Dec 012012

Re: scrapping of equality impact assessments and fair consultation arrangements


Dear …..

 I am writing to express in the strongest terms our objection to the plans announced by the Prime Minister to scrap equality impact assessments and fair consultation arrangements.

 The Coalition Government has unleashed the most disproportionate and discriminatory attack on disability rights and  the resources on which disabled people depend in a civilised community.

 Equality impact assessments when carried out thoroughly provide an indication of the impact of proposals on disabled people and reveal factors that may significantly reduce the ability of disabled people to contribute to the community and economy.

 Government’s proposal to scrap this mechanism will not lead to growth, but to a widening of the fast growing gaps into which many disabled people are falling to the detriment of the economy and cohesion in our communities.

 Your Government has refused to carry out a cumulative impact assessment of all the measures that are being introduced which affect disabled people. Our own research shows that disabled people will have their living standards reduced by 20% over the four years of the austerity programme.  Contrast this with the richest 20% of the population who are only seeing a 7.5% reduction – clearly we are not all in this together.  

 Mr Cameron is trying to cover it up by scrapping the instruments that prove it.

 “The cuts to disability benefits are estimated to total £9 billion over the four years, about a third of all cash benefits paid to disabled people in 2009-10. These cuts mean that the poorest fifth of the 2.7 million households receiving disability benefits will lose 16% of their cash income plus benefits-in-kind over the four years. This percentage loss is four times as big as the loss for the richest fifth of all households but even this 16% is probably an understatement because of the difficulty of analysing how hard disabled people will be hit by the cuts in Departmental Expenditure (Local Government, Health, Education, etc)” 

 The Austerity War and the impoverishment of disabled people, Chris Edwards, September, 2012

 What concerns me most is that you have no democratic mandate to carry out these attacks as neither the Conservative or Lib Dem manifestos put these plans before the public.

 Fair consultation on Government plans and Equality Impact Assessments are the only means by which Government can claim the democratic process has been satisfied.

 I urge you to take all possible action to reverse the decision to scrap Equality Impact Assessments, and to restore fair consultation with disabled people throughout Government.


Yours sincerely



For the record we will itemise the regressive measures that your Government is carrying out that negatively affect the life chances  and rights of disabled people:


  • Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and replace it with the Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which aims to reduce the budget by 20%, removing support from half a million people.  Increase the take up ofDLA so that disabled people and people with long term conditions can live independently in the community. DLA – like child benefit – is recognition that some groups of people face additional costs and that society wishes to collectively make provision to cover some of these costs.  The principle of making ‘reasonable adjustments’ – whether it takes the form of money or support – should be applied to both disability and out of work benefits, and to employment support.


  • Employment and Support Allowance and ‘medical model’ Work Capability Assessments, which reduces eligibility, increases means-testing and imposes conditions and sanctions.  This approach sees us and our behaviour as the problem. Instead it needs to recognise the additional needs that come with impairment and/or ill health and the barriers and discrimination in the labour market.  This would mean a welfare system which compensated for loss of income and for additional costs associated with impairment and ill health, while at the same time tackling disabling barriers to employment. Crucially, this system must recognise the impact of ill health and not confuse it with functional impairment. 

A recent article in The Church Times recently highlighted the issues:

 “…those who fail the Government’s new Work Capability Assessment. This includes 73 people each week who usually die as a result of the illnesses and conditions for which they had previously received welfare payments, after they were certified “fit for work”. Some commit suicide. In one case, Freedom of Information requests revealed, someone died while filling out an assessment form. Relatives of the deceased have suggested that the stress of the assessment itself also contributes to death.

The arbitrary nature of such categorisation is also highlighted by the 400,000 disabled and sick people who have been initially declared fit, and who then have to undergo a lengthy, expensive, and exhausting appeals process to establish that they were deserving after all.

The categorisation of “deserving” and “undeserving” hardly makes financial sense, either. The total expected savings from putting 2.5 million disabled people through work tests will be just £2.2 million over three years – and that is if the targets are met.”

