Kendall compares DWP deaths to Mid Staffs hospital scandal, as she opens door to new ‘safeguarding duty’

Labour’s new work and pensions secretary has told MPs that she is open to the idea of her department being subject to a legal “safeguarding duty”, a move that could transform its approach to the safety of disabled benefit claimants.

Liz Kendall, who made the comment in her first appearance before the Commons work and pensions committee, compared the countless deaths linked to her new department with the Mid Staffs hospital scandal, in which hundreds of patients died as a result of poor care.

She told the committee’s new chair, Debbie Abrahams, who had asked if she believed such a duty should be imposed on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP): “I am open to the suggestion.

“I don’t just want people to be safe, which is the bare minimum, I want the best possible standard of care and support for people who rely on us.

“I think that being open about problems is the only way you solve them.”

Abrahams had told her that the committee had reopened its inquiry into DWP safeguarding (see separate story), which was originally launched following the deaths of hundreds – and possibly many more – of “vulnerable claimants”.

Kendall told the committee that “when there were problems in the NHS around Mid Staffs hospital, mistakes being made, but not being open about them, learning from mistakes to put into best practice, then a duty of candour was brought in.

“I don’t think laws alone change behaviour. It’s about culture and leadership from the top.

“But they can help… I sometimes think you need to look at both.”

She added: “So, it isn’t a commitment to doing it, but I am open to it, because we want to make sure… all of our policies, procedures, practices, contracts, staff, training… all of that has got to be right.

“And I’m very open to looking at all the possible mechanisms for achieving that. “

Her comments follow the repeated insistence by Conservative predecessors, including both Mel Stride and Therese Coffey, that DWP did not have a duty of care to those claiming benefits.

Coffey said four years ago that such a duty should be left to “the local councils, the social services, the doctors and other people”.

But only this week, Alison Burton, whose father-in-law Errol Graham starved to death after DWP wrongly stopped his benefits when he missed a work capability assessment, said DWP needed to have a legal duty of care to those receiving benefits.

Speaking as the committee reopened its safeguarding inquiry, she told Disability News Service (DNS): “I think if they had one it would go a long way to resolve a lot of the issues.”

After being told of Kendall’s comments, she said this morning (Thursday): “Let’s hope this is the first step forward to making sure the department is accountable for its actions.”

Evidence collected by DNS and others, stretching back more than a decade, has shown how DWP repeatedly ignored recommendations to improve the safety of its disability benefits assessment systems, leading to countless avoidable deaths.

It also shows how DWP hid evidence from independent reviews, and how the department failed to keep track of the actions taken in response to recommendations made by its own secret reviews.

Evidence also demonstrates that the cultural problems within DWP extend far beyond the assessment system, touching all aspects of its dealings with disabled people in the social security system.

The evidence, compiled over the last decade by DNS and other journalists, academics and activists, shows systemic negligence by DWP, a culture of cover-up and denial, and a refusal to accept that the department has a duty of care to those disabled people claiming support through the social security system.

Much of that evidence has been brought together in a detailed timeline, as part of the Deaths by Welfare project headed by Dr China Mills and supported by Healing Justice Ldn, which works with marginalised and oppressed communities.

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press 

14 November 2024

Rail company cuts ticket office hours, just a year after national closure programme was abandoned

A train company has planned partial closures of 14 ticket offices across its network by “stealth”, say campaigners, a year after the rail industry was forced to back down over plans to shut nearly 1,000 of them across England.

Disabled campaigners and allies believe Southeastern’s plans will have a drastic negative impact on disabled passengers and others who need support to use rail services.

There are now fears that other train operating companies across the railway network might be planning similar moves, after they were all forced last year to abandon more extensive cost-cutting plans to completely close many of their ticket offices.

The government said this afternoon that it was now examining Southeastern’s plans “to ensure passengers remain supported”.

