A WAR of words has erupted over the introduction of tough new incapacity benefit tests.

The assessments, which were launched yesterday in Burnley as part of a pilot scheme, check whether each claimant is capable of holding down a job.

Bosses at the Department of Work and Pensions said they expect 23 per cent of those tested to be fit for work immediately, which nationally could save around £2billion a year.

But concerns have been raised over whether the tests are ‘fit for purpose’ and campaigners have warned that genuinely disabled or sick people could be forced into work or on to jobseekers’ allowance, a reduction of up to £26 a week.

Critics also say there is not enough employment in the area to support a large increase in jobseekers, and are demanding more Government investment to provide work locally.

In Burnley there are 6,400 on incapacity and around 1,500 could lose the benefit if the Government’s target is reached.

Latest unemployment figures showed that 2,300 people claimed jobseekers allowance last month in teh town.

Across East Lancashire, 26,000 people claimed the benefit and all will be tested when the scheme is rolled out nationally in April.

Gordon Birtwistle, Lib Dem MP for Burnley and Padiham, said he welcomed the scheme and believed it could help people back into work.

He said: “There are jobs available but we need people who have the skills to do them.

“Vedas (Burnley Council’s recruitment partner) have around 500 jobs on its books so it is about giving these people the specific skills needed for the area.”

Steve Rumbelow, chief executive of Burnley Council, however, said the Pennine Lancashire area needed to create more jobs to make the scheme successful.

He said: “This is not about people going from welfare to welfare. It is about going from welfare to work.

“We need to be creating opportunities for more jobs going forward.

“But this doesn’t make the tests the wrong thing to do.

"There are people who have skills that could be valuable that are on benefits and would want to get back to work.”

Julie Cooper, the Labour leader in Burnley, said she had grave concerns about the scheme.

She said: “There are around 10 applicants for every job in the area at the moment.

"No matter how many incentives people have, they are not going to get a job.

“You are simply going to be moving people to a reduced benefit.

“The council recently made 90 people redundant, and there are a lot of people in Burnley looking over their shoulders fearing redundancies.”

Paul Hogarth, of Burnley Citizens’ Advice Bureau, said he was unhappy at the form the tests took.

He said: “We do have a number of concerns about the testing process.

“We don’t believe the test is fit for purpose. It doesn’t assess people in the reality of work.

“One of our clients received zero points and was told to go back to work, but within weeks they were diagnosed with terminal cancer with only weeks to live.

“Another client couldn’t read or write but the medical professional failed to pick this up and they were sent back to work.”

The CAB in Burnley has represented 60 people who were passed fit to work at tribunals in the past year, with over 80 per cent of appeals being successful.

Chris Grayling, employment minister, visited the Community Restart Centre in North Street, Burnley, yesterday to see how people with disabilities were being supported back into work.

He said: “As well as getting people back into work we will provide support for people who need further help to get into work.”

The benefits test

Claimants are put through a variety of tasks and are awarded points, with anybody getting more than 15 being deemed unfit for work.

The tests include:

  • Being able to go up and down two steps with support from another person or a handrail
  • Having to sit at a desk for 30 minutes without getting up
  • Raising their arm to the top of the head as if to put on a hat
  • Raising their arm as if to put on a coat or jacket
  • Picking up a moving 0.5 litre carton full of liquid
  • Picking up a £1 coin
  • Completing a simple task such as setting an alarm clock
  • Walking more than 50 metres without stopping
  • Pressing a button, such as a telephone keypad
  • Turning the pages of a book

What Burnley claimants say

Victoria Chadburn has suffered from arthritis in her knees, ankles, spine and knuckles on and off since she was 16.

The 29-year-old, of Burnley Wood, relies on her motorised scooter to get around.

She said: “It’s unfair on the people who have got genuine claims.

“There are so many people who claim just because they can’t be bothered working, because they are on alcohol or drugs.

“But there are people like me who can’t manage work getting put in the same group.

“I think it’s good that the Government is trying to clamp down on scroungers but they shouldn’t put us all in the same bracket.

"I couldn’t pass the tests of bending to pick up a coin or walking unaided.”

Former builder Shaun Meara has been on incapacity benefit for three years due to problems with his knee.

Mr Meara, 44, of Brunshaw, Burnley, said he injured his knee at work.

He said: “I’ve got an operation coming up, because I struggle to walk.

"I’m housebound most of the time, this is the first time I’ve been out in a while, and it’s only because I had to get out to pay bills.

"I think there are people who are claiming who shouldn’t be but they need to target the right people.

"I worked on building sites for 20 years and I never asked for anything in my life, but this has crept up on me and now I have no choice.”

Simon Townley was unable to work for 18 months after he broke both his legs.

The 24-year-old hairdresser, of Brunshaw Street, Burnley, was born with brittle bones, which can break if he trips or falls.

He said: “I used to be on incapacity benefits. I’d broken both my legs, so I was physically incapable.

"I had casts on my legs, so there was no doubt I was genuine.

“I’ve been working since, but even now I could name 10 examples of people who are on it who shouldn’t be. It winds me up.

“I would have been on more money if I had stayed at home, but I wanted to work.

“I think it’s better in the long run that people are re-tested.

"Rather than have say 10 people who shouldn’t be on it, you could have 10 people who do need it, on more money.”