 ATOS, A4E etc: The privatised delivery of Government assessment, employment and training programmes is failing disabled people and the public purse.  It may be good forPLC’s, directors and shareholders but it is not delivering good outcomes for disabled people.  The Guardian, Panorama and Dispatches have shown that the real agenda is targets to get people off benefits.. 

 ATOS – 40% of assessments are overturned on appeal and this rises to 70% if representation is present in the appeals process.

 The Work Programme – Only 3.4% of people referred to the job programme got and stayed in work 3-6 months (these figures drop to 2.5% if calculated from June – May.

 This is an expensive waste of money. 

  • Closing Remploy

It is gross negligence to close Remploy factories and throw disabled people onto the open job market in the current economic climate.  This Government has done nothing to ‘level the playing field’ by addressing the disablism in the training and job market.  In the last round of redundancies at Remploy only 3% of the disabled employees were able to get jobs and that was prior to the current triple dip recession.  We absolutely agree with the planned closure of sheltered workshops but this approach is crass.

  • Changes to housing and  housing benefits: Government figures show about 450,000 disabled people will see their incomes cut under one of the changes planned to housing benefit.  Our fear is that thousands will be forced from their homes.   From April 2013, housing benefit for working age people in social rented homes will be linked to the size of property councils believe they need. 

An assessment from the Department for Work and Pensions shows   the change will leave 450,000 disabled people an average of £13 a week worse off.

  • Independent Living Fund: There are 20,000 existing users of ILF in theUK. The fund was closed to new applicants in 2010 preventing many disabled people from accessing this support to remain independent.  The Coalition Government wants to force disabled people to rely on local authorities from 2015 by closing the ILF permanently. Local authorities already face severe cuts and cannot provide adequate support to existing customers. Some local authorities are already saying that residential care homes will be their only option.  Without guaranteed levels of funding and ringfencing this is fantasy talk as the funds will disappear through the cuts.  This is a major threat to independent living for disabled people.


  • Cuts to Local Authorities: disabled people are disproportionately affected to cuts to local authorities as we use public services more than non-disabled members of the community.  Any cuts therefore are discriminatory and threaten our right to live independently in the community.  Services can be delivered more effectively and in a personalised way and we support reform that gets better outcomes more cost effectively.  However the level of cuts is negatively impacting on disabled people’s life chances and will not achieve reform.


  • Universality in health and social care: Social care policies have led to the privatisation of care services, and may well support the same trend in the context of health care.  This has led to the re-institutionalisation of people with learning disabilities and other groups.  This private sector led retrograde step has been colluded with by local authority commissioners who have shunned the community based alternatives leading to disasters such as Winterbourne View.  Reverse this move and return to the founding principles of the health service and welfare state – services should be based on need and free at the point of delivery funded through a progressive taxation system, in benefits, services and equipment which aim to create a level playing field for people affected by illness and/or impairment. Work with DPOs to truly personalise services in ways which increase choice and control for disabled people and achieve the best outcomes and value for money, whilst protecting rights and reversing the harmful effects of privatisation. Create real choice and control for us over the resources needed to go about our daily lives.  


  • Social Care: Can people who need help to go about their daily lives, help which involves intimate care, help that enables someone to access the most basic human rights like communication, rely on the profit motive to deliver this assistance in a way which protects and promotes their human rights?  Giving and receiving intimate care is not the same as having your car serviced.  To rely on another person in such a way is inevitably associated with a vulnerability to abuse, unless the person providing the care holds and promotes values which in many instances are incompatible with the profit motive.  Maximising profit requires holding down wages, increasing productivity by reducing the amount of time spent on each task to a minimum, only investing in training to provide basic competence, and minimising regulation.  We don’t believe that the delivery of high quality social care services, which protect and promote people’s human rights, is compatible with the profit motive.  This is not to say that services run by public authorities are necessarily any better at delivering our human rights. Over the last twenty years, public services have increasingly had to measure themselves against private sector notions of efficiency – and efficiency is defined in terms of cost, not quality.  Personalisation in social care – the current policy – is only tinkering with the adult social care system, which is underfunded, and too reliant on organisations motivated by profit and answerable to their shareholders. 














