Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Only 1 per cent of people from the workforce for health reasons find a job within six months, although 20 percent want one, according to the research that emphasizes the challenge the government is facing in reducing the UK’s luxury bill.

The Learning and Work Institute said the results, Posted on Tuesday, He showed the need to change the financial incentives for patients and disabled people to work, but this best support will be more effective than suddenly reduce benefits.

The Thought Center said: Its interference reflects the increasing fear between charitable societies of disability that will pressure the public finance in the United Kingdom to the ministers to follow up with short -term savings at the expense of the vulnerable persons, instead of the reforms that will be paid in the long run.

Liz Kendall, Minister of Labor and Pensions, will publish plans to reform health advantages and disability before the spring statement next month. The twin goal is to enhance employment and reduce spending on benefits – which increased by 40 percent in real terms since 2013 and is on its way to 100 billion pounds annually by the end of the contract.

The focus so far has been on people who receive approximately 3.5 million people who receive the so -called inability advantages after being evaluated as very ill on work or searching for work. This group, which has grown by a million people since the epidemic, receives 5,000 pounds annually than those in the basic rate of unemployment benefits, without any requirements to search for work.

L & W said that a mixture of deviant financial incentives, insufficient support to return to work and lack of adequate employers “create a useful trap.”

There has been a more severe height since the epidemic, however, in the number of people receiving disabilities, or personal independence payments – which are paid regardless of the status of the job for those who face higher living costs because of their health.

Stephen Evans, CEO of L & W, said it would be wrong if the ministers rushed to cut and restrict any of these benefits without doing more to help people return to work.

“What worries me, it does not reduce the costs in a sustainable way. People are still there and they are struggling. In a reasonable world, it is a little invested now, its fruits will come within 5 to 10 years.”

The previous conservative government had planned to restrict eligibility to obtain ordinary benefits, with about one billion pounds annually provided between 2026-27 and 2028-29, which is still placed in the Office of Responsibility Financial Expectations.

The Labor Party ministers are now intending to persuade OBR that their reforms could result from it at least. But previous luxury reforms have repeatedly failed to reduce costs as much as intended, making the financial financial agency hesitant to “register” anything but confirmed savings.

One of the options that the government is thinking – although it will be very controversial – is to cancel the benefits of complete inability, direct all financial assistance to patients and disabled through personal independence payments, and re -draw its rules.

But the ministers in the Ministry of Labor and pensions are also fighting to ensure that some money that is provided at least by restricting the benefits tends to support disabled persons to find work.

The L & W report argues that spending about 450 million pounds annually to increase employment support may lead to savings of 4 billion pounds annually in the long run, in the form of low benefits payments and higher tax receipts.

Evans said this will allow a double in the number of employment support places, and a new initiative to call for calling for disability to the quarterly “conversations” to discuss their options – instead of leaving them to support the state for consecutive years.

A government spokesman declined to comment on the details of the green paper, but he said that the reforms aim to ensure that “sick and disabled people are truly supported at work, while he was more just on the taxpayer.”