The story behind the film
Fraser Nelson
Any documentary involves the collection of vastly more material than can be used in the film. This website is intended to share that information.
The film argues that the sickness benefit surge is the single most important (fixable) problem in UK public life, an argument I've made in print over the years. But the debate risks becoming trapped in statistics: three million on sickness benefits, rising to four million etc. The figures are shocking (and explored at length in the data library of this website) but behind every figure lies a human story. That's the missing element. Only television could open this up and humanise it, show the people whose lives are governed by this dysfunctional system.
I'm a print journalist, mindful of my limitations as a television presenter. But I could not turn down Ch4's invitation to work on a film on the subject I care about most. The budget for a documentary like this - well into six figures - is more than any newspaper or magazine journalist would have at their disposal. It means a team of people working for months to find the right case studies: people willing to go on camera and open up about their situation.
This is a story full of nuance - and, ergo, harder to tell. It needs producers and directors of the highest quality: Ch4 provided them. Also, a story like this needs time. Ch4 was willing to set aside not just an hour but an hour of primetime (8pm on a Monday) in the belief that this is an important story that doesn't need to be sensationalised.
My hope is that this film and website might plant seeds for further discussion. It's is intended for anyone - journalists, policymakers or anyone interested - to follow the trail. To show how my team got where we did, and hopefully go far further. I presented a similar Ch4 film ten years ago which was 27 minutes long and juxtaposed rich with poor, glamour with grit, in hope of keeping the viewers' interest. This film is longer and more ambitious, confronting the subject directly and staying on point, giving each interviewee the space and time they need. The aim is to ask the viewer: in their situation, would you take different decisions? As I say in the film, I'm certainly not sure that I would.
My main hope is that the perspectives of Michael, Amy, Gavin and others will at least be used as discussion points. I was delighted, for example, when BBC2's Politics Live played the full clip about Amy and we then had a panel debate based on her perspective. I'd also like to thank Amy (and others) for inviting us into their lives and houses and opening up on camera. Problems cannot be solved if they are not seen, and without people like her giving interviews then this debate would be reduced to people like me wittering on about statistics.
The documentary does not offer solutions: a whole new film would be needed for that. But Sweden, Australia, the US and others have all managed to cut their sickness benefit caseloads over the same five years that ours have soared. The UK is the anomaly. Even we were cutting our sickness benefit caseload from 2002 to 2018. We did it before and we can do it again. This isn't a left- or right-wing issue, or a story about skivers and shirkers. It's about good people caught in a bad system.
My hunch is that the hard part isn't solving the crisis: the hard part is seeing it. Rabbi Lionel Blue once spoke about 'moral long-sightedness': the ability to get worked up about problems thousands of miles away while being blind to scandals on our doorstep. As the saying goes: to see what is under your nose can be a huge struggle. The aim of this film and the website is to make the people, the problem and its nuances a bit easier to see.
Only Ch4 would have made this film. It has a statutory remit to stimulate debate on difficult subjects, to challenge the status quo. And to innovate (this is, I think, the first time a website has been published to accompany a documentary so others can follow the trail). The film offers a passing glance at another world: there is much more to explore and understand. Only then can proper solutions be found.
Ch4 doesn't have in-house production teams, so all work is done by outsiders. I'd like to thank Ch4 for commissioning Eamonn Matthews' QuickSilver, which has a track record in making superb films on difficult subjects. It's hard to overstate the work that's needed to find these case studies: a task so difficult that, at first, I doubted it could be accomplished. Emily Keene, the producer director, and Katie O'Toole, the shooting producer, scoured the country for the right people, as well as conducting the research, filming and editing. I'm the presenter, but it's their film. To work with them has been a reminder that some of the country's best journalism is done by those whose names never appear in print.
I will keep this website updated and would like to hear from anyone with other perspectives to offer. The story only came together thanks to ex (and serving) DWP assessors, GPs, the ex-ONS staffers and others - who shared their insights. Their time (and pointers) were invaluable and I'd be interested in hearing from anyone else.
This website offers micro data for neighbourhoods (the so-called MSOAs). I'd be happy to give pointers to anyone outside of London looking to tell the story in more detail.
SOME SOURCES AND STUDIES
-
DWP Health and Disability Green Paper ‘Evidence Pack’ here
-
Gardiner & Gaffney, Resolution Foundation paper from 2016 here
-
Gregg, Paul “Employment, economic inactivity and incapacity” - Health Foundation paper Sep24 here
-
IFS Oct24 “Three challenges for getting people on incapacity benefits into work” here
-
IFS Sep24 study on UK vs global sickness benefit trends here
-
Kendall, Liz, Jul24 Barnsley speech here
-
Milburn report from Barnsley Council, Jul24, here
-
Murphy, Louise “A U-shaped legacy” Resolution Foundation report on age pattern of sickness benefit claimants here
-
OBR welfare trends, Oct 24 here
-
Spectator data hub, welfare section here
