Written evidence from the Riverside Advice
(AJ 31)
Riverside Advice would like to express our thanks
for the calling of this Select Committee inquiry, giving the opportunity
to present our experiences on the importance of Social Welfare
Law, and the consequences on vulnerable people of removal of Legal
Help/Aid as proposed in the Green Paper.
Welfare Rights sector organisations do not have a
large or loud voice; —for most just the every-day challenges
of providing services with high demands prevent involvement in
wider issues.
There are many negative impacts of the proposals
in the Green Paper. In this evidence Riverside Advice have restricted
our comments and points to our main expertise;
"relating it to the impact the proposed changes
have on the number and quality of practitioners, in all areas
of law, who offer services funded by legal aid".
by describing the impact of taking Social Welfare
Law (Welfare Benefits, Debt and Housing) "out of scope",
and the consequences to the vulnerable people who currently receive
these essential services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Riverside Advice (RA) has 35 years of experience
in delivering Social Welfare Law (SWL) to the most deprived and
vulnerable people in Cardiff.
2. The proposals as set out in the Green Paper
will bring to an abrupt end the majority of SWL specialist advice
currently delivered to people across the UK, and consequently
threaten the financial viability of all the organisations which
deliver these services.
3. In Cardiff alone there will be a loss of the
total budget of £900,000 for the provision of SWL, (Welfare
Benefits, Debt and Housing), this is for 4,000 cases. This Contract
is currently provided by a Not For Profit Consortium of Cardiff
Law Centre, Cardiff CAB, Shelter Cymru and Riverside Advice. There
is no other significant funding in Cardiff for SWL advice provision.
4. Taking SWL out of scope will result in the
cuts being targeted at the services which will hit the most vulnerable
in society. To those people who often already experience exclusion
and barriers to services, including Advice services.
5. The impact of the removing SWL "out of
scope" will end the essential early intervention and prevention
work which current Welfare Benefit, Debt and Housing services
provide. This means this will push many more cases onto the more
expensive "litigation" stage. For example, if a Welfare
Benefit case for a vulnerable client is not dealt with, and the
person is deprived the welfare benefit income they are entitled
to, this can soon become a debt problem, and escalate to a housing
and homelessness problem, or equally a hospitalisation problem.
The cost to the government, tax payer or society is £170
for a Welfare Benefit case,—the subsequent problems and
cost of not providing this assistance at the appropriate time
will be far higher.
6. Telephone advice has been suggested as a way
forward. From RA's experience it would be impossible to successfully
deliver most of the casework currently provided face to face for
clients by telephone. There is a place for telephone advice, but
it should be part of a range of options, and is only suited for
a limited type of work, and for certain clients. The reality is
that majority of telephone advice get referred on to face to face
advice for complex matters.
7. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) are required
to make £350,000,000 of savings, 2% of this is proposed by
taking several areas of Legal Aid/Help out of scope. This will
include SWL categories. This doesn't seem the most fair and appropriate
way of making cuts which will essentially be targeted at those
in poverty, and the most vulnerable and deprived. Perhaps cuts
can be looked at on the administrative side of the MOJ, or on
some of the very high cost cases, or from the much larger criminal
legal aid budget
BRIEF INTRODUCTION
TO RIVERSIDE
ADVICE AND
EXPERTISE
8. Riverside Advice RA was set up in 1975 as
part of a local Community Development Centre.
9. RA is an independent community based Welfare
Rights organisation providing specialist Social Welfare Law (SWL)
services in Cardiff under the umbrella of AdviceUK.
10. We have a LSC Contract and Specialist Quality
Mark (SQM) to deliver Legal Help/Aid in Welfare Benefit and Debt,
this is as part of a Consortium with Cardiff Law Centre, Cardiff
CAB, and Shelter Cymru.
11. RA is situated and delivers its Welfare Rights
advice services in the deprived geographical areas to the west
of Cardiff, primarily South Riverside, and delivering by outreach
to the other main deprived areas to the west of Cardiff.