Freedom of information responses obtained by the Association of British Commuters (ABC)* – which campaigns for equality and justice in public transport – show that Southeastern is cutting the opening hours of ticket offices at the 14 stations in Kent, East Sussex and south-east London by six or seven hours a day, for at least five days a week, through its secretive Ticket Office Project Change Programme.

Changes at two of the stations have already been introduced, while the other reductions are set to be introduced early next year.

The company has avoided the need for a public consultation by describing the changes as “minor” under section 17 of the guidance that covers ticket office opening hours.

The cuts were originally proposed two years ago, so Southeastern has already secured Department for Transport (DfT) approval from the last government.

It is not yet clear whether other train-operating companies are engaged in similar attempts to reduce ticket office opening hours.

Among the concerns raised last year by disabled passengers who campaigned against the permanent closure of nearly 1,000 ticket offices across the country – which were abandoned 12 months ago – were over the accessibility of ticket vending machines and how a closure of ticket offices would increase anti-social behaviour and crime.

They also raised fears about the availability of hearing loops if ticket offices were closed; the loss of easily accessible “focal points” at stations; reduced access to waiting-rooms and toilets; the difficulty of navigating stations, for example for blind passengers; and discounted tickets that are only available at ticket offices.

Some or all of these concerns will now apply to the new cuts to ticket office opening hours.

A draft equality impact assessment (EIA), carried out by Southeastern, claims the impact of the changes on disabled people will be “minor”, but much of the information in the documents has been redacted.

In the EIA, Southeastern uses a similar defence to the one used by the rail industry when it fought last year’s campaign against the permanent closures, stating: “This change will help our people start to think differently about their roles and prioritise the customer service they are brilliant at giving rather than primarily being an underused sales point.

“This will be a beneficial mindset change for our passengers who will get a dedicated customer service expert to help them with their journeys.”

This suggests the changes will lead to no staffing cuts, while Southeastern said yesterday (Wednesday) that there would be no change to the hours the 14 stations are staffed “so there won’t be any impact on customer assistance”.

But the EIA suggests that Southeastern has already secured reductions through voluntary redundancies, which has only left enough staff “for a morning shift”.

Examples of the cuts to ticket office opening hours are a reduction of more than seven hours a day at Bexleyheath, Monday to Saturday; nearly seven hours fewer at Beckenham Junction, Monday to Saturday; and more than seven hours a day fewer at New Eltham from Monday to Friday, and six hours 40 minutes fewer on Saturdays.

The partial closures appear to come on top of the company’s failure to meet its existing duties on ticket office opening hours.

Only twice across 26 periods in two years has Southeastern met those duties across at least 80 per cent of its stations, ABC has discovered, with an average of just 74 per cent compliance with its duties.

Emily Yates, co-founder of ABC, pointed to the organisation’s 2023 campaign coalition letter, which raised the alarm about schedule 17, and how it could be used to destaff the network.

She said it was “completely absurd that after 680,000 responses to the 2023 ticket office consultation (PDF), this evidence is not being used to take staffing decisions.

“Instead, this operator is taking actions based on questionable decisions taken in 2022, which did not take any account of the impact on accessibility.

“The DfT must act immediately to prevent these ticket office cuts going ahead.

“They also need to enforce ticket office staffing hours, publish compliance figures for all operators, and take overall responsibility for staffing strategy – ensuring that there is always a member of staff present to provide assistance.

“Ultimately, the government needs to end this flawed system of staffing regulation once and for all.

“Currently it is only ticket office staffing that is even regulated, and there is no transparency whatsoever about other staffing numbers.

“We need to see the regulation of all staff, complete transparency about staffing figures of all types, and duties to consult on all changes relating to accessibility.”

Disabled activist Paula Peters, who first alerted ABC to the partial closures, after being contacted by a Southeastern employee, said: “Disabled people across the UK were very much involved in the national campaign by the RMT union and community groups to keep the ticket offices open in 2023.

“There was a huge backlash from the public over the public consultations to close the ticket offices.

“Disabled people wanted the ticket offices kept fully open and needed them kept open.

“That Southeastern are using schedule 17 without a public consultation to restrict ticket office opening hours shows the scant regard they have for disabled passengers’ access needs and safety.”

She added: “As a disabled passenger, I need frequent access to trains to London for hospital appointments.

“These are major changes for disabled people like me who need the access to the ticket offices to make sure I get the best price for my journey but also assist with journey planning and access to the station.

“By restricting ticket office hours, this will be another barrier for me to travel safely and have my needs met.”

A DfT spokesperson said this afternoon: “We recognise the vital role ticket offices play in the journeys of people with disabilities, and we have no plans to close them.

“These ticket office changes were agreed under the previous government.

“The department is now examining Southeastern’s plans to ensure passengers remain supported.”

Southeastern insisted yesterday that it did not conceal the changes, and it claimed they were first publicised by the industry’s Rail Delivery Group in 2022, before the process was paused during last year’s national consultation.

It claimed that the new opening hours were publicised on its website and on station posters last month.

It also claimed that additional platform staff would be in place to mitigate the impact on disabled passengers of the ticket offices not being open.

David Wornham, Southeastern’s passenger services director, said: “In 2022, proposals to adjust hours at 14 of our 141 ticket offices were paused during the national consultation.

“Recently, changes were made at Otford and Deal, which both typically see no more than 10 ticket sales per hour each shift.

“We plan to adjust hours at another 12 ticket offices in 2025.

“Stations will remain staffed, with accessibility and safeguarding assistance provided by platform staff.”

He also said: “Following a national consultation confirming that no ticket offices will close we are recruiting and training around 100 additional ticket office staff this year.

“To date we have recruited 97 of these and this will lead to significantly increased ticket office hours.”

He added: “We are committed to enhancing accessible travel across our network, helping more people every day.

“Our website and posters display staffing and ticket hours for each station, making it easy for customers to find available assistance.

“Passenger assistance, both booked and unbooked, is experiencing strong growth, with an overall customer satisfaction rating of 97 per cent.”

*Visit ABC’s website for more details of its investigation

14 November 2024

Labour and its disability minister appear to be in dispute over assistance dog discrimination at party conference

Labour appears set for a serious disagreement with its own minister for disability, after apparently rejecting his advice about a disabled member who was prevented from attending the party’s annual conference with her assistance dog.

Sir Stephen Timms wrote to the party’s new general secretary on Saturday to raise concerns about the treatment of Anna Morell, a party delegate.

He told Hollie Ridley in the letter that, having taken advice from the Cabinet Office: “It does look to me as if Anna should have been admitted, together with her dog.”

But when Disability News Service checked with the party that it now accepted it had been in the wrong, it instead made it clear – but only in a point “on background”, so it cannot be quoted – that Labour only accepted disabled people with recognised assistance dogs at its annual conference.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has made it clear in guidance – updated in September – that there is no legal requirement for an assistance dog to be trained, that assistance dogs “can also be trained by their owners”, and that the law “does not require the dog to wear a harness or jacket to identify it as an assistance dog”.

It appears, although the party refused to confirm this point this week, that Labour continues to dispute the EHRC guidance.

The incident was the latest example of years of disability discrimination by Labour, which has frequently left the party on the verge of being sued by its own disabled members under the Equality Act.

Morell is actively considering legal action against her own party.

She said in September that she felt like a “third-class citizen” when staff refused to allow her to enter Labour’s conference in Liverpool with her assistance dog Rex.

She was told that the party’s conference policy did not allow service dogs entry without accreditation, registration, or formal training.

Morell, who has an energy-limiting impairment, later raised her concerns from the main stage of the conference in Liverpool, but without Rex, who plays a key health and safety role for her.

Since the conference, she has been in touch about the incident with Sir Stephen, Labour’s minister for social security and disability.

