‘Devastating’ COVID deaths figures ‘show government breached disabled people’s right to life’
“Devastating” new official figures showing how many disabled people have died from coronavirus demonstrate that the government has violated its obligation to protect their right to life, says a leading disabled expert.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures show disabled people have made up about three-fifths of COVID-related deaths in England and Wales, although ONS admits this is likely to be an under-estimate*.
In all, there were more than 27,500 coronavirus-related deaths of disabled people between 2 March and 14 July, compared with about 18,800 of non-disabled people.
The figures also show that younger disabled males (those “limited a lot” in daily life and aged between nine and 64) were 6.5 times more likely to have died due to COVID-19 than non-disabled males.
Disabled females between nine and 64 were even more at risk, in comparison with non-disabled females in the same age group, with a rate of death 10.8 times higher.
Dr Marie Tidball, coordinator of Oxford University’s Disability Law and Policy Project, said the “devastating” ONS figures confirmed that the government had violated its obligation to protect disabled people’s right to life, under article two of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Despite the violation, and the disproportionate number of deaths, she said, the government had failed to order an inquiry to investigate fully the impact of COVID-19 on disabled people, and the scale and causes of coronavirus-related deaths during the first wave of the pandemic.
She said: “This is despite the fact that this week, the Joint Committee on Human Rights raised concerns that ‘decision-making relating to admission to hospital, in particular critical care, for adults with COVID-19 has discriminated against older and disabled people’.”
She added: “Urgent action is needed, therefore, by government, to prevent a second wave of deaths and fulfil its duties under article two of the ECHR, including producing a disability-inclusive COVID-19 response and recovery action plan.”
Mike Smith, the former disability commissioner of the Equality and Human Rights Commission and now chief executive of the east London disabled people’s organisation Real, said: “The numbers that came out last time from the ONS were shocking enough, yet few parts of the media picked up on this story.
“It feels like there is a collective acceptance that disabled people will die because that’s ‘just what is to be expected’.
“But it’s the role of our government to step in and address this, not ignore it.
“It is absolutely essential that a more detailed understanding of the issues disabled people experience, and what can be done to address them, is carried out during this second wave to minimise unnecessary deaths of disabled people.”
Ian Jones, from WOWcampaign, said the prime minister and his fellow “clowns” in government “continue to follow a ‘one size fits all’ strategy to control COVID-19, unless you are Dominic Cummings or a party of grouse-shooters.
“With two-thirds of deaths being disabled people, if they valued us, they would implement specific policies to try to save our lives.”
Fazilet Hadi, head of policy for Disability Rights UK, said: “As winter approaches, we need government to act, to prevent another wave of disproportionately high deaths among disabled people.
“We need our Care Act rights restored (see separate story). We need additional funding for social care.
“We need disabled people wherever they live to be supported by safe care workers, with full access to personal protective equipment and testing.”
Professor Peter Beresford, co-chair of the disabled people’s and service-user network Shaping Our Lives, said the figures highlighted the importance of continuing, accurate data about disabled people’s deaths during the pandemic.
He pointed also to the government’s “conflicting official messages” throughout the pandemic and its failure to safeguard disabled people, both those in the care system and those under lock-down in their own homes.
He said disabled people were “bearing the brunt of this confused and inadequate political response, dying and suffering disproportionately even when all statistical adjustments are made to the figures”.
He said: “We can have no confidence in this government’s approach to handling this medical emergency.
“A cross-party response is now urgently required and should be agreed by the prime minister.”
Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, said: “These heart-breaking figures show how urgent it is for the government to listen to disabled people and act on what they say.
“Ministers must urgently review the steps they are taking to protect disabled people, especially in light of a potential second spike.”
The ONS figures also show that there were 808 COVID-related deaths of disabled females aged from 9 to 64, and 1,066 deaths of disabled men in the same age group.
For those 65 and over, men limited a lot were 2.4 times more likely to die a COVID-related death than non-disabled men of the same age group, and women were 3.1 times more likely to die than non-disabled women of the same age group.
Once social factors, such as the part of the country where someone lived, the population density of their local area, how well-off they were, and their living and working conditions are all taken into account, the risk of a COVID-related death falls slightly.
ONS stressed that these figures have been calculated in a different way to the other statistics and so cannot be directly compared, and there are no such figures for those aged nine to 64.
Disabled males who were limited a lot were 2.9 times more likely to die than non-disabled males, after adjusting for age.
Once the social factors are taken into account – and using this different method of calculation, so not directly comparable – the ONS figures show that disabled males limited a lot were 2.0 times more likely to die through COVID.
Disabled females who were limited a lot were 3.9 times more likely to die than non-disabled females, after adjusting for age.