12. RA also deliver targeted Welfare Rights specialist
casework services to vulnerable client groups across Cardiff,
such as for those with:
Mental Health Difficulties, (48% of cases).
Carers of those with Mental Health Difficulties (25%
cases).
BME's with English Language and literacy difficulties
(30% cases).
Physical health difficulties, (25%).
Vulnerable families with Children under four, (15%
cases).
13. RA Welfare Rights Services are delivered
mainly to people who have been referred to our services, (71%).
The referrals are made through "networks" and from organisations
and agencies in all sectors, many through government and government
funded organisations and agencies. These "networks"
have developed over many years of delivering services to vulnerable
client groups, and the excellent reputation Riverside Advice has
of delivering positive outcomes for people.
INFORMATION ON
GREEN PAPER
PROPOSALS
Impact and loss from proposed changes; The
value of Social Welfare Law (SWL—Welfare Benefits,
Debt and Housing) casework
14. Social Welfare Law (SWL—Welfare Benefits
Debt and Housing) Advice is mainly and currently provided under
Legal Aid/ Legal Help—by Charities working in the not-for-profit/voluntary/third
sector.
15. The Social Welfare Law advice services under
Legal Help/Aid, often involve resolving complex matters of law,
- and is provided relatively "cheaply" by extremely
competent and experienced Advice Workers on a salaries of around
£20,000 to provide between 250 and 300 Legal Help/ Aid cases
a year. These services, are actually good value for money. It
is therefore totally inaccurate to say the current SWL services
are "too much money spent on expensive fat cat lawyers".
16. At RA 800 hours a year, or 25% of the time
spent on the LSC cases is time not chargeable to LSC under the
strict Legal Help/Aid Contract criteria rules. Additional funding
RA receives from other sources allows us to carry out a full "holistic"
service for vulnerable clients by providing additional time for
casework (in addition to the LSC eligible work and time), which
is required for these vulnerable clients to combat the barriers
that often prevent them accessing their rights.
17. The vast majority of the current SWL (LSC
Legal Help/Legal Aid) budget already currently goes to the Not-For-Profit
sector, where experienced advice workers provide excellent services
with excellent outcomes. Solicitors and lawyers delivering within
these areas of Law are also most often working in the Not for
Profit sector. The Not for Profit sector— such as CAB's,
Law Centres, are therefore not, as has been suggested, the new,
future or "fall back" option for future delivery of
SWL, as they are already the providers. These cuts however will
render many, if not most of these well established organisations
unviable.
18. There is much added value in the not-for-profit
sector/voluntary sector. This can be financially—as the
employers are non paid volunteers, and all the funding income
goes to the delivery of services and not towards making a "profit".
In delivery of front line services, volunteers can also help in
reducing overall costs. Quality Welfare Rights services, with
the complexities of welfare rights law can-not however be run
or delivered by "volunteers" alone as has been suggested,
they have to be managed within an competent and experienced structure.
Importance and impact of SWL in prevention
and early intervention
19. SWL law provides early intervention and prevention
services to some of the most vulnerable and deprived people in
society. This is essential to avoid problems escalating.
20. These SWL/Welfare Rights services by their
nature, and by the restrictions of the current eligibility rules
of LSC Legal Help and Legal Aid, (in receipt of Income Support
or equivalent level of income), are targeted at those who already
are in poverty, deprived and disadvantaged, and for many who already
face major barriers to accessing their "rights".
21. Cutting this particular Legal Aid SWL budget
will mean "problems" will not be dealt with at an early
"preventative" stage, which is imperative in terms of
successful outcomes, and essential in terms of preventing small
"problems" escalating into major disasters for people.
A Welfare Benefit issue for someone with a mental health problem,
unresolved through expert means can soon turn into a debt and
homelessness or hospitalisation situation, costing far more to
the government than the money spent on resolving the original
problem promptly. The cost's both financial and social of removing
SWL Legal Help/Aid will be enormous for the future.
