Posted on October 14, 2013


Photograph –  John DW Macdonald

w hawkins says:

February 24, 2013 at 10:12 pm

“The fact that targets preceded even the first assessment, and that actual savings were already the criterion for meeting targets and a subsequent completion of contract by ATOS in order for the to be paid by the DWP.   Any assessment was a mere formality, rhetorical in fact.  Because they are target driven and not needs led, as stated clinical outcomes were irrelevant, but merely required process to de-register any  disabled person.  It amounts to “cruel and inhumane treatment/torture under the UN convention and ECHR’s human rights legislation (in some cases the denial of the basic right to life)  where fatalities/suffering can be directly linked to ATOS behaviour/outcomes/processes.  This is far from a done deal, it should be dealt with by litigators by human rights groups, as the legal framework utilised is both vague and complex, which is a deliberate ploy to cause appeal after appeal that will drag on for years.”