One all the social factors are taken into account – and again using the different method of calculation, so not directly comparable – the figures show that disabled females limited a lot were 2.4 times more likely to die through COVID.
Previous figures released by ONS in June – and covering the period from 2 March to 15 May – showed similar rates of COVID-related deaths among disabled people, who again made up 59 per cent of all coronavirus deaths.
*The ONS figures examine the impact of the pandemic on those in England and Wales who described themselves as disabled people in the 2011 census, either by saying they were “limited a little” in their daily lives or “limited a lot”. This means that disabled children under the age of nine are not covered by the new figures, which also do not take account of those who have become disabled over the last nine years. Therefore, the figures probably underestimate the number of disabled people who have died
**For sources of information and support during the coronavirus crisis, visit the DNS advice and information page
24 September 2020
Activists ‘aghast’ at ‘negligent’ plans to send infected COVID patients into care homes
Disabled activists say that government plans to allow NHS patients infected with COVID-19 to be discharged into care homes this winter will repeat the failings that led to thousands of deaths of older and disabled people in the early stages of the pandemic.
The “safe discharge” measures are part of ministers’ new adult social care winter plan (see separate stories).
The plan says the Department of Health and Social Care is working with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) on a scheme that will decide which care homes “are safe for people leaving hospital who have tested positive for COVID-19 or are awaiting a test result”.
It says that no care home will be forced to accept such a patient “if they are unable to cope with the impact of the person’s COVID-19 illness safely”.
All patients now have to be tested for COVID-19 before they are discharged to a care home, and should then be isolated within their own room for 14 days after their admission, even after they test negative for the virus, according to government guidance (PDF).
But the new winter plan raises the prospect of patients found to be infected with COVID-19 being sent into care homes that were previously clear of the virus.
Manchester Disabled People Against Cuts (MDPAC) said it was “aghast” at the plans, which it says will simply repeat the disastrous failures that led to thousands of deaths of care home residents earlier this year.
Those who are infected, says MDPAC, should be cared for in separate, well-resourced care facilities that are only for patients infected with COVID-19, until they are clear of the virus.
Rick Burgess, of MDPAC, said: “This is about the right to life, and people’s right not to have their life endangered by a government that is not dealing with the pandemic in a responsible or competent way.
“They are looking again to use care homes as a pressure valve to protect the NHS from being over-run.
“There was a huge disproportionate death toll in care homes, and frankly we think that is going to happen again.
“Do something better than the first time, because the first time was a disaster.”
He added: “Care homes are not a dumping ground for infected people.
“They don’t think that we have equal rights, and that begins at the right to life, which is a pretty important right.”
MDPAC has launched a campaign to highlight the government’s plans and demand that they are changed.
They say the plans show the government has failed to learn lessons from the first weeks of the pandemic, when hospital patients were discharged into care homes without being tested for COVID-19, causing the loss of thousands of lives.
MDPAC has launched a petition to highlight the concerns, but it also plans further action, including contacting its local authorities to plead with them to refuse to carry out such “negligent” measures and promise instead that only people who do not have COVID-19 are allowed to enter the care home system.
Further MDPAC actions could include COVID-safe protests, and it is reaching out to other organisations to join its campaign.
It is also encouraging disabled campaigners across the country to contact their own local directors of adult social services to ask them to “do better than the national guidance”.
CQC had failed to comment by noon today (Thursday).
But Clenton Farquharson, chair of the Think Local Act Personal partnership and the service-user representative on the Social Care Sector COVID-19 Support Taskforce, which fed into the government’s winter action plan, defended the government’s measures.
He said the taskforce and winter plan were “a genuine attempt to provide guidance for the sector aimed at keeping people safe and limiting the spread of the virus.
“No one is saying they are perfect, and certainly not me.
“Of course, there are some very real and difficult issues around balancing risks with rights and people’s wellbeing, as in the scenario you paint.
“The guidance needs to be applied sensitively with local organisations working carefully and closely with people and family carers at all times.”
A DHSC spokesperson said: “No care home will be forced to admit an existing or new resident to the care home if they do not feel they can provide the appropriate care.
“Our priority remains to ensure that everyone, including those with disabilities, is discharged safely from hospital to the most appropriate place, and that they continue to receive the care and support they need.
“Last week we announced over half a billion pounds extra funding for care providers to reduce COVID-19 transmission and help protect residents and staff throughout winter.”
*For sources of information and support during the coronavirus crisis, visit the DNS advice and information page
24 September 2020
Government faces calls to scrap ‘discriminatory’ pandemic emergency measures
The government is facing growing pressure to scrap “wholly unacceptable” and “discriminatory” emergency powers that have allowed public bodies to suspend disabled people’s rights during the coronavirus pandemic.
More than 60 disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) and their allies this week signed a statement that called on the government to restore rights suspended in March by the Coronavirus Act.