ALTERNATIVES SUGGESTIONS
FOR DELIVERY
OF SWL
22. Telephone advice has been suggested as a
way forward. From RA's experience it would be impossible to successfully
deliver most of the casework currently provided face to face for
clients by telephone. There is a place for telephone advice, but
it should be part of a range of options, and is only suited for
a limited type of work, and for certain clients. The reality is
that majority of telephone advice get referred on to face to face
advice for complex matters.
23. Pro-bono. There is a place for pro bono work,
but this would only meet at best the iceberg in terms of the need
and demand for SWL services. In the area of Welfare Benefits,
where the Law and system is complex and ever changing it is time
consuming and difficult to keep up to date, and to provide work
in this area of Law it is essential you do so. So generally this
casework will not be carried out on a pro-bono basis.
24. Volunteers have their acknowledged place
within Welfare Rights organisations, but need an adequate support
and supervision structure for them to assist with delivery of
SWL. Due to issues such as the complexity of the system, the commitment,
knowledge, training and level of expertise required to provide
SWL volunteers will only ever be a part of a competent welfare
rights service, and generally at the lower information or basic
level. The higher casework level (ie funded through Legal Aid)
for specialist matter is in the majority delivered by employed
specialist caseworkers and could not be adequately replaced by
volunteers.
OUTCOMES FOR
CLIENTS FROM
SWL SERVICES
Financial gains for SWL services
25. With the financial recovery and "gains"
made for the clients of Riverside Advice last year, which was
nearly £2,000,000, made by ensuring that through our services
they received their correct entitlements. It is clear that there
is a very high level of incorrect decision making by the current
DWP and Social Security decision making processes and their need
to be a process to challenge this. There is not, and will be no
effective alternative service for these vulnerable people to access
their rights if SWL is taken out of scope. Many of these people
who already feel they don't have a voice, and experience barriers,
and therefore the withdrawal of SWL will have a severe negative
impact of their lives and their future, and society as a whole.
Over-turning DWP decisions at tribunal with representation
26. Statistics show how representation at Social
Security Tribunal makes a significant difference to the outcome.
If no one attends a Tribunal Hearing there is *18.7% chance of
winning the tribunal, if both appellant and a **representative
attended there is a *66.6% chance of success. (*DWP figures
from 2006V Tribunals now under MoJ and do not publish the figures,
** representive means any representative). Riverside Advice
maintains 80% success rate when our workers represent at a Tribunal
hearing.
RELATED ISSUES
FOR CONTINUATION
OF VITAL
SWL ORGANISATIONS AND
SERVICES
27. CAB, Law Centres and other independent community
advice agencies, such as Riverside Advice, the CAB, Law Centre,
Speakeasy Advice in Cardiff not only face the withdrawal of much
of their legal aid funding, but local authority support for free,
independent advice is also being squeezed. Many of the current
organisations who have been delivering services to the local communities
for many years, often since the 1970s, and deliver to the most
vulnerable and disadvantaged in society will not survive these
cuts.
28. RA organisationally currently has seven different
sources of funding amounting to £443,250. Every source of
funding is currently under threat of either ending completely,
being reviewed for ending/or cuts, or a "fixed term"
project. RA therefore, as with most other Welfare Rights organisations
see no viable future if the Legal Help/Aid cut to SWL proposed
in the Green Paper is approved.
RECOMMENDATION FOR
ACTION
29. To reconsider all the proposals in the Green
Paper; particularly those relating to taking Social Welfare Law
"out of scope". Removing this part of the budget, from
which the saving would be relatively small, will have a comparatively
large and negative impact on the most vulnerable in society, and
a future additional financial and social cost to the government,
tax payer and society.
30. Other areas for consideration and potential
alternative cuts are the very high cost cases, or criminal legal
aid. The MOJ are required to make £350,000,000 of savings,
2% of this is proposed by taking several areas of Legal Aid/Help
out of scope. This will include SWL categories. This doesn't seem
the most fair and appropriate way of making cuts which will essentially
be targeted at those in poverty, and the most vulnerable and deprived.
Perhaps cuts can be looked at on the administrative side of the
MOJ, or on some of the very high cost cases, or from the much
larger criminal legal aid budget.
January 2011
| 
