

We are acutely aware that some people are keen to see us make changes more quickly. However, we must be realistic about the challenges facing the Scottish Government in considering any potential future changes. As set out in the Emergency Budget Review[39] on 2 November 2022, the financial situation facing the Scottish Government is, by far, the most challenging since devolution. This requires difficult decisions about how to prioritise spending across all of our public services. Major changes which result in new, additional spending will therefore not be deliverable within this parliamentary term.

18. How can the independent review ensure that any recommendations it makes are both deliverable and affordable?

Please provide detail about:

• The considerations the review should take into account
• What types of change you think the review should prioritise considering
• Any other considerations you think are relevant to managing deliverability and affordability

Please give reasons for your answer.

Considering the impact of recommendations on reserved benefits and entitlements – “passporting”

Disabled people who receive a specific rate of PIP or Adult Disability Payment may be entitled to additional amounts as part of other means-tested benefits as a result. These are known as “passported benefits” and include:

• Universal Credit
• Employment and Support Allowance
• Jobseeker’s Allowance
• Income Support
• Pension Credit
• Housing Benefit

There are also other sources of support delivered by the UK Government that a person entitled to a specific rate of PIP or Adult Disability Payment might be entitled to, such as:

• a discount on road tax (known as Vehicle Excise Duty) and
• being able to apply for a driving license at age 16.

These benefits are delivered by the UK Government. The UK Government have decided that both PIP and Adult Disability Payment can currently allow disabled people to qualify for the same additional amounts. This is because the eligibility criteria for both benefits are broadly similar.

If we were to expand eligibility for Adult Disability Payment significantly and reserved benefits remained linked to our benefit, that could increase UK Government expenditure in Scotland. Under the terms of the Fiscal Framework[40], the UK Government could make a financial claim from the Scottish Government to recoup any additional costs incurred by providing this linked support/“passporting” to disabled people in Scotland who would not have been eligible for this support pre-devolution. This poses a significant risk to the Scottish Government budget.

Alternatively, the UK Government may elect to alter their system for assessing eligibility for these reserved benefits. UK Government officials indicated in their evidence to the Social Justice and Social Security Committee on 10 March 2022[41] that, if the criteria for Adult Disability Payment were to become very different from PIP, it would be for the UK Government to decide how eligibility to reserved benefits for disabled people living in Scotland would be assessed.

This would potentially result in a longer time for any changes to be implemented, as we would also need to consider the timescales required by UK Government to implement new processes to replace existing “passporting” arrangements. It may also mean that disabled people living in Scotland are required to re-apply for “passported benefits”.

We want to ensure that any alternatives to the “passporting” system do not introduce new restrictions and/or inconveniences for disabled people continuing to receive the payments that they are entitled to.

19. How can the independent review consider the impact of any recommendations on existing “passporting” arrangements?

Please provide detail about:

• The considerations the review should take into account when making recommendations
• How changes could be implemented given a largely fixed budget
• Any other considerations you think are relevant to “passporting” arrangements

19(a). How much of a priority to you is maintaining the current “passporting” arrangement?

Very high / high / medium / low / very low

19(b). Please explain why you chose this answer.