They point out in the statement that “no other minority group other than disabled people” has had its “minority-specific rights” removed under the act.
Among the emergency powers are the so-called “Care Act easements”, which allow councils to suspend their legal duty to carry out detailed assessments of disabled people’s care and support needs, and their legal duty to meet all eligible care and support needs.
The government’s new adult social care winter plan makes it clear that local authorities must continue to use the powers if they need to do so over the next few months, although they should only be used “when absolutely necessary”.
Pressure on the government to think again is mounting, with MPs set to review the Coronavirus Act powers on Wednesday (30 September).
But the winter plan says the government’s two joint chief social workers for adults in England have already advised that the Care Act easements should remain in place through the winter to “ensure local authorities are able to meet the most urgent and acute needs”.
The winter plan was released just days after two crossbench disabled peers – Baroness [Jane] Campbell and Baroness [Tanni] Grey-Thompson – called on health and social care secretary Matt Hancock to scrap the Care Act easements.
Polling carried out by YouGov for the civil liberties organisation Liberty – which supports this week’s statement – found two thirds (67 per cent) of the public think it is “unacceptable” that councils have been able to reduce people’s care during the pandemic.
The Coronavirus Act also weakens the rights of disabled children and young people to education and support, and allows the removal of basic legal safeguards that protect people within the mental health system.
The statement says the measures in the Coronavirus Act are “wholly unacceptable” and are causing disabled people “disadvantage and discrimination”, and putting “our mental and physical health and our lives at risk”.
Their statement came as new figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed that disabled people made up three-fifths (59 per cent) of deaths linked to coronavirus in England and Wales between 2 March and 14 July (see separate story).
The statement says these figures show the “lethal and disproportionate impact” the pandemic has had on disabled people.
It has been signed by a swathe of influential disabled people’s organisations, including Disability Rights UK (DR UK), The Alliance for Inclusive Education, Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People, Inclusion London, the National Survivor User Network and the Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance.
Kamran Mallick, chief executive of DR UK, said: “Throughout the pandemic we have heard horror stories from disabled people who have had their care cut as a result of easements to the Care Act under the Coronavirus Act.
“The learning curve on what has worked and what hasn’t in these changing times has been steep.
“But what we have learnt is this: people suffer too much when the Care Act is not fully in place.
“Two thirds of the population stand with us in saying this: care should not be cut.
“We are calling on the government to restore all aspects of the Care Act before winter kicks in.
“We need the means for our health, our independence, and our human rights to be front and centre of our lives again, now.”
Svetlana Kotova, director of campaigns and justice at Inclusion London, said: “The coronavirus pandemic had, and continues to have, a devastating impact on disabled people with many fearing for their lives and feeling abandoned, forgotten and ignored.
“For many of us, the situation did not improve after the lockdown was lifted and we are being further marginalised and isolated.
“Disabled people’s needs and rights were not considered when decisions were made during the pandemic; quite the opposite: the government was quick to diminish our already limited rights. This is totally unacceptable.
“With this campaign, which is led by disabled people and our organisations and supported by many others, we urge the government to rethink its policy and show its commitment to upholding disabled people’s rights.
“If the government truly believes in equality for disabled people, it should use the opportunity of the Coronavirus Act review to restore our rights and show disabled people that we are valued equally.”
Simone Aspis, ALLFIE’s policy and campaigns coordinator, said the special educational needs (SEN) aspects of the Coronavirus Act had been an “absolute disaster”.
ALLFIE wants parliament to permanently remove the SEN parts of the act.
She said there had been a “total disregard” for those disabled students who found the online learning provided during lockdown inaccessible.
Earlier this month, ALLFIE published the results of a survey of disabled students, their parents and education practitioners, carried out in April, to discover the emerging effects of the pandemic.
More than half (54 per cent) of parents said they had not received any support from either the local authority or their disabled child’s school to help with home schooling during the period when schools were closed.
*For sources of information and support during the coronavirus crisis, visit the DNS advice and information page
24 September 2020
Government tries to address abuse of disabled people’s rights in new winter plan
The government has attempted to address some of the concerns about the abuse of disabled people’s rights to health and social care that emerged during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The policies come in a new adult social care winter plan, which mentions many of the areas where there were breaches of rights over the first six months of the crisis.
One of them was discrimination that emerged within the NHS, including examples of the wrongful use of “do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation” (DNACPR) orders.
In the winter plan, ministers say they are aware of “anecdotal reports of inappropriate practice in applying DNACPRs”, which they say is “unacceptable”.
The plan says the government has taken “national action” to prevent this happening and continues “to work with stakeholders to understand what more we can do nationally to prevent inappropriate DNACPR decisions being made for individuals”.