[suffusion-the-author display='description']

  10 Responses to “Open template letter to MPs: scrapping of equality impact assessments and fair consultation arrangements”

  1. my MP is the infamous Mark Harper – the previous disablity minister when the tories were in opposition – the minister who so nearly made a name for himself by securing the rights of disabled people across the world by convention – now the minister in the cabinet office who doesn’t give a shit – who arrogantly laughs whilst disabled people die

    write to him? – don’t think so – he only believes in democracy if you agree with his world view – and all in his constituency office do – the patronising and self styled wall behind which our MP hides.

  2. I forgot to say, one of the ‘knock on’ effects. If you do find a 1 bed property to move to. It will most likely, be a flat. If, you have animals. They most likely won’t be allowed.
    With rescue/ re-homing centres already bursting at the seams.
    What will happen to your pets???
    Most likely, they will have to be put to sleep.
    Some people, are already ‘dumping’ their animals because they can’t afford to feed them selves, let alone their animals.
    Many people are having to go to Food Banks.
    That is, IF you have one near you.
    Many Disabled people won’t be able to access them.

  3. I shall certainly be sending the letter to my MP. one of many!!
    What concerns me most is people with mental health issues.
    who just can’t cope with all the welfare reforms.
    Many have already committed suicide due to ATOS. And there will be many more before they have finished.
    We have the introduction of the bedroom tax in March 2013. Which is causing so much distress.
    And the media are not interested in reporting about this.
    If you receive Housing Benefit and are in Council or HA property.
    People are desperately worried that they are going to be evicted. Because they simply cannot afford to pay.
    14% of your rent if you have 1 spare room. 25% of your rent if you have 2 spare bedrooms.
    Even if you are Disabled and your home has been adapted.
    Many people have lived in their homes for many years. spent a lot of their own money.
    There are no 1 bedroom, adapted properties for them to move to!!
    Many would not be able to physically, pack up their belongings or cope with the process of moving. The cost for 1 thing.
    Apparently, you are allowed a spare room for an over night carer. Yeah right! Who can afford that, 24/7.
    Children of huge age differences are expected to share a room.
    They say, you can take in a Lodger. Who, wants a stranger living in their home?
    They would have to be unemployed. Or it would screw up your HB anyway.
    Many councils and HA’s say if you have a Lodger, you can be evicted!!
    Many Councils and HA’s don’t have much information about this to inform people.
    And yet, it will be implemented in 3 months time!!
    If you are going to be affected by this. please, write to your MP.
    There is a campaign on facebook. PLEASE join and sign the petitions.
    There is lots of support and information on there. Even, template letters to send to your MP and anyone else you can think of!!!
    I’m not sure if I’m allowed to put a link on here???
    Type in: Bedroom Tax…think it’s unfair…join the fight here
    And you will find us.
    We managed to get OWEN JONES to join us, last night!

  4. I’ve sent the letter onto Stella Creasy (Walthamstow – Labour) but she is very new labour ie a tory in a red tie. I forwarded her a petition about homelessness at Christmas and she replied that she didn’t sign EDM’s and if I cared about homelessness why didn’t I volunteer in a hostel having already told her I work full time for a mental health charity

  5. Congratulations on a superbly written letter

    I would like to know every charity that is involved. I’m sure many others would also, so people can decide to boycott them and have the knowledge when asked for donations to refuse and tell those collecting the exact reasons why they are not giving these charities any money.

    Instead of just walking past those collecting for charity a word in their ear about why they are not getting any money may work its way back to those in management.
    If enough people do this it would be a start in the right direction.

  6. could not agree more unfortunately the so called charities who are supposed to protect us and take action on our behalf have been bought off . they have applied for monies to run the so called work programme and completely done the dirty on the very people they should be protecting. but have no fear god will pay them out I am a strong believer in what goes around comes around do someone a bad turn and sooner or later you will pay for it. one things for sure they will never get another penny from me.

  7. My M.P in Northampton North is Conservative Michael Ellis an out and out one at that. He wont sign EDM,s or give any satisfactory response, but he will throw in a Party Political Broadcast in his replies, i dont have to imagine his reaction to this i know.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



For security, use of Google's reCAPTCHA service is required which is subject to the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

I agree to these terms.