He wrote to Ridley after obtaining a legal briefing from the Cabinet Office.

He said the Cabinet Office had told him there were “no rules or regulations that make it a requirement for people with assistance dogs to have documentation to enter retail outlets, licensed premises or any other premises of businesses or service providers”.

The Cabinet Office told him that the government “fully supports the principle that guide dogs and assistance dogs should always be allowed access, except in the most exceptional circumstances”.

Sir Stephen told Ridley in the letter: “It does look to me as if Anna should have been admitted, together with her dog.

“Will these difficulties be resolved in time for future Party events?”

Morell is still waiting for a copy of the minutes of a meeting with Labour chiefs about her complaint, in which she was supported by Ellen Morrison, who represents disabled members on Labour’s national executive committee, and a representative of Disability Labour, on the afternoon of the prime minister’s speech at the conference in September.

Morell had been denied permission to record the meeting.

She said this week: “I am astonished and disappointed by the radio silence from the party.

“The law is very clear and I cannot understand why the conference organisers cannot accept this, and change things for next year.

“I cannot understand why there appears to be no will to implement such an important law [the Equality Act] which was brought into being by the same party.

“The strapline at conference this year was ‘change begins’. Does it? Please can it begin for disabled people?”

Labour refused to respond to the points made in Sir Stephen’s letter; refused to say if it accepted that it had been unlawful to prevent Morell’s assistance dog joining her at the conference; refused to comment on its failure to provide minutes from the meeting; and refused to promise that Morell and other disabled people in her position would in future be able to attend the conference with their assistance dogs.

Instead, a Labour party spokesperson said in a statement: “We strive to ensure that all our events are accessible to our disabled members by working with organisations that represent disabled people and provide expert services.”

A Cabinet Office spokesperson declined to confirm that Sir Stephen was correct when he suggested that Morell should have been allowed entry with her assistance dog.

She said the Cabinet Office could not comment on the point of law because it related to something that was “part of a political letter”.

But she added: “The government’s general position on disability remains that no one deserves to be held back or treated unfairly because of their disability and that we are determined to tackle barriers and work with disabled people to ensure they have equal access to every opportunity.

“Where individuals are concerned they have been a victim of discrimination, the Equality Advisory and Support Service is there to provide information and advice and it is important that both the government and businesses address the issue to ensure that assistance dog users feel welcome in society.”

14 November 2024

Kendall strongly hints there will be no PIP vouchers, but twice fails to make that promise

Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall has strongly hinted that she will not implement the last government’s proposal to replace disability benefits with vouchers, but she twice failed to make a promise to that effect to MPs.

A public consultation that began in April under the Conservative government included a number of proposals aimed at cutting spending on personal independence payment (PIP), including one possible idea to replace cash PIP payments with vouchers.

The new Labour government has repeatedly refused to say if it supports the ideas in the Conservative consultation or provide any details of its own proposed PIP reforms, which are set to be published in the spring.

But in response to a question from Labour’s Damien Egan, Liz Kendall told the Commons work and pensions committee yesterday (Wednesday): “I was very struck, particularly by the comments people made around shifting support to vouchers and where many organisations said their real concern was that it took away people’s autonomy, particularly when services are so stretched and tight.

“So, I’ve read those very, very carefully.”

She declined to rule out the vouchers idea, but she said Labour’s plans would be based on “getting the decisions right first time, early intervention, genuine support to help people into work, helping people live full, fulfilling and independent lives.

“But this is extremely difficult, and I know people really want more detail, but we won’t do that until we’re absolutely ready and have had the proper discussions with people.”

She was later asked to rule out the vouchers idea by the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, Steve Darling, who told her that a disabled constituent was “worried sick about vouchers being offered up and her not being able to have a richer life”.

Kendall again declined to rule out the idea of vouchers but told him she was “really aware of people’s concerns about that”.

She said that “this issue of empowerment and giving people power and control over their lives is really important because I think it leads to better results, so I understand people’s real concerns about that”.

Asked by Labour’s Amanda Hack about her plans for reforming the work capability assessment (WCA), Kendall repeated the government’s line that it would either be “reformed or replaced alongside a proper plan to support disabled people”.

She highlighted flaws in the WCA system, including delays, too many decisions being overturned, and – in a criticism used by DWP ministers for decades – that there was an unhelpful “binary classification [in the system] between those who are able to work and those who are unable to work”.

She claimed that “the truth is, apart from those with very, very severe disabilities, many people’s health conditions fluctuate, and it depends on the work, the job that they have, the flexibility that might be available, and a number of other issues”.

She said the last government “wrote people off, then blamed them, [so] I am not surprised that people are concerned and worried”.

Kendall again admitted that the government would make the savings promised by the last government, which appears to refer to Conservative plans to cut spending by £2.8 billion in the four years to 2028-29 by tightening the WCA, which would have seen 424,000 disabled people lose their entitlement to extra support of up to £4,900 a year by 2028-29.

She said the government would make these savings by “bringing forward our own proposals” after “genuinely” consulting with “disabled people in the organisations that represent them”.

She added: “I believe disabled people should have the same rights, choices to work, to independent living, as everybody else.

“That is the core that runs through us. So that’s the absolute principle. I cannot give you a more detailed response now, but that is our approach.”

Asked by Egan about the “big spike” in the number of people with mental health conditions claiming out-of-work disability benefits, particularly younger people, Kendall said the UK was “an older, sicker nation” than the other major economies in the G7 group.

She said: “If you look around the country, the places that have the worst life expectancy and lowest healthy life expectancy and the highest economic inactivity are the same places, parts of the country that were written off by the last but one Tory government, and the last one promised to level them up and actually didn’t.”

With young people, she said she believed the increase in mental ill-health was likely to be connected to “the impact of Covid, possibly also built on top of the cost-of-living crisis, anxious, worried parents, anxious, worried children, plus social media, plus less stigma about reporting mental health.

“I wish in life there was one reason that you could give an easy headline for, but, you know, life’s not like that.

“There are complicated things going on with mental health. That’s why we’ve really got to intervene early.”

She added: “One of the reasons we want mental health support in every school, and mental health support in open access hubs in every community, is we know these problems start young, so we’ve got to intervene much earlier.”

14 November 2024

Warning for MPs set to vote on assisted suicide: ‘Please do not sleepwalk into something you will regret’

A string of disabled people’s organisations and disabled activists have delivered powerful statements opposing a bill that would legalise assisted suicide, just two weeks before it is due to be debated and voted on by MPs.

Labour’s Kim Leadbeater finally published her 38-page terminally ill adults (end of life) bill on Tuesday, giving MPs only 17 days to digest the contents of her private members’ bill before they vote on it on Friday 29 November.

Among the disabled people’s organisations to issue statements opposing the bill this week were Inclusion London, Disability Rights UK (DR UK) and Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC).

In a thread on social media, DPAC warned that MPs would have a maximum of five hours to debate the bill’s 43 clauses and six schedules at second reading, which was not long enough “by many miles”.

The bill, which applies to England and Wales, would allow people to seek an assisted death if they have “an inevitably progressive illness, disease or medical condition which cannot be reversed by treatment” and their death could “reasonably be expected within six months”.

DPAC warned that doctors often get such estimates wrong with terminal illnesses.

And although the bill creates a new offence of “dishonesty, coercion or pressure” aimed at those trying to force someone to seek an assisted suicide, DPAC said such actions were “difficult, indeed sometimes impossible, to detect”.

And while the bill would give a new right to an assisted suicide, there would be “no right to palliative care or independent living support”, said DPAC.

Inclusion London said it was “deeply concerned” that after “14 years of austerity and broken public services… choosing to die may seem like the only viable option”.

It said in its statement that the solution to suffering pain, isolation, poverty or a lack of good support was not helping people to die “but instead helping people to live by investing in and providing the support they need.

“We know many in our society think our lives are not worth living and we see the consequences of this deeply entrenched view in the experience of other countries, such as Canada, where the conditions and criteria for assisted dying quickly become wider than only the terminally ill and now include many different groups of disabled people.”

Inclusion London added: “We also saw how quickly disabled people’s lives were treated as of lesser value during Covid.

“Legalising assisted dying will only reinforce and perpetuate this.”

In its statement opposing the bill, DR UK said that assistance to die “should not be easier to access than assistance to live.

“Parliament and government should not allow assisted dying when political choices undermine our lives, and rights, every day.”

The statement added: “We recognise this is an issue many feel strongly about, and not everybody (including some disabled people) will agree with our position.

“However, until access to good quality support and services become the norm, we believe that opting for assisted dying may not be a real choice, and the proposed change in the law poses a danger to disabled people.”

There were also powerful statements this week from disabled activists.

Baroness [Jane] Campbell, who for years has led the fight against legalisation as co-founder of Not Dead Yet UK (NDYUK), told Disability News Service that disabled people were “deeply worried” that the legislation would be “passed in a hurry, to please the electorate”.

She said: “NDYUK has studied the effects of assisted suicide legislation internationally over two decades.

“The evidence demonstrates that safeguards do not work in practice.

“The Kim Leadbeater bill will result in more deaths amongst the most disempowered people in our society.”

She added: “Disabled people without sufficient health and social care to live with dignity often feel a burden on their families and friends because these services are scarce and declining in quality.

“It is not rare to hear disabled people in vulnerable situations say, ‘Perhaps I would be better off dead?’

“Feeling a burden or desperate for scarce health and social care services to live with dignity, must never be the reason to end a life prematurely.”

Baroness Campbell said she was calling on MPs not to “sleepwalk into something which you will regret” and to “hear our voices of experience before voting on the 29th November”.

She said: “Thousands of disabled people do not enjoy choices and rights to support services when we are ill or incapacitated.

“Assisted suicide legislation will only serve to push the desperate in a direction from which there is no coming back.”

Dr Miro Griffiths, co-director of the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds, although speaking on behalf of the Better Way campaign, said: “We are deeply concerned that Kim Leadbeater’s bill will not enjoy an appropriate level of scrutiny before second reading in two weeks’ time.

“MPs and the public deserve the opportunity to give this legislation and the issues it raises considered reflection.

“This will not be possible under the dangerously short time frame allowed for by the bill’s architects.

“Legalising assisted suicide in the UK would give rise to profound injustices, injustices that affect disabled people, people facing poverty, people who are isolated and lonely, and many others.

“No amount of legal drafting can rule out citizens choosing to end their lives because they lack sufficient support to go on living.”

He added: “Doctors warn that ‘assisted dying’ would undermine palliative care for everyone.

“Psychiatrists warn of a harmful shift in our societal response to suicide.

“And sociologists caution that a change in the law may open the door to more permissive legislation in years to come.

“The tragic experience of other nations suggests it is a matter of when, not if, laws expand.”

14 November 2024

MPs reopen inquiry into DWP safeguarding failures that led to countless deaths

Relatives of disabled people whose deaths were caused by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have welcomed the decision by a committee of MPs to relaunch an inquiry into the department’s years of safeguarding failures.

The Commons work and pensions committee announced this week that it had reopened an inquiry that had to be abandoned in May when the government called a general election.

The Safeguarding Vulnerable Claimants inquiry was set up to examine whether DWP has a duty to safeguard “vulnerable people”, and if it does not, whether it should.

The committee says the reopened inquiry will now “seek to understand how the new government intends to rise to the challenge of ensuring it supports those who find it difficult to interact with the benefit system”.

