‘We want to make sure we get the money to the really disabled people who need it’, the words yesterday from No 10’s policy unit head George Freeman sparked the ire of disability campaigners as the aide intimated that the Personal Independence Payment (used by disabled people to help with the costs of living) was not being used by the ‘really disabled’ – instead by those ‘who are taking pills at home, who suffer from anxiety.’
Were the government concerned with helping the really disabled, surely the last few years would reveal a story other than one where this group has been hardest hit by cuts and welfare reforms. Nine times moreso infact.
It’s been nearly two years since the closure of the independent living fund – a grant that helped some 18,000 disabled people, many with severe learning difficulties and cerebral palsy, live independently in their communities (perhaps these individuals would fit Freeman’s ‘really disabled’ category?). The Equality and Human rights Commission warned this closure would result in the ‘loss of dignity and independence’ for recipients.
We have also been warned on a worldwide level by the UN itself, after an investigation into the violation of disability rights found the government had not done enough to protect disabled people, instead targeting them disproportionately with cuts. The report also highlighted that propaganda about benefit claimants had fuelled rises in hate crimes against disabled people.
This misinformation has always stemmed from the government itself. Ex-Minister for Work and Pensions Iain Duncan Smith was repeatedly reprimanded by the UK Stats Authority for using mis-leading and made up statistics about disability benefits in order to push through cuts – the implication being that these cuts could not be justified without the fantasy of groups abusing the system.
Freeman’s comments are in reality emblematic of the now embedded Conservative discourse on welfare. While he made some distinction between those with mental and physical disability, the government has protected neither group. The idea of the ‘really disabled’, like ‘British Values’, or the sanction-imposing ‘not looking for work enough’ used in job centres across the country, acts as a subjective and ambiguous tickbox that cannot be clarified but must somehow be met. It pretends to do the noble work of finding those ‘most deserving’, while actual policy chips away indiscriminately at the social system that we really need.
“It is unhelpful to make crude distinctions between those with physical impairments and mental health issues because the kind of impairment someone has is not a good indicator of the costs they will face.
“Many disabled people will now be anxiously waiting to hear as to whether or not these tighter rules will affect their current PIP award.
“The government must offer clarity and reassurance that these new measures will not negatively affect the financial support that disabled people receive now or in the future, and that they stand by their commitment to making no further changes to disability benefits in this Parliament.”
Mark Atkinson, Scope