Among the other promises in the plan is to provide free personal protective equipment (PPE) for all adult social care providers and care workers until March 2021.
It also says that care providers should stop all but essential movement of staff between care homes, to reduce the spread of the virus.
The movement of staff, including agency workers, between care homes was one of the factors blamed for thousands of deaths in residential care during the early part of the pandemic, while shortages of PPE were also blamed for helping spread the virus in care facilities.
The winter plan also discusses the suspension of key rights to health and social care through the emergency Coronavirus Act in March, and concerns over plans for the “safe discharge” of hospital patients infected with COVID-19 into care homes.
In both cases, there is growing alarm over the government’s plans (see separate stories).
For disabled people who receive direct payments, the winter plan says local authorities and clinical commissioning groups must “take a flexible approach” to the arrangements recipients will need to make to meet their care and support needs during the pandemic.
It adds: “Payments should continue to be used flexibly and innovatively with no unreasonable restrictions placed on the use of the payment, so long as it is being used to meet eligible care and support needs.”
Disabled people who use direct payments to employ a personal assistant (PA) are entitled to free personal protective equipment for PAs that carry out “close contact care”.
During the early months of the pandemic, many disabled people who receive direct payments to pay for their PAs were unable to access personal protective equipment, while the government only published guidance for people on direct payments more than five weeks after it had published guidance for the wider social care sector.
The winter plan says the government will publish updated guidance for recipients of direct payments ahead of the winter period.
Last week, the government announced a six-month extension of the Adult Social Care Infection Control Fund, another measure included in the winter plan.
The extra £546 million can be used by local authorities to help social care providers pay staff their full wages when they are self-isolating, and to enable staff to work in only one care home, cutting the risk of spreading COVID-19.
Although the fund is focused on supporting care homes, councils can use 25 per cent of their grant on other COVID-19 infection control measures, including payments to home care providers or “wider workforce measures”.
The winter plan also includes the appointment of a new chief nurse for adult social care, and free flu vaccines for all health and care staff, including PAs, and unpaid carers.
To improve understanding of where infections are taking place, the government will publish and update an adult social care “dashboard”, which will bring together data about COVID-19 from multiple sources, and will allow local, regional and national government to monitor outbreaks and emerging risks.
Health and social care secretary Matt Hancock said: “We are entering a critical phase in our fight against coronavirus with winter on the horizon.
“Our priority over the next six months is to make sure we protect those most vulnerable receiving care and our incredibly hard-working workforce by limiting the spread of the virus and preventing a second spike.”
*For sources of information and support during the coronavirus crisis, visit the DNS advice and information page
24 September 2020
Fresh hope for long-awaited strengthening of disability hate crime laws
Disabled campaigners who have fought for years to challenge the disability hate crime failings of the criminal justice system have welcomed reforms suggested by the Law Commission, despite frustration at the slow pace of change.
The reforms suggested in a new consultation paper by the statutory, independent body include changes that would meet long-awaited demands for stand-alone “aggravated offences” covering disability hate crime in England and Wales.
This would mean that, for the first time, an offender could be charged with an offence – such as assault, harassment or criminal damage – that was aggravated by hostility towards a disabled person.
At present, aggravated offences currently only apply to racial and religious hostility, and a disability hate crime can only be addressed by a court during sentencing, where the sentence can be increased if the offence was motivated by disability-related hostility.
But the Law Commission has now suggested extending aggravated offences to sexual orientation, disability and transgender status.
Disabled campaigners on disability hate crime have been calling for more than a decade for such a change.
But there was only muted welcome yesterday (Wednesday) for the suggested changes, partly because there will now be another consultation and then the government will need to approve any changes recommended by the Law Commission, before any new legislation is introduced.
Disability News Service has been reporting on calls for aggravated offences to be extended to disability-related hostility for nearly eight years, since an earlier Law Commission review of hate crime law launched in December 2012.
Anne Novis, chair of Inclusion London and a leading expert on disability hate crime, said the change was needed “urgently”.
She said: “I do get frustrated, but I also see some slow progress. Meanwhile, disabled people still experience injustice.
“We all know what needs doing. If we had been truly heard, a change in the law would have been made a decade ago.”
Stephen Brookes, another leading expert on disability hate crime and a former coordinator of the Disability Hate Crime Network (DHCN), said the Law Commission must “demand” that the government finally makes “meaningful changes”.
The Law Commission is also consulting on other changes, including extending the existing offences of stirring up hatred – which currently only apply to race, religion and sexual orientation – to disability and transgender status.
It also suggests making such offences less difficult to prosecute in cases where the defendant clearly intended to stir up hatred, and providing greater protection for freedom of expression if such an intention cannot be proved.
These changes – and the aggravated offences – would also be extended to any new protected characteristics added to hate crime law, which could include crimes based on hostility towards women.
The consultation document also suggests the appointment of a new hate crime commissioner to “drive forward best practice in preventing hate crime and supporting its victims”.
There is also the possibility that the definition of disability in hate crime legislation could be extended to cover cases where there is a mistaken presumption that a person is not disabled.
This would allow hate crime law to cover abuse and violence experienced by disabled people with invisible impairments who are, for example, challenged over their use of an accessible service, such as an accessible toilet.
But the Law Commission said it was not recommending another change, which would allow prosecutors to argue that someone was a victim of disability hate crime because they had been “targeted” as a disabled person, rather than having to prove there was disability-related hostility involved.
The commission said it considered this would be too wide a definition and “may capture conduct where there is no evidence that the defendant harbours any animosity” towards disabled people.
Instead, it asks whether there should be a test that asks if the offence was “motivated by hostility or prejudice” towards disabled people.
David Wilkin, a DHCN coordinator and author of a book on disability hate crime on public transport, said he was concerned that this “hostility or prejudice” definition could exclude offences motivated by resentment or greed, including cases of so-called “cuckooing”, which involves exploitation of people in vulnerable situations.
He said he supported the creation of a hate crime commissioner, if the role had the authority to “oversee the complete victim journey, from the initial report, the police and Crown Prosecution Service actions, through to the court”.
Wilkin also said that any reforms to disability hate crime would need to be accompanied by cultural change within the criminal justice system.
The deadline to respond to the consultation is 24 December.
24 September 2020
Disabled artist ‘sections’ DWP for being ‘a danger to benefit claimants’
A disabled artist-activist yesterday attempted to “section” the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) for being a danger to benefit claimants.
In an action designed to highlight DWP’s lack of compassion, Dolly Sen delivered a printed heart to DWP’s Caxton House headquarters in Westminster and laid it at the front entrance.
Laying a stethoscope against DWP’s nameplate outside its offices, she said: “I can’t hear a thing. There’s no heart in this building.”
She later stretched yellow and black tape across the front and rear entrances of the building to demonstrate that it was being sectioned under the Mental Health Act.
Sen accused DWP of lacking kindness, compassion and decency in the way that it treats disabled people who claim benefits such as personal independence payment and employment and support allowance.
She said the department had driven many claimants to their deaths.
As the action ended, a police officer – apparently called by DWP – arrived but was happy to allow Sen and her team to leave after she explained why they were there and told her about the deaths of benefit claimants including Jodey Whiting and Errol Graham, both of which were closely linked to DWP failings.
Sen told Disability News Service later: “I am glad they called the police.
“It means that something we did riled them, unsettled them. It obvious struck a nerve. There was a reaction.”
Asked why the action was important, she said: “People are still dying.
“I am still seeing people who are suicidal being asked to do impossible things like 200 job applications when they struggle to do basic day-to-day living.”
Her message to DWP, she said, was: “Where is your heart? Today I was looking for your heart and I couldn’t find it.”
The action is one of several being devised by Sen that will be included in a film about DWP, which also explores how art can be used in activism and “can touch people in a way that ordinary information cannot”.
But the protest was also making a series of demands, including an end to “unfair, punitive, devastating” benefit assessments that are not fit for purpose, and recognition that DWP is institutionally disablist, and that it is damaging people’s mental health, including during the COVID-19 crisis.
Sen, an award-winning writer, artist, performer, filmmaker and “professional mad person”, also wants DWP to make “radical changes to its policies and administration of social security benefits to make the safety of all claimants a priority”.
She was joined in the action by Joy Dove, the mother of Jodey Whiting, who took her own life in February 2017, 15 days after she had her out-of-work disability benefits wrongly stopped for missing a work capability assessment.
Dove displayed a banner calling for “Justice for Jodey” and she asked again for the attorney general to decide whether to call for a second inquest into her daughter’s death.
She said outside Caxton House that she was at the action for her daughter.
She added: “I want the right decision from the attorney general for a second inquest, and a public inquiry. I’ve waited long enough.”
Another protester told DWP: “You have blood on your hands.”
The Independent Case Examiner (ICE) concluded last year that DWP was guilty of “multiple” and “significant” failings in handling Jodey Whiting’s case.
Dove has told the attorney general that the original inquest in May 2017, which lasted less than an hour, failed to investigate DWP’s potential role in her daughter’s death, and that new evidence has since emerged.
This new evidence includes the ICE conclusions, and a report from a consultant psychiatrist who found that DWP’s failings would probably have had a substantial effect on Whiting’s mental state at the time she took her own life.
Her family had no legal representative at the inquest and were unaware that they could have been entitled to public funding to ensure they had one.
Dove believes a second inquest would increase the pressure for an independent inquiry into all deaths linked to DWP’s failings.
The call for a new inquest has been backed by grassroots groups of disabled people which last year supported a petition in her daughter’s name that demanded an independent inquiry into her death and the many others linked to DWP failings, and was signed by more than 55,000 people.
Dove told DNS after yesterday’s action that she was glad she had made the 250-mile journey from her home in Stockton-on-Tees to take part.
She said: “I will never forgive them for failing my daughter and driving her to her death, like many others.”
She said DWP needed to change its assessment system so it was more considerate to disabled people and those in vulnerable situations.
She said: “Whatever the decision [of the attorney general], I will keep fighting for justice for Jodey and others.”
DWP declined to answer questions from DNS, including why it called the police and what the department had done with the printed heart.
But a spokesperson said in response to the action outside Caxton House: “The DWP works extensively with assessment providers and disability representative groups to ensure that people receive high quality assessments and get the support to which they are entitled.”
24 September 2020
Labour faces pressure from party activists over Starmer’s independent living pledge
Labour activists are pushing their party for a stronger commitment to plans drawn up by disabled people that would solve the social care crisis by setting up a co-produced National Independent Living Service (NILS).
A motion based on the NILS plans became party policy at last autumn’s Labour conference, but it was not included in Labour’s general election manifesto.
Keir Starmer told Disability News Service (DNS) in February, before he became party leader, that he supported the motion, which was based on a document – Independent Living for the Future – drawn up by Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) and the Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance (ROFA).
This week, Fran Springfield and Kathy Bole, co-chairs of Disability Labour, took part in a policy debate on the future of social care as part of Labour’s online party conference.
But they told DNS afterwards that they were disappointed at the failure of Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, Vicky Foxcroft, to back the Independent Living for the Future document during the debate.
Although Foxcroft spoke of the need to listen to service-users, and give them the “opportunity to live decent independent lives”, she focused in the debate on care workers and their need for a “real national living wage”.
Springfield said afterwards: “I did hope for a stronger commitment from Vicky on NILS.
“This is a key issue for disabled people. It’s vital that it becomes a given for MPs and council leaders to support us on this, instead of just talking about a National Care Service.”
She said the right to independent living is a key part of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which the party has pledged to implement into UK law.
Bole added: “I would have liked that Vicky would have fleshed out what the thinking was from the front bench.
“It would be helpful to know what her take is on NILS. Keir hasn’t allowed us time he promised we would have when he was campaigning.”
Springfield and Bole said they also expected more meetings with Foxcroft and Liz Kendall, Labour’s shadow social care minister.
Labour has spoken of the need for a new National Care Service, but Springfield told Sunday’s debate that the key for any such scheme would be “to give disabled people control over their lives and allow them to live in their homes independently”.
She said the Independent Living for the Future document – which calls for all social care to be provided free, to be person-centred and to be funded by progressive taxation through a national service designed through co-production with service-users – was “extremely important”, as it offered a “new way of looking at social care”.
She said: “We have got to stop focusing just on care homes.
“Most disabled people who have been disabled for quite long periods of their lives don’t when they get into their 60s and 70s want to go into a care home.
“We want to be able to live in our own homes independently with the right level of care.”
Bole, a Labour county councillor in Suffolk, added: “The biggest thing I have seen is that no social care system works the same as any other throughout the country.
“Disabled people are certainly not put at the centre of any process.”
Asked about Labour’s commitment to the NILS plans, Foxcroft told DNS: “With four years to go until the next general election, we’re not writing our manifesto yet.
“But the National Independent Living Service is an important part of ensuring disabled people live independent lives with dignity, and we fully intend to work with disabled people and disabled people’s organisations to get this right.”
24 September 2020
Anger and frustration over mayor’s ‘recovery board’ failure
The mayor of London is facing anger from disabled campaigners over his decision to set up a board of nearly 30 senior figures to oversee the recovery from coronavirus in the capital without including any members representing disabled people.
The aim of the London Recovery Board – which is co-chaired by the Labour mayor, Sadiq Khan, and the Labour chair of London Councils, Cllr Peter John – is to co-ordinate the planning for London’s long-term recovery from the coronavirus crisis.
Part of its job is to support communities that have been “most impacted by the virus” and to “narrow social, economic and health inequalities”.
But there is no representative of disabled people on the 29-strong board, even though its members include representatives from the London Resilience Faith Sector Panel, Operation Black Vote, management consultants Planet Communications, and The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.
There was anger, frustration and disbelief from disabled Londoners and others after Disability News Service (DNS) revealed the lack of disability representation last week.
Alan Benson, chair of Transport for All, which campaigns for older and disabled people in the capital, said: “Just wow. Imagine not including women and the outcry.”