The committee’s inquiry received 78 pieces of written evidence, and held four oral evidence sessions, with evidence received from families of disabled people whose deaths were caused by DWP’s actions, disabled claimants, disabled people’s organisations, lawyers, academics, safeguarding and welfare rights experts, ministers, and charities.

It was the first serious public investigation into DWP safeguarding since reports of deaths linked to the department’s actions first began emerging in the early years of the 2010-15 Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government.

As part of the inquiry, the committee carried out a survey of DWP staff, which found that two-thirds of them still do not have enough time to deal with safeguarding concerns “carefully” and “correctly”, despite years of deaths of benefit claimants linked with DWP’s failings.

The inquiry was launched in July 2023 when the committee was chaired by Labour MP Sir Stephen Timms, who is now minister for social security and disability and is likely to have to respond to the inquiry’s final report.

The committee will now be contacting witnesses who previously gave evidence to ask if they need to update their evidence.

A spokesperson for the committee, now chaired by Labour MP Debbie Abrahams, said it had not yet decided whether to hold further evidence sessions.

Alison Burton, whose father-in-law Errol Graham starved to death after DWP wrongly stopped his benefits when he missed a work capability assessment, said she was “definitely glad” the inquiry had been reopened.

She gave evidence about his case to the committee at a virtual round-table evidence session, and she said the safeguarding issues raised by the inquiry “still continue to affect people”.

She made it clear to the committee that DWP needed to have a legal duty of care to those receiving benefits.

She told Disability News Service (DNS): “I think if they had one it would go a long way to resolve a lot of the issues.”

Burton said such a duty of care would force the department to review all its practices “because there are plenty of practices within the department that would not comply with a duty of care”.

Among them, she said, would be the department’s continuing resistance to obtaining further medical evidence for many claimants – including her father-in-law – particularly for those with mental distress.

She said: “If the department had a duty of care, they would have to obtain further medical evidence because it would be part of their duty of care.”

She is convinced that if DWP had had such a duty at the time and had obtained further medical evidence in her father-in-law’s case, he would still be alive.

Yesterday (Wednesday), work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall suggested to the committee that she was open to the idea of DWP being given a legal safeguarding duty (see separate story).

Joy Dove, whose daughter Jodey Whiting 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, also welcomed the committee’s decision to reopen the inquiry and said she was “eagerly awaiting the outcome”.

She highlighted how a report by the Independent Case Examiner found that DWP failed five times to follow its own safeguarding rules in the weeks leading up to her daughter’s suicide, despite her long history of mental distress.

Even though a “flag” was placed on DWP’s ESA system to alert staff that she was a “vulnerable” claimant because of her mental ill-health, DWP failed to refer her request for a home assessment to Maximus, the company that was carrying out WCAs on its behalf.

Maximus also failed to act on her request, even though it had been included in the ESA50 questionnaire she had filled out.

Grassroots groups of disabled people, such as Black Triangle, Disabled People Against Cuts, the Mental Health Resistance Network, and the Spartacus network, spent years highlighting deaths linked to DWP’s actions.

Concerns have also been raised by relatives such as Burton and Dove who have called for action after the deaths of their family members.

Some of the evidence linking DWP with the deaths of benefit claimants has come through prevention of future deaths reports written by coroners, several of which only emerged years after they were written.

Other evidence of persistent DWP safeguarding flaws has emerged through freedom of information requests to the department, which have revealed how hundreds of recommendations for improvements have been made by DWP’s own secret reviews into the deaths of claimants.

Some of these reviews showed DWP staff continuing to make the same fatal errors, year after year.

The evidence collected by DNS and others, stretching back more than a decade, has shown how DWP repeatedly ignored recommendations to improve the safety of its disability benefits assessment system, leading to countless avoidable deaths.

It also shows how DWP hid evidence from independent reviews, and how the department failed to keep track of the actions taken in response to recommendations made by its own secret reviews.

Evidence also demonstrates that the cultