Prospect of Atos ‘fitness for work’ contract return horrifies activists
Disabled activists reacted with horror this week after learning that the discredited government contractor Atos could soon be carrying out “fitness for work” tests again, six years after withdrawing from its assessment contract.
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is introducing a major change to the way it commissions private sector companies to carry out health and disability benefit assessments, and campaigners fear it could lead to Atos once again carrying out work capability assessments (WCAs) in some parts of the country.
Atos earned more than £465 million from delivering WCAs before it withdrew from the contract in 2015, following years of negative publicity and multiple links between the actions of the company and its staff and the deaths of disabled claimants.
DWP currently pays one company – Maximus – to carry out WCAs, which test eligibility for out-of-work disability benefits.
It pays two other companies – Atos and Capita – to assess eligibility for personal independence payment (PIP), which contributes to the extra costs of living with an impairment.
About two million health and disability assessments are carried out every year under the contracts.
But DWP has now decided that it wants a single supplier to supply all assessments – both WCAs and PIP assessments – in each part of the country from August 2023.
The change could mean, for example, that one company would carry out all WCAs and PIP assessments in London and southern England, and another company would carry out all assessments in central England and Wales, although it is not yet clear how the country would be divided up.
Information released to Disability News Service (DNS) by DWP last year showed that, between April 2010 and April 2019, Capita was paid more than £300 million, Atos more than £1.34 billion, and Maximus more than £620 million, to deliver assessments.
Atos has so far failed to say if it will be bidding for any of the new contracts, but disabled activists have said the possibility is “an absolute outrage”.
Atos, Maximus and Capita have all faced significant and repeated criticism over their performance over the last decade.
Their failings have been exposed through research and direct action by grassroots groups of disabled people, inquiries by parliamentary committees, concerns raised by individual MPs, the release of government statistics, television documentaries, and a lengthy investigation into the PIP assessment practices of Atos and Capita by DNS.
A “prior information notice” announcing the move to a new system was issued by DWP in April, but has so far not been widely publicised, and was not mentioned in DWP’s disability benefits green paper, Shaping Future Support, which was published in July.
It was also not mentioned by the minister for disabled people, Justin Tomlinson, when he gave evidence to the work and pensions select committee yesterday (Wednesday).
But the green paper did discuss DWP’s plans to create what it calls an “integrated health assessment service”, which would bring the two assessments onto a single digital system.
The prior information notice says the plan to “provide functional health assessments through a single supplier in each geographical lot” was part of DWP’s “long term plans” to develop an integrated health assessment service.
But there will also be concerns that moving to a single assessment “supplier” in each part of the country could make it easier for ministers to merge PIP with out-of-work disability benefits (employment and support allowance, and the disability-related aspects of universal credit), a possibility also raised in the green paper.
The situation in Scotland will be different from England and Wales under the new assessment system, as the Scottish government is due to take over responsibility for a replacement for PIP next year, although DWP will still be responsible for providing WCAs in Scotland.
It is not yet clear what will happen with assessments in Northern Ireland.
Atos was replaced as the provider of WCAs by the US outsourcing giant Maximus in March 2015, after years of concerns over links between its actions and relapses, episodes of self-harm, and even suicides and other deaths among those being assessed, including those of Stephen Carré, Michael O’Sullivan, Mark Wood, David Barr and a woman known only as Ms D E.
Paula Peters, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts, which helped to force Atos’s withdrawal from the WCA contract six years ago, said: “It’s an absolute outrage that Atos could be carrying out work capability assessments again.
“We must never forget the names of Mark Wood, Linda Wootton, and all the disabled people who died as a result of the dreadful fear and distress these assessments have caused.
“Many have taken their own lives after being found fit to work.”
She said there were “countless stories”, backed up with research and evidence, to show that Atos, as well as Maximus and Capita, were “not fit for purpose”.
Peters said that if Atos was being considered to carry out WCA assessments again, it would be “a further stain on DWP’s appalling reputation”.
John McArdle, co-founder of the grassroots group Black Triangle, which also played a significant part in raising concerns about Atos when it was delivering the WCA contract, said: “If they were to be brought back, it would be an absolute affront to the grieving families who have lost loved ones, and whose lives will never be the same.”
He added: “The disability assessment regime by for-profit companies continues to be a grave and systematic violation of the fundamental human rights of sick and disabled people in the UK.
“Nothing has changed.”
Neither Maximus nor Atos had said by noon today (Thursday) whether they would be bidding for any of the assessment contracts.
A Capita spokesperson said: “Capita doesn’t comment on any potential future bids and so we will not be commenting on this occasion.”
A DWP spokesperson confirmed the department was moving towards using a single contractor for all assessments in each geographical area.
He said: “Last July the department announced its intention to extend current contracts with assessment providers for up to two years to ensure continuity of service for customers.
“The department intends to re-procure health assessment services contracts during this extension period and anticipates that the procurement will start later this year.”
DWP said it would continue to keep the most appropriate method of delivering assessments under review, but that it believed private providers would continue to have an important role.
And it said that it set its providers challenging targets and monitored their performance closely to ensure they delivered the best possible service to customers.
16 September 2021
COVID inquiry will conclude that benefit cuts led to deaths, MP tells minister
The government’s cuts to social security will be found to have played a significant part in causing the deaths of many disabled people during the pandemic, MPs were told yesterday (Wednesday).
Labour’s Debbie Abrahams said that ministers’ failure to assess the impact of their policies on minority groups was one of the reasons that nearly six in 10 COVID-related deaths were of disabled people.
And she told the minister for disabled people, Justin Tomlinson, that the government’s new National Disability Strategy had failed to introduce measures that could prevent such failings in the future.
She pointed to the strategy’s failure to strengthen the Equality Act’s public sector equality duty – as highlighted last week by a House of Lords committee – which would have forced public bodies to take bolder steps to eliminate discrimination and advance equality when drawing up new policies.
Abrahams said she was convinced that the independent public inquiry into the government’s handling of the pandemic, which will begin next spring, will find that underlying poverty and cuts to social security, particularly for disabled people, had played a significant part in causing the disproportionate number of COVID-related deaths.
She told Tomlinson, who was giving evidence to the work and pensions select committee: “It needs to be recognised that the cuts in working-age support, particularly to disabled people, had a direct impact.
“As much as I absolutely share your ambition about building back fairer, you’re not getting the basics right, and that’s about making sure that we have an adequate social security system.”
Tomlinson said the inquiry would look at “the wider impact in terms of deaths”, and “whether that’s related to poverty, whether that’s related to the fact that if you have an underlying health condition you’re more receptive to the impacts of COVID, that will all be looked at in the inquiry”.
He said the impact of poverty and social security support was “a really important area that the inquiry will have to look at”, but he said that benefit spending on disabled people had risen by £10 billion to £55 billion, and on disability benefits in particular had risen by £4 billion in real terms to £25 billion, since the Conservatives came to power in 2010.
He said that successive Tory-led governments had exempted those on personal independence payment (PIP) from the benefit freeze and had overseen an increase in the number of disabled people receiving support.
He said there had also been an increase in the proportion of those on PIP receiving the highest rates of support, compared with the benefit it has replaced for working-age claimants, disability living allowance.
He said DWP was also “looking at other ways that we can improve the whole of our benefit process”, but he added: “I don’t diminish anything you said there, I know they are important points, and they need to be looked at.”
Tomlinson had earlier suggested that the government’s reform of the disability assessment process would lead to far fewer face-to-face assessments.
He said that the use of “triaging” claims through telephone and video technology – trialled through necessity during the pandemic – meant that “the traditional face-to-face assessment” would be needed far less often.
He even suggested that this could mean that so few face-to-face assessments were necessary that there would no longer be any need for permanent assessment centres “because the few that need that could very well be done through home visits or a suitable independent location”.
He said DWP had estimated that it might carry out 250,000 fewer PIP reassessments a year, for example for those claimants who are already receiving the highest level of support and have a degenerative condition and where it is “in no-one’s interest to waste time assessing somebody”.
He said the government’s consultation on its disability benefits green paper was “looking at how we can identify those groups”.
16 September 2021
Autistic campaigners to protest over study that sparked ‘eugenics’ fears
Autistic campaigners are to protest outside a University of Cambridge autism research centre over a £3 million study they fear could be used to find a cure for autism, or even to attempt to eradicate it altogether through pre-natal screening.
Their campaigning efforts have already persuaded the researchers to pause work on the project, which was aiming to collect DNA samples from 10,000 autistic people across the UK.
The Spectrum 10K project would be the largest study of autism in the UK, and the researchers behind it say they want to examine how biological and environmental factors impact on the wellbeing of autistic people.
They say the project will “not look for a cure for autism and does not aim to eradicate autism”.
But campaigners say there are “enormous” concerns about the research and are warning autistic people not to take part.
The study is led by researchers at the Autism Research Centre (ARC) at the University of Cambridge, the Wellcome Sanger Institute, based near Cambridge, and the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA).
But last month’s high-profile launch, which included endorsements from celebrities such as autistic naturalist and television presenter Chris Packham, led to a significant backlash and sparked a new autistic-led campaign, Boycott Spectrum 10K.
This led to the researchers announcing a pause in recruitment of autistic people onto the study.
Members of Boycott Spectrum 10K say they are “gravely concerned” about the study, particularly over how DNA data from the research could be used, and the lack of safeguards over future use of the data by other researchers.
Despite the research team insisting that any use of the data must align with its own aims – that it will not be harmful, and will not be used to develop a cure for autism or for the purposes of eugenics – the Boycott Spectrum 10K campaign is still concerned.
It says there are “genuine and well publicised fears amongst the Autistic community around eugenics-based science” and the development of technology that would allow parents to abort autistic foetuses after pre-natal screening.
The campaign has also raised concerns about the lack of co-production in designing the research and with some of the lead researchers involved in the project.
They say that Professor Sir Simon Baron-Cohen, ARC’s director, has previously been closely associated with “debunked” theories that have led to “inaccurate and damaging stereotypes” about autistic people, such as their lack of empathy and the claim that most autistic people are male.
He strongly disputes these claims about his work.
They also point to the long-term involvement of another of the lead researchers, Daniel Geschwind, a professor of human genetics, neurology and psychiatry at UCLA, with attempts to find treatments for autism, and with organisations such as Cure Autism Now (CAN) and Autism Speaks (which later merged).
Autism Speaks has been criticised by disabled people for its exploitative, damaging and offensive fundraising tactics and campaign goals, which campaigners say are “abhorred” by many autistic people.
The campaign says it is “astounded” that the Spectrum 10K research received funding and ethical approval.
Boycott Spectrum 10K and the autistic-led group Autistic Inclusive Meets (AIM) are now planning a protest outside ARC on 29 October.
Emma Dalmayne, AIM’s chief executive, said she felt the pause in the study was “a token gesture”.
She said: “They still have not given any clarification of proposed safeguarding over this DNA.”
She said she feared the DNA that was collected would not be protected and would be “open for any researcher to use in any way they wish”.
And she said there were concerns that those taking part may not have been aware of those fears and the issue of consent.
She added: “When you think of the fact the funding they have put into this could have been better used to support autistic people, into educational settings for instance, it’s truly heart-breaking.”
Tanya Adkin, an autistic advocate and part of the Boycott Spectrum 10K team, said the study had “done immense damage to the well-being of the autistic community that it claims to want to help”.
She said the decision to pause the study was “positive” but “does not go far enough”.
She said: “S10K has been funded for the sole purpose of collecting autistic people’s DNA.
“Simply put, without the DNA, there is no study, which means that if S10K were to change the study in any meaningful way in line with the majority of the autistic community’s wishes, it would be an entirely new study that would need to be completely restarted and funding re-applied for.”
She added: “This study serves as a stark reminder that regardless of how ‘inclusive’ we claim to be as a society, different is considered less.”
Bristol Reclaiming Independent Living (BRIL) has added its name to those supporting the Boycott Spectrum 10K statement.
A BRIL spokesperson said: “Both autistic and non-autistic members of BRIL support the campaign, and share concerns with the autistic campaigners, scientists, academics and many others leading this.
“We don’t see how a research project that admits its aims are unclear can be ethical – without this, no-one can give informed consent.
“There is over £3 million being spent on research no-one seems to want or need, at a time when autistic people are facing discrimination and inequality, as the Bubb report in Bristol showed.
“The lack of focus on rights, unclear information about who DNA data will be shared with, and the real intentions of those involved in this research are deeply concerning.”
An autistic BRIL member added: “It is imperative we reject eugenics and attempts to hinder us autistics.
“This Spectrum 10K, ‘at best’, is a dodgy mine for collecting genetic data that may end up in the hands of those that strive to ‘correct’ us.
“It ought to be a time to gather ourselves against ‘projects’ like this.
“Nothing about us without us: the money could have been used to support us, to make things more accessible for us. Ours is a voice that must and will be a roar.”
In a statement announcing the “pause” in the research, Baron-Cohen said it was clear they needed “much wider consultation, that we were not clear enough about the aims of the study, and that aspects of our study need further discussion”.
He said the researchers “apologise unreservedly” for any distress they had caused.
Baron-Cohen told DNS this morning (Thursday): “We understand why autistic people have fears about how genetics might be used towards eugenics in relation to autism research, and I wrote about this back in 2018.
“However, we have also made clear that Spectrum 10K is anti-eugenics, anti-a cure for autism, anti-prevention of autism, anti-developing a prenatal test for autism, and that the aims of Spectrum 10K are to deepen our understanding of the causes of autism (genetic and non-genetic factors) and why these increase the likelihood of co-occurring chronic health conditions.”
On the concerns about the data, he said: “We will discuss how to improve safeguarding of their DNA during the consultation process, but one suggestion is that we establish a data-sharing committee that includes autistic people and their families that will evaluate every request for data sharing.
“To be clear, the DNA itself would not be shared, only the data generated by it, but the data sharing committee would then be able to limit who it is shared with, and in particular only scientists whose values are aligned with those of Spectrum 10K.
“This would be a legally binding contractual agreement.”
On co-production, he said: “There was consultation with the autism community from the outset, via our advisory panel.
“This included both autistic adults and parents of autistic children.
“Given the concerns raised, including new ones since the launch, we now want to pause the study to listen to a wider and deeper consultation with the autism community.”
Baron-Cohen strongly disputes the claims made about his work, and says he does not think autistic people lack empathy, that he has never said that it is largely males who are autistic, and that he “has written on the sex ratio in autism which was formerly 4:1 (m:f) and is now about 3:1 or 2:1, thanks to better diagnosis of females”, while the clinic he opened in 1997 pioneered the diagnosis of Asperger Syndrome in women.
He said that Prof Geschwind was “very clear that he is anti-cure of autism and his values are aligned with the values of Spectrum 10K (anti-eugenics, anti-cure of autism, anti-a prenatal test for autism)” and never received funding from CAN.
16 September 2021
Government reveals National Disability Strategy offers just 28p per person in new funds
The government has pledged less than £4 million in new funding to accompany its new National Disability Strategy, figures produced through a freedom of information request have revealed.
The figures, released by the government’s Disability Unit, show that of the £1.6 billion the prime minister said would support the reforms, only £3.95 million had not previously been announced.
This is even less than previously estimated by Disability News Service (DNS), and it means that the government is offering just 28p of new funding for every disabled person in the UK.
In his introduction to the strategy, Boris Johnson described it as “the most far-reaching endeavour in this area for a generation or more”, and said it was the “down payment” on the government’s pledge to “to build back better and fairer, for all our disabled people”.
But the Disability Unit, part of Johnson’s Cabinet Office, has now admitted there is almost no new money attached to this pledge.
In fact, nearly all the £1.6 billion was announced at last November’s spending review, or even earlier.
Only four small parcels of new funding have been announced, totalling a maximum of just £3.95 million.
There is up to £1 million to improve the accessibility of seaports on the Isle of Wight and the Isles of Scilly; £1.5 million to help the smallest bus companies provide audio-visual information on their services; an extra £450,000 for new Changing Places toilets across the transport network; and up to £1 million to develop a new Centre for Assistive and Accessible Technology.
When divided among the 14.1 million disabled people the strategy says there are in the UK, this total of £3.95 million amounts to just 28p per person.
Fazilet Hadi, head of policy for Disability Rights UK, said: “This analysis casts an even bleaker light on the government’s disability strategy and its commitment to tackling the inequalities faced by disabled people.
“Almost all of the £1.6 billion was money already in the system.”
She said this mirrored last week’s announcement on increased health and social care spending, which “again left disabled people at the back of the spending queue”, with “no recognition of the true scale of the hole in social care budgets and no end to the lack of care, inadequate care and increased charges faced by disabled people”.
When DNS asked how the minister for disabled people could justify such a small amount of new funding on the disability strategy, a Disability Unit spokesperson declined to comment.
She also declined to explain how this could be described as a “down payment” on the prime minister’s promise to “build back better and fairer, for all our disabled people”.
But Tomlinson was asked about the DNS figures when he appeared before the work and pensions select committee yesterday (Wednesday).
He did not deny the figures, but he said that focusing on new funding “misses the point of the National Disability Strategy because this is about removing barriers within society”.
And he said there were “many, many, many examples” in the strategy of the government identifying “common sense things” that can be done to remove barriers that are “preventing people going about their everyday lives”.
He pointed to a success where campaigning by the mother of a disabled child had led to some councils agreeing to add at least one piece of inclusive play equipment when they refurbish playgrounds or build new ones, and to a possible change in government planning rules.
Tomlinson said a “huge amount” of the Disability Unit’s work in the next few weeks would be to provide evidence for individual government departments that would “strengthen the likelihood” of disability-focused funding bids being successful in this autumn’s spending review.
He added: “Please do not lose sight of the fact that the majority of the things we need to do across society is about common sense, left and right hand joining up together, that don’t have an arbitrary Treasury cost, but matter incredibly to people who are having to deal with that in their everyday lives.”
16 September 2021
Opponents of assisted suicide must ‘shout louder’, after doctors vote for neutrality
Disabled campaigners have called on those who oppose the legalisation of assisted suicide to “shout louder” about their opposition, after doctors voted by a tiny margin to move to a position of neutrality on the issue.
Representatives of doctors and medical students voted on Tuesday by just 49 per cent to 48 per cent to move away from the previous position of opposition to a change in the law, which had been held by the British Medical Association (BMA) since 2006.
The vote to move to a neutral stance came as the House of Lords prepares to debate a private members’ bill that would legalise assisted suicide – proposed by the crossbench peer Baroness Meacher – on 22 October.
Not Dead Yet UK (NDY UK), the leading organisation of disabled people campaigning against legalisation, said it was disappointed that BMA had moved to a position of neutrality “by the tiniest of margins”, and it warned that legalisation had “dangerous legal, medical and social implications for disabled people”.
The crossbench disabled peer Baroness [Jane] Campbell, NDY UK’s founder, told Disability News Service: “Disabled people want to trust our doctors to do everything in their power to help us live a good, pain free, dignified life until we die, without the burden of wondering if they think it would be both in their best interests and our best interests if we accepted the option of assisted dying.
“The pandemic has already knocked our confidence in the notion of health equalities and this BMA vote doesn’t help.”
She said: “We need to move away from narrow votes and division – to take a pause and reflect, before changing our laws around end-of-life care.
“I believe this, especially considering what disabled people with progressive and other complex health conditions suffered throughout the pandemic, when it became obvious that many were not treated as equal citizens, with equal access to healthcare life-saving treatments.
“Thousands of disabled people like me don’t want the law to change at this time.
“That’s why we set up the Not Dead Yet UK network, to amplify our voice in the ever-worrying populist debate.”
She added: “I call upon every disabled person, medical practitioner and others who are worried about the potential for the legislation to change to allow physician assisted suicide to be practiced in the UK, to speak out.
“The NDY UK network is growing every week, we all need to shout louder that our lives have value from beginning to end.”
And she called for new allies to “join us in our efforts to support disabled people to survive and thrive, because our lives are in your hands”.
Baroness Meacher, a former social worker, is chair of the campaigning organisation Dignity in Dying, formerly known as the Voluntary Euthanasia Society.
She says her bill would “enable terminally ill, mentally competent people whose suffering is beyond the reach of palliative care to die well and on their own terms” and would “provide invaluable comfort and control to countless more who may never avail themselves of this option but would be comforted by the simple fact of its existence”.
But NDY UK believes that a change in the law would be “a threat to disabled people’s lives, independence and peace of mind”.
16 September 2021
DWP and contractor admit delays with mail handling
Disabled benefit claimants have been facing significant delays with their claims because of pandemic-related issues at Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) mail-handling sites run by one of its contractors, DWP has admitted.
Last month, DWP blamed Royal Mail for any delays and insisted that all documents being sent in by claimants as evidence were being scanned onto the IT system within 24 hours of being received from Royal Mail.
This came despite one disabled woman, who was trying to discover what had happened to her personal independence payment review form, being told by a DWP adviser that claimants’ documents were taking between four and six weeks to be scanned onto the system.
DWP denied this week that the delays were ever as long as four weeks.
But DWP has admitted, in a freedom of information response, that there were problems from 21 July onwards “due to resourcing issues” within its mail opening unit that were “caused by a surge in Covid isolations generated by the NHS App”.
One benefits advice company, Benefit Answers, said that one of its staff was told by a DWP PIP adviser last month of “severe delays with scanning onto the system”.
A Benefit Answers spokesperson said some DWP call handlers were blaming Royal Mail for delays, while others were admitting they were due to COVID problems at DWP’s mail handling sites, which meant it was sometimes taking weeks for evidence to be uploaded onto the DWP system.
DWP’s mail handling unit is run by EQUANS, part of the French multinational utility company ENGIE, at two sites in the West Midlands.
Disability News Service has heard from a DWP staff member who received a DWP-wide memo only last week which warned there had still been a backlog of nearly 26,000 cases on 26 August.
The memo warned DWP staff that, following an earlier update issued on 28 July, the mail opening unit was “still experiencing delays due to resourcing issues” and was “currently working through a recovery plan to deal with the backlog”.
But the memo said that the oldest post being scanned was only three days behind schedule.
DWP claimed in the freedom of information response, dated 8 September, that a recovery plan had been put in place and the mail handling unit was now “fully up to date”.
An EQUANS spokesperson also said the backlog had now been cleared.
She said: “We experienced higher than expected absences due to track and trace isolations across a six-week period from the end of July which resulted in some short delays processing mail.
“Working closely with DWP we agreed a contractual recovery plan.
“The situation is now fully resolved and mail is being processed within 24 hours as per the agreed timescales.”
A DWP spokesperson said: “At no time was there ever a delay of four to six weeks in the department’s mail opening unit and it is meeting contractual obligations to have all DWP post scanned within 24 hours.”
16 September 2021
Disabled campaigners and allies protest at ‘discriminatory’ taxi rank plans
Disabled campaigners and allies protested this week against “discriminatory” plans to move a taxi rank further away from platforms at Leeds railway station.
Hundreds of people have raised concerns about the plans, which even led to Leeds City Council paying a trio of barristers to defeat two legal claims of discrimination brought by some of its own access advisers.
Members of the Access Use Ability Group (AUAG) – which advises the council on access issues – are at the centre of the protests, as are members of the council’s Disability Hub.
AUAG’s members include representatives from organisations such as the local branch of National Federation of the Blind of the UK and the Access Committee for Leeds.
They have linked up with the union Unite, many of whose members are taxi-drivers affected by the plans.
The protest saw disabled campaigners lobbying councillors at Leeds Civic Hall, before they and union activists made speeches attacking the proposals, which are due to be introduced in 2023.
Tim McSharry, an AUAG spokesperson, who spoke at the protest and was involved in bringing the legal action, said: “No local authority should spend public money on denying access to older and disabled people in any public development.
“We have tried for mediation, but the council have refused. The engagement has been an absolute shambles.
“It’s just too much of a case of discrimination. We can’t just let it go.
“There is no case we have come across in the past 20 years that has been such an open case of discrimination.
“We really feel there is a quick and easy solution. The existing rank needs one minor adjustment, which is easily achieved.”
He said AUAG had previously had a “very productive, constructive partnership” with the council until the taxi rank plans emerged at the start of last year.
AUAG was so concerned that it attempted to take action in Leeds County Court but its efforts were thrown out after the council employed three barristers to successfully argue that the case was too complicated to be dealt with in the small claims court.
Unite says the current taxi rank is 45 metres from the station entrance, while the proposed replacement is down steep steps or via a lift, which, if not working, would mean a 165-metre journey to reach the new rank.
In evidence submitted last year to the council by AUAG and local disabled-led groups, one guide dog-user said: “When I found out that the Leeds Station rank was to be moved away from its easy access only seconds away from the exit, I was shocked, but when I was told the rank was moving onto a different road level and would need a lift, I cried, because travelling is such a stressful task and rather than designers making it easy, they’ve just made it impossible.”
She added: “Whoever thought of this in Leeds City Council did not think of my needs as an older disabled blind person and have put massive barriers in the way of my participation and right to travel independently.”
Unite regional officer Darren Rushworth said the plans would put “intolerable obstacles” in the way of disabled and older people, who will find the new rank nearly four times as far away from the platforms.
He said: “This is supposedly happening to make passenger movements easier and to cope with modelled increases in passenger numbers, but the Office of Rail and Road has already shown that the throughput is down by 12 per cent for Leeds station in 2020 and that it did not anticipate the same levels of passenger movements in future with people’s changing habits to work and travel.
“Unite and a wide range of disability organisations want the status quo to continue and for people actually running this development to listen rather than dismissing our legitimate arguments, most of which have been outlined to the local council many times.”
A spokesperson for Leeds City Council (LCC) said: “The proposals are to make New Station Street pedestrian-friendly, safer and traffic-free.
“As part of this, LCC, West Yorkshire Combined Authority and Network Rail developed proposals and LCC gained planning permission to relocate the taxi-rank to Bishopgate Street.
“The proposed move means that people will no longer have to cross a busy road to access the taxi rank, and with the number of people using Leeds Station expected to rise significantly over the coming years it will also make it easier for people to travel to and from the station using what is already a very busy street.
“Throughout this we’ve worked with representatives from disabled access groups across the city to discuss the proposals and helped shape the design to address their needs.
“This includes Network Rail’s built environment accessibility panel, an independent group of experts who were in support of the proposals to relocate the taxi rank to Bishopgate.
“At the request of Leeds City Council’s access and useability group (AUAG), we explored alternative options for the location of the taxi rank but unfortunately these were not feasible.
“We will continue to consider any proposals or suggestions to enhance the design further, as we finalise our scheme.”
The council confirmed that the claims brought against the council for disability discrimination were dismissed at Leeds County Court in March 2021.
16 September 2021
Johnson’s social care ‘fix’ is ‘disappointing… regressive… and insulting’
Disabled campaigners have delivered a withering response to the government’s long-awaited plan to “fix social care” in England.
The proposals were announced on Tuesday by the prime minister, Boris Johnson, who claimed they would “fix social care” and the NHS treatment backlogs caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The first reading of a bill to introduce the levy was approved yesterday (Wednesday) by MPs.
But there was almost universal criticism across the disabled people’s movement of the inadequate level of funding, the failure to address the needs of working-age disabled people, the lack of detail, and the disproportionate impact of the plans on lower-income workers.
Where Johnson called his plans “responsible, fair, and necessary”, disabled people’s organisations and grassroots groups described them as “disappointing”, “regressive” and even “insulting”.
The plans focus on the introduction of a new 1.25 per cent national insurance levy and a similar rise in dividend tax rates, ringfenced for health and social care, but with most of the new funding put aside for the NHS, at least for the first three years.
The key social care measure – to be followed by a health and social care white paper later this year – is the introduction of a new cap of £86,000 on lifetime personal care costs and a more generous support system for those with significant assets, particularly older people who own their own homes.
But ministers have not yet been clear exactly what they mean by “personal care” (see separate story).
The initial responses to the announcement from disabled people and disabled people’s organisations were overwhelmingly negative and dismissive.
Professor Peter Beresford, co-chair of the disabled people’s and service-user network Shaping Our Lives, said the prime minister’s proposals “treat older and disabled people with contempt and they further signal his government’s primary commitment to the well off and the powerful”.
He said the national insurance rise was a “broad brush attack on lower income tax-payers”, while there was nothing to address social care employment, the “poor law principles of means and needs testing” that lie at the heart of the current social care system, or local variations in provision.
And he said there was “not even a nod in the direction” of the proposals put forward by the disabled people’s movement for a free, universal system of independent living that would be funded by progressive taxation, through a National Independent Living Support Service (NILSS).
Inclusion London was just as dismissive of the government’s proposals, and said it was “extremely disappointed” with the plans.
Svetlana Kotova, Inclusion London’s director of campaigns and justice, said the current system excludes thousands of people with support needs, and condemns many of those who do receive support “to a life of isolation” because they are trapped at home with care visits that only last 15 minutes, which “barely ensures basic survival”.
She said: “The existing structure forces disabled people, already on means-tested benefits, to pay unjust charges and makes them even poorer.
“At the same time, it pays care workers a pittance and heavily relies on unpaid carers.”
She said the increase in national insurance was “not a progressive move” and would “not fix a broken system”.
She added: “The cap won’t fix our broken care system – it won’t provide social care for many hundreds of thousands of people currently excluded from support.
“It won’t improve the quality or amount of support people currently get, which is woeful.
“It won’t stop the scandal of charging for social care that is robbing disabled people of essential disability benefits income and pushes them into extreme poverty, and it won’t improve wages or conditions of care workers or address the recruitment and vacancy crisis.
“Social care must be free at the point of need, funded through progressive taxation.
“The government needs to provide an urgent injection of funding to stabilise the system and start to actively work with disabled people to develop a social care service fit for our needs and the years to come.”
Disability Rights UK (DR UK) said the plans were “too little, too late”.
Fazilet Hadi, DR UK’s head of policy, said: “The proposed measures do not kick in for another two years.
“They may not be enough to cover care costs, they may still rely on those with minimal assets having to contribute to care costs, and they do not cover the vastly greater accommodation or food costs, known as hotel costs, for disabled people in residential care.
“We also believe it is the wrong mechanism to use national insurance contributions instead of income tax.”
The Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance dismissed the government’s proposals as a “tax without a plan”.
Mark Harrison, a member of ROFA’s steering group, said it was “a con to get working people to disproportionately bail out the private sector, who deliver inadequate social care services to disabled people for profit”.
He said Johnson’s plan was “focussed on preventing older Tory voters in the south of England from ‘losing their homes’ and will do nothing to resolve the crisis facing working-age disabled people”.
He said ROFA was instead focused on developing and implementing its NILSS plans, which would allow the government to meet its duties under article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
And he called on Labour leader Keir Starmer to “seriously engage with ROFA members to coproduce a legal right to independent living backed by a transformational system”, rather than pushing Labour’s “out of date, 20th century solutions”.
The National Survivor User Network (NSUN) described the “inadequate” level of funding as “deeply disappointing” and criticised the government’s “regressive” solution of a levy on national insurance contributions, which it said was “not the answer to the social care crisis”.
The disabled author and Guardian columnist Frances Ryan spoke out about the plans as the BBC released Hen Night, a short drama inspired by her book Crippled, in which a young disabled teacher, Jessica, fights back after her social care is cut during the pandemic.
Ryan said: “Boris Johnson’s social care plan was effectively a plan without a plan.
“Nothing for working age disabled people drowning in care bills and unmet needs. Nothing for underpaid care staff. Nothing for family carers.
“There are hundreds of thousands of real life Jessicas out there and few of them will be helped by the government’s announcements.”
The grassroots disabled people’s organisation Bristol Reclaiming Independent Living (BRIL) said the amount of funding provided for social care was “both meaningless and insulting”.
BRIL said the only winners from the government’s announcement would be “the wealthy, and the owners of the private care companies”.
A BRIL spokesperson said the decision to unfreeze the minimum income guarantee [frozen by the government since 2015] for those paying care charges next year was “welcome, and no doubt due to the efforts of disabled activists drawing attention to this scandal”.
But he said it was “too little, too late” and “no solace for the thousands of disabled people who have been forced into debt, poverty and left without care and support for years”, while the failure to provide anything concrete on social care support for mental health service-users was “frankly unforgivable”.
Disabled People Against Cuts was another to criticise the use of national insurance to fund the proposals, and it described the minimum income guarantee offering as “a crumb rather than a slice of bread”.
Donald O’Neal, whose exposé of England’s social care system, The Lack of Care Act 2014, was published in July, said the government’s plan “says little about people of working age who live in the community” and nothing about centres for independent living and other disabled people’s organisations, “which have shown that they are best at supporting disabled people who live independently”.
O’Neal, a social care service-user for more than 35 years, said the government’s plan failed to address disabled people’s needs “beyond the basics”, such as washing, dressing and getting out of bed.
And he said the proposals read instead “like a plan that was created without disabled people around the table”.
O’Neal also said he did not believe the proposal to impose a levy on national insurance was a fair way to raise extra funds, because of the burden it imposed on low-income workers, and that he feared it would not raise enough funds to address the social care crisis.
The Disability Union was also critical of the funding solution, which it said “predominantly benefits the wealthy while being predominantly paid for by the poorest”.
9 September 2021
Government’s silence over gaping holes in plans to ‘fix social care’
The government has refused to explain why there are gaping holes in its long-awaited plans to “fix social care”, and it has even been unable to define what it means by “personal care”.
The proposals were announced on Tuesday by the prime minister, who claimed his plans would fix both social care and the NHS treatment backlogs caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
But the paper published by Boris Johnson – Build Back Better – offers just eight pages on the government’s new plan for adult social care in England, despite the prime minister announcing more than two years ago on the steps of Downing Street that his government would “fix the crisis in social care once and for all with a clear plan we have prepared”.
The plans focus on raising revenue through a new 1.25 per cent national insurance levy and a rise in dividend tax rates, ringfenced for health and social care, but with most of the new £12 billion-a-year funding apparently put aside for the NHS, at least for the first three years.
A key aspect of the social care plan is to introduce a new lifetime limit of £86,000 on the amount an individual will have to pay for their “personal care”, starting from October 2023.
The government paper refers repeatedly to limiting lifetime “eligible personal care” costs, but it is not clear whether this only includes support with washing, dressing and getting out of bed.
If it does, disabled people who also pay towards council-funded help with housework, laundry and shopping, and support to enjoy a social life and to stay engaged in the community, will find those payments not included in the £86,000 ceiling.
But when Disability News Service asked the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to explain what the prime minister meant by “personal care”, it had failed to do so by noon today (Thursday).
There are other gaping holes in the plans.
There is no mention in the proposals of the right to live independently under article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Johnson’s failure to discuss a legal right to independent living comes despite a call only four months ago by the Equality and Human Rights Commission for the government to introduce such a right.
The social care focus of the paper is instead on providing a more generous support system for service-users with significant assets, particularly older people.
The three case studies examining the financial impact of the plans on those needing social care all focus on service-users who are over the age of retirement.
There is no mention in the paper of working-age recipients of social care, other than when defining adult social care in the fifth paragraph of the document.
And there is almost no mention of the impact of the government’s plans on the thousands of disabled people who must currently pay significant care charges out of their monthly income, due to means-testing.
The only brief reference to means-testing is in the decision to unfreeze the minimum income guarantee for those who pay for their care, which has been frozen by the government since 2015 and will now rise again, but only by the rate of inflation, from next April.
DHSC declined to answer several questions about the proposals from Disability News Service.
The department declined to explain why there was no mention of the need for a right to independent living; why there was no mention of working-age disabled people in the three case studies; how it defines personal care; why there was almost no mention of working-age care recipients; why there was almost no discussion of the impact on people’s income, rather than their savings; and why the white paper was still not ready to be published, two years after the prime minister said he had a plan ready to go.
Instead, a DHSC spokesperson said in a statement: “This week’s announcement means that no one receiving long-term disability care and support – whether that care starts at 17 or 70 – will any longer face the catastrophic, unlimited costs they did before.
“An additional £5.4 billion is being invested in social care over the next three years, which includes an extension of the established disabled facilities grant to enable more people with disabilities to live independently in their own homes.
“We are determined to ensure the quality of care for disabled people who need it is consistently high and will work closely with disability groups as part of our work to develop the next steps in this ambitious reform programme.”
9 September 2021
Ground-breaking production will create a high-tech museum of DWP’s victims
The stories of 10 disabled people whose deaths have been linked publicly to the failings of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) are to be told in a ground-breaking digital production that explores the devastating human impact of austerity.
Museum of Austerity uses the verbal testimony of family members and state-of-the-art technology to recreate the circumstances that led to the deaths of 10 disabled benefit claimants in the post-2010 austerity decade.
The mixed reality production uses recorded interviews with the family members and ground-breaking “volumetric capture” techniques that have produced high-quality, three-dimensional images.
Museum of Austerity will eventually include several rooms that each demonstrate a different element of the personal and public impact of austerity.
The first room focuses on the personal stories of disabled benefit claimants, whose deaths have all previously been linked by Disability News Service (DNS) to flaws in DWP’s assessments, sanctions and safeguarding systems.
A work-in-progress version of this room will be shown publicly for the first time at next month’s BFI London Film Festival*.
It has been produced by the English Touring Theatre and the National Theatre’s Immersive Storytelling Studio, and devised and directed by critically-acclaimed theatre director Sacha Wares.
All of the relatives whose voices will be heard have previously spoken to DNS, including Mo Ahmed, the brother of Sophie (Faiza) Ahmed, whose suicide in 2014 exposed flaws in DWP’s safeguarding system; and Gill Thompson, whose brother David Clapson died after being left destitute when his benefits were sanctioned.
Other deaths covered by the exhibition include those of Mark Wood, Moira Drury, Diane Hullah and James Oliver.
It also includes testimony from Imogen Day, Joy Dove and Alison Turner, all three of whom have previously spoken to DNS to highlight DWP’s failings following the deaths of their relatives Philippa Day, Jodey Whiting and Errol Graham.
Dove said: “I need the story told for Jodey’s sake.
“Jodey’s death changed our lives forever from day one and we as a family have suffered continuing heartache.
“It has broken me. All that keeps me going is to get justice for Jodey and the other families.
“I want these stories out there. From day one of being told about this theatre project it has given me hope for justice and a hope that we can change the system.”
The Museum of Austerity team includes experienced and emerging disabled artists, including leading composer Adrian Lee – who has produced an original score in memory of those who have died – producer Meg Fozzard, assistant director Hana Pascal Keegan, and co-editor and specialist advisor John Pring**.
*Tickets are on sale from 20 September, with the exhibition open from 6 to 17 October, 11am to 9pm, at 26 Leake Street
**Eight of the 10 interviews were carried out by Pring, editor of Disability News Service, who has been working on the project for more than a year
***Museum of Austerity is supported by CreativeXR, a programme developed by Digital Catapult and Arts Council England. It is a Genesis Kickstart Fund project, supported by the Genesis Foundation; and is supported using public funding from Arts Council England, and co-commissioned by BFI London Film Festival – LFF Expanded
9 September 2021
Mobile video screen will tell delegates the ‘appalling’ truth about their Tory government
Anti-cuts activists are to hire a mobile video screen that will give disabled people the chance to tell members of the Conservative party attending their annual conference what they think of the government’s “appalling” breaches of their rights.
Manchester Disabled People Against Cuts (MDPAC) is calling on disabled people from across the country to record short video messages to the government that can be played on the mobile screen during next month’s conference in Manchester.
MDPAC hopes the action will allow disabled people who need to continue to shield from COVID-19 to express their feelings about the government’s repeated failure to protect their rights – rather than having to attend an in-person protest in Manchester – and allow those messages to be relayed to some of the Conservative delegates attending the conference.
MDPAC has hired a van with a video screen to spend several hours skirting the conference venue in the centre of Manchester on 4 October, due to take place on the day the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, delivers his set-piece conference speech.
MDPAC is now calling on disabled people to record their messages – ideally of one or two minutes – and upload them to MDPAC’s Dropbox account.
There will also be an opportunity to record messages during a Zoom meeting that will be held later this month.
Anyone who would like to contribute financially to hiring the equipment can visit a Crowdfunder page, which is already more than halfway to its £1,000 target.
An MDPAC spokesperson said: “There’s a lot of security so there is little we can do to impact on [delegates inside the conference].
“The one thing we can do is let them know that what the government is doing is not good for disabled people.
“They must never get the idea that everything is fine.
“The disability strategy and the [disability benefits] green paper have little announcements written throughout them about how great they are doing, which is a complete rejection of reality – there is no mention of the UN [which said that cuts to support for disabled people had caused “a human catastrophe”], of the welfare deaths, of the absolute collapse of social care.
“We are asking people what they want to tell the Conservative government about being a disabled person in 2021, because we don’t think they listen to disabled people.
“Wherever you are, whatever your situation, if you can find a way to get yourself on video, that would be great.”
He added: “We don’t want charities speaking for us or politicians, we will speak for ourselves, or sign for ourselves or caption for ourselves. It’s about our message.”
Tory conferences, held every two years in Manchester since the coalition came to power in 2010, have frequently been associated with DPAC protests.
Four years ago, activists from DPAC and the Disabled People’s Direct Action Network (DAN) held up Manchester city centre tram services for about 90 minutes by blocking tram lines outside the conference.
9 September 2021
Labour shadow ministers for equality and disability stay silent over party discrimination
Labour’s shadow ministers for disability and equalities have refused to comment on the party’s continuing failure to address the discrimination faced by its own disabled members.
Both Vicky Foxcroft, the shadow minister for disabled people, and Marsha de Cordova, the shadow secretary of state for women and equalities, both stayed silent this week on Labour’s ongoing refusal to address the barriers faced by disabled party members.
Their silence came after Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, failed to explain what had happened to the promise she made 18 months ago to address the issue.
Rayner called in March 2020 for Labour to do more to ensure that “disabled people’s voices are heard in politics”, and she said that the party needed “to start by looking at ourselves”.
She spoke out as part of her successful campaign to secure the deputy leadership, saying: “We need to ensure that disabled people have full access, to ensure that there are no barriers for anyone.
“I want to start by taking an honest look at what we are doing and whether we are living up to our principles.”
Rayner wrote a report in late March 2020, which included more than 20 actions that the party should carry out so it could become “the most accessible it has ever been”.
These included ending the practice of holding constituency Labour party (CLP) meetings in inaccessible venues; providing training for CLP chairs on how to deal with discrimination; all CLP disability officers to themselves be disabled people; the appointment of a national disability officer with an allocated budget; and the party to provide resources to help disabled members with the disability-related costs of standing for election.
But Disability News Service (DNS) has been unable to find evidence of any of the actions being implemented after Rayner became deputy leader.
DNS has been reporting for several years on concerns raised by disabled Labour members about the barriers created by the party’s structures, policies and actions.
At the party’s last annual conference before the pandemic, in 2019, senior Labour figures were accused of discrimination and “oppression”, while the previous year a survey of disabled party activists revealed three-quarters of those questioned believed there was disability discrimination at all levels of the party.
Kathy Bole, co-chair of Disability Labour, said this week that there was little evidence of a “true commitment” within the Labour party to addressing the long-standing discrimination.
She said: “Disability Labour has been working with different areas of the Labour Party to improve access within the party.
“However, that being said, we have had little interaction with Angela Rayner or indeed with Keir Starmer about the commitments made to disabled members during their leadership campaigns.
“We have watched as programmes have been launched with little consultation and design in mind for disabled party members.
“Despite trying to remain positive that change will come, we are faced with having a face-to-face conference in Brighton [later this month], despite being told repeatedly we would not have conference there due to the general inaccessibility of the conference venue.”
She said Disability Labour feared that the financial problems facing the party would lead to many of the gains that had been made being lost.
Bole said: “We are still willing to work with the party, but we have seen little to show a true commitment.
“With the finances as they are, it seems inevitable we will not see the level of change which needs to come for disabled members.
“Less Labour Party staff means less support for the kind of change disabled members need.
“I urge the leaders in the party to meet with us to discuss the issues we have from ableist discrimination within the party.”
This week, DNS contacted both Vicky Foxcroft and Marsha de Cordova to ask them what action they and the party had taken to address the long-standing issues of discrimination within Labour.
Neither of them had responded by noon today (Thursday).
9 September 2021
Peers criticise government for ‘objectionable’ Equality Act failure
A cross-party House of Lords committee has criticised the government for its “objectionable” failure to bring into force key anti-discrimination measures that became law more than a decade ago.
The Lords liaison committee said ministers had also failed to use their much-criticised National Disability Strategy to implement “key provisions” from the 2010 Equality Act.
A report, published today (Thursday), says the committee “finds it objectionable that parts of the Equality Act, now over 10 years old, are still not in force”, which it says is “an affront to Parliament”.
Among the areas of the Equality Act that the government has failed to improve or implement over the last decade, according to the committee, are the public sector equality duty; access to taxis and private hire vehicles; and access to sports stadiums.
The report also highlights the continued delay in implementing the provision in the Equality Act that would give tenants the right to force landlords to make reasonable adjustments to the common parts of residential buildings, such as hallways and staircases.
Ministers have repeatedly pledged to implement this provision, but there will now be further delays, with the new disability strategy promising only a consultation rather than immediate implementation.
The Lords liaison committee also calls on the government to make it easier for disabled people to take discrimination claims under the Equality Act by extending the use of a process known as Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (QOCS).
Disabled campaigner Esther Leighton failed last year with a judicial review that aimed to force the government to extend QOCS to Equality Act cases.
The committee said it found the government’s stance on the issue “disappointing” and added: “The Government should be focusing on the impact of the current costs regime on disabled people and the fact that it is preventing disabled persons from accessing justice.”
The report follows up an inquiry by the Lords Equality Act 2010 and disability committee, which concluded in 2016 that the government was failing to protect disabled people from discrimination, and that laws designed to address disability discrimination were “not working in practice”.
An analysis by Disability News Service of the government’s response to that report, which was published later in 2016, suggested that it had accepted in full only about eight of the committee’s 55 recommendations.
Baroness Deech, who chaired the Equality Act 2010 and disability committee, said: “The government has missed a golden opportunity to tackle key issues including ensuring the public sector equality duty delivers results and improved outcomes rather than being a tick-box exercise, ensuring taxis and private hire vehicles are accessible to disabled people and ensuring sports stadiums have appropriate provision for all fans.
“Some of these provisions are already law and are just not being enforced; for the government to ignore them yet again in its national strategy means that it is not acting on what parliament has agreed.
“The government cannot expect disabled people to have confidence in its new strategy when it has consistently failed to enforce existing legislation or act on recommendations to rectify that.”
9 September 2021
Only a tiny proportion of responses to national survey were read, government suggests
Only a tiny proportion of the views expressed by the thousands of disabled people who took part in the government’s national disability survey have been read by a minister or civil servant, a freedom of information response suggests.
The new information has added fresh ammunition for disabled campaigners who believe that the National Disability Strategy – which was “informed” by the survey results and was published in July – has no legitimacy and should be withdrawn.
Most of the questions posed by the UK Disability Survey in January were restricted to multiple choice answers.
But four of them allowed “free text” answers, and the Cabinet Office says it received more than 25,000 answers from disabled people to these four questions.
A freedom of information response from the Cabinet Office now says that all 25,000 of these answers were analysed through so-called “topic modelling”, which the government has described as “a method of machine-assisted reading of text data, used to identify topics from free text responses to open format questions”.
A report on the survey responses says that only 1,200 of the 25,000 responses from disabled people were also analysed by researchers through “manual coding”, and even then, only with the aim of producing themes and sub-themes.
The freedom of information response says there is no written evidence to show how many responses were read in full by a civil servant, a minister or a researcher, with the Cabinet Office telling Disability News Service: “No information is held on the number of responses read in full by a Civil Servant, Research [sic], or Minister.”
The much-criticised survey is already being challenged by four disabled people through a high court judicial review.
Doug Paulley, one of the four taking the legal action, said: “I am unsurprised but dismayed that the government evidently doesn’t care enough about disabled people’s input into their strategy that they didn’t even bother to read most responses.
“The survey was so flawed that the strategy has no legitimacy, should be withdrawn and rewritten with disabled people.”
He said that the failure to read all the responses was not a surprise because the survey was “clearly deeply flawed from the start”.
He said: “The topics chosen were not directed by disabled people, the mechanism of survey was inaccessible to many disabled people and the restricted range of answers meant that the limited free text responses were for many the only way to put down what is really important to them.
“I spent time writing mine carefully; doubtless other disabled people did similarly – unless they were put off responding altogether due to the other issues.”
The Disability Unit declined this week to say how many of the free text responses were read by civil servants and ministers; how the government justified having the vast majority of the free text responses read only by a machine rather than a human being; and what the Disability Unit’s message was to the thousands of disabled people whose responses will not have been read by anyone, but were just “coded” by a machine.
The Disability Unit also refused to say if any of the free text responses were read by a civil servant or a minister.
But a Disability Unit spokesperson said in a statement: “All responses have been rigorously analysed and full details of the methodology for analysing the UK Disability Survey is published on GOV.UK.”
9 September 2021
Labour MP who holds DWP to account defends government appointment
The Labour chair of the committee tasked with holding the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to account has been accused of “total hypocrisy” after accepting a high-profile appointment from the government.
Stephen Timms, who chairs the cross-party Commons work and pensions select committee, has been appointed by the prime minister to an unpaid role as a trade envoy to Liechtenstein and Switzerland, with the aim of “helping businesses find new export and investment opportunities” and promoting UK trade.
Timms has defended himself this week from accusations that he will now find it harder to hold ministers to account.
But Paula Peters, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts, said his decision to accept the position was “absolutely appalling”.
She said: “This is a conflict of interest, as Stephen Timms chairs the DWP select committee and is supposed to be holding the government to account for its horrendous policies that have caused untold distress and harm towards disabled people.”
Peters said that both Switzerland and Liechtenstein had long-standing reputations for tax evasion.
She said: “How can you hold the government to account for its appalling treatment of disabled people at the hands of government policy and DWP assessments and yet represent the Tory government as a trade envoy in tax haven countries?
“This is total hypocrisy and shows Labour hand in glove with government. The rich getting richer while disabled people pay a heavy cost.”
Timms told Disability News Service that the post was “entirely unpaid”.
He said: “The rigour of my scrutiny of government policy on the select committee, and in the chamber of the Commons, will in no way be weakened by the appointment.
“One of my Labour parliamentary colleagues in the Commons has served for some years as the trade envoy to Bangladesh, and it certainly hasn’t affected her capacity to criticise the government.
“I had, of course, to ensure there was no concern in the opposition whips’ office before agreeing to take it on.”
He added: “All of us want UK trade to increase.
“It’s particularly important given the difficulties we face outside the European Union.
“I hope I will be able to make a useful contribution to increasing UK trade with Switzerland and Liechtenstein, not least in financial services, a sector which is an important source of employment to my constituents.”
The Department for International Trade (DIT) refused to comment on the concerns about a conflict of interest.
But a DIT spokesperson said in a statement: “Our new trade envoys will play a key role in delivering our ambitious global trade agenda by boosting opportunities for British businesses in some of the world’s fastest growing markets and promoting vital inward investment.
“Trade envoys are unpaid, voluntary roles chosen on the merits of their relevant skills and experience.
“All trade envoys undergo a robust due diligence process and complete a declaration of interests form before their appointment.”
9 September 2021
DPAC hopes to make some noise as it returns to the streets
Disabled activists are hoping to make some noise when they raise concerns about imminent cuts to universal credit in their first direct action since the start of the pandemic.
Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) is hoping its #AudioRiot protest in central London will help highlight concerns about a series of “devastating” changes to social security.
They are encouraging disabled activists and non-disabled allies to bring drums, whistles, cymbals, bells, klaxons, loudspeakers – as well as their own ear protectors – and anything else that might help to make noise as they protest about the government’s social security policies.
Among their concerns is the government’s decision to scrap – from the end of this month – the temporary £20-a-week uplift to universal credit that was introduced at the start of the pandemic.
The protest, which will gather outside King’s Cross station* at 11.30am on Tuesday 28 September, will also highlight the government’s refusal to offer recipients of so-called legacy benefits – including disabled people receiving employment and support allowance (ESA) – the same £20-a-week increase given to those on universal credit during the pandemic.
Andy Greene, a member of DPAC’s national steering group, said he believed there was a lot of pent-up energy among disabled activists who have not been able to take to the streets for more than 18 months.
He said: “People want an opportunity to come out and have the harm that has been done acknowledged.
“Pre-COVID times there were plenty of people hitting the streets and movements were growing and growing and I would certainly hope that we will give an opportunity for that to flourish.”
He said the government had made decisions during the pandemic that had led to the deaths of countless disabled people and had “got away with murder” because of the months of lockdown.
Disabled people had paid for the government’s decisions with their lives, he said, and there had been very little critical response to that, both from within parliament and outside it.
He added: “They have literally got away with it. History will look back and wonder how.
“There is no accountability. Nobody is holding anybody to account.”
The action will be the first time DPAC has taken to the streets since the start of the pandemic, and it will take COVID-19 protective measures for those activists taking part.
Greene said: “We understand that not everybody will be comfortable going back onto the streets and coming to London for direct action, which is why we will also have online actions, and we are calling for local actions as well.”
On Saturday 25 September, three days before the central London action, DPAC will be calling on members and allies to create an #AudioRiot in their local areas.
And on the day of the London protest, the high court will be hearing a judicial review being brought by two disabled ESA recipients who believe the government breached the European Convention on Human Rights by increasing the standard allowance of universal credit by £20-a-week, but not increasing the rate for 1.9 million ESA recipients by the same amount.
A vigil to support those taking the judicial review will take place outside the Royal Courts of Justice, between 9.15am and 10am on 28 September.
*DPAC has stressed that the action will not be targeting King’s Cross station
9 September 2021
News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com