The Disabled Police Association said the mayor had obviously not read the latest statistics on the deaths of disabled people during the pandemic from the Office for National Statistics (see separate story) “which clearly show who was impacted the most”.
Artist-activist Jess Thom said that her “life, work and community” had been “drastically impacted” both by COVID-19 and some of the steps taken to recover from it, and she called on the mayor to “urgently” add disabled people and disabled-led organisations to the board.
Sofia Khan said on Twitter that disabled people had been “significantly affected” by COVID-19 and “to not have us represented properly at the same table as other agencies is discriminatory and shows how disabled ppl are an afterthought”.
Dr Hannah Barham-Brown, a wheelchair-user and deputy leader of the Women’s Equality Party, said there was “no excuse” for the omission, and added: “I could have given you a list of at least 20 amazing #disabled experts to bring into this.
“Incredibly disappointed that 23 per cent of the population have been forgotten.”
Disabled actor Ruth Madeley also spoke out on Twitter, saying: “The RSPB are part of this Recovery Board… yet disabled organisations are not.
“Now, I like birds as much as the next person, but disabled people need a seat at the damn table more than the local city wood pigeon.”
Keryn Seal, a member of the British blind football team that competed at London 2012, told the mayor to “hang your head in shame” and said that it “speaks volumes that disabled groups do not get a seat at the table but the RSPB do.
“This is 2020, where the rights of pigeons and swans are of higher importance than those with disabilities.”
And disabled campaigner Corry Shaw said on Twitter: “Everyone knows I am a huge supporter of @SadiqKhan but this is hugely disappointing from @MayorOfLondon. I’m really upset by this, it is indefensible.”
The failure of the mayor and London Councils comes despite the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on disabled people.
This week, DNS reports how the government has been accused of violating its obligation to protect the right to life under the European Convention on Human Rights, after “devastating” new official figures showed that disabled people have made up almost three-fifths of COVID-related deaths in England and Wales (see separate story).
It is just the latest piece of research to show the disproportionate impact, including a report by Inclusion London, which published research in June showing disabled people had faced the “grim effects” of discrimination and inequality in every area of their lives from the beginning of the pandemic.
The mayor’s office has yet to explain why there are no disabled people or representatives of DPOs on the board.
But it has insisted that it is committed to working with disabled people and DPOs, that it has engaged with disabled Londoners, and that the mayor’s equality and diversity advisory group – which includes representatives from DPOs – provides “advice and guidance” on the recovery programme.
Although the pan-London disabled people’s organisation Inclusion London is not a member of the London Recovery Board, it is a member of a sub-group of the board, the London communities strategy group.
24 September 2020
Council faces anger over ‘inexcusable’ increase in care charges in middle of pandemic
Campaigners have asked a local authority why it has taken the “inexcusable” step of increasing care charges for disabled people in the middle of a pandemic.
Greenwich council was warned last year that planned increases to the contributions disabled service-users have to make towards council-funded care would lead some to quit their jobs or stop their volunteering work, and push many into poverty.
The council decided in January to ignore these concerns and push ahead with increased charges, although the planned implementation in April was postponed because of the COVID-19 crisis.
But the council has now “reviewed” the situation and introduced the changes this month, despite a steep rise in COVID-19 infections across London.
Among the changes, home care charges will rise, recipients of the higher rate of disability benefits will contribute more towards their care, and a cap on charges for home care will be removed.
In an open letter to the council, disabled activists have described the move as “inexcusable” and say that, “in light of the awful consequences” of COVID-19, it is “unfair and unjust”.
They warn that it will “inevitably lead to more unnecessary pain and misery for many Greenwich residents” and point to the higher costs that disabled people have faced during the pandemic, particularly for food.
They have already been contacted by one Greenwich resident who has decided she has no choice but to stop all her care this month, while another was sent home from hospital and had to stop the care package she was assessed as needing after receiving an unexpected and “hefty” bill from the council.
The letter has been sent by disabled people’s organisations including Greenwich Disabled People Against Cuts, Inclusion London, WinVisible, Metro GAD and BME Volunteers.
They say in the letter: “The coronavirus pandemic has hit disabled people hard and also exposed and amplified the long-standing structural inequalities and discrimination that Deaf and Disabled people have experienced.”
Some of them, they say, “will face the unenviable choice of having to decide between heating the home and putting food on the table”.
They have also raised concerns that the council has been carrying out “cold call” care reviews, without giving the disabled service-user any notice and so depriving them of the chance to arrange advocacy and support “and therefore undermining choice, control and independent living”.
Greenwich council defended its actions.
Cllr Miranda Williams, its cabinet member for adult social care and health, said: “Our decision to review the current charges for adult social care services was not taken lightly.
“We put off introducing any changes to our current policy for many years – all the while the population has been growing, and the cost of care has continued to rise – particularly for those coming out of hospital or living with complex needs.
“Many other councils have already increased the amount they are charging – something we resisted for years.
“Since 2010, our funding has reduced by a staggering £1,400 per household, totalling some £125 million, largely as a result of funding that the government has taken away from us.
“Unfortunately, we urgently need to address this growing gap in funds to safeguard our services for the future and continue to provide quality care to people who need our support the most.”
She said that disabled people who have had to spend extra money on food deliveries or similar costs during the pandemic were entitled to reductions in their care charges under “disability-related expenditure”.
And she said the pandemic had “placed a further significant strain on already stretched council finances”, although the council had provided several free support services from the beginning of the outbreak, including food and prescription deliveries, befriending and phone support.
Cllr Williams added: “During the height of the pandemic, reviews of care were suspended – with the exception of urgent cases.
“Our disabled residents were contacted for their overdue reviews by telephone initially, to ensure safe distance was maintained, but this practise was altered as call receivers advised us that this made them uncomfortable.
“We now make sure any review telephone calls take place at a mutually agreed time.”
24 September 2020
DWP ‘performs partial U-turn’ over DNS ‘ban’ after criticism from campaigners
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) appears to have performed a partial U-turn after disabled campaigners reacted angrily to an apparent ban on media requests from Disability News Service (DNS).
Last week, DNS reported how DWP’s press office had failed to provide a meaningful response to questions submitted by DNS on 10 consecutive news stories.
The stories covered issues including the deaths of benefit claimants, the failure of minister for disabled people Justin Tomlinson to engage with disabled people’s organisations, and the silence of the government’s Disability Unit during the coronavirus pandemic.
Following DNS’s report, disabled activists and Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people have raised concerns about DWP’s actions.
Rick Burgess, from Manchester Disabled People Against Cuts, said: “If it affects DNS, it means the whole disabled population is affected.
“DNS is really the only specialist news service for a demographic of the population, and if they are not speaking to DNS they are saying, ‘We don’t want to communicate to that section of the population.’
“It’s telling us, ‘You’re not part of society.’ In pure social model terms, they are introducing a new barrier towards disabled people. They are putting a barrier in front of our press.
“If they tried to do that with almost any other minority group, I suspect it would be a lot more difficult, but unfortunately in disability there is not a stronger unified voice that would take the government to account on this.”
Vicky Foxcroft, Labour’s shadow minister for disabled people, said: “Sadly, this doesn’t surprise me; this is a concerning trend.
“MPs across the house, myself included, have repeatedly asked questions in parliament and the government has avoided answering.
“Accessible information is core to the press being able to hold the government accountable – freedom of the press must always be respected.”
Disabled activists who commented on social media on DWP’s refusal to respond to DNS said its evasion of accountability was deeply worrying.
“Ben Claimant”, who tweets at @imajsaclaimant, said DNS had “been a thorn in the side of DWP for years”, exposing its failings “again and again”.
He said: “The DWP press office has now stopped answering his questions. This should concern everybody!”
Other campaigners described the failure as “unacceptable”.
James Lee, a consultant and a member of Transport for London’s independent disability advisory group, said: “Government departments gain nothing by refusing to respond to public scrutiny. This is disgraceful.”
Dr Rosa Morris, who has published expert analysis of the work capability assessment and out-of-work disability benefits, said DWP was trying to do everything it could to gain disabled people’s trust at the same time as “refusing to engage with the only disability-focused news service”.
Benefits adviser Mark Harris said: “Every day there’s another nail in democracy’s coffin, and alas accountability was buried a long time ago.
“I’ve not many years left but I was hoping my grandchildren would inherit a better, more open, caring Britain.
“With this type of action and many like it, it’s not looking promising.”
There was also support from journalists in the mainstream media, with the Daily Mirror’s Dan Bloom saying the failure seemed “pretty odd”.
He said: “DWP is always rightly keen to respond to stories I write, even if it’s just to give a generic statement on the issue.
“DNS has exposed some important errors and failings – what’s different?”
The Guardian’s Patrick Butler added: “Strange that @dwppressoffice – normally understandably keen to get its view across in the media – appears to be refusing to answer questions put to it by @johnpringdns.”
Over the last decade, DNS has reported on links between DWP and the deaths of disabled benefit claimants, DWP’s breaches of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, evidence of flaws in DWP programmes such as Disability Confident, and misleading statements made to parliament by work and pensions ministers.
A DWP spokesperson at first refused to comment this week, but later said: “We treat every media enquiry on a case-by-case basis and respond as appropriate.”
It later provided a brief, one-line statement in response to a story about a protest action by artist-activist Dolly Sen (see separate story), although it failed to answer questions on the protest.
24 September 2020
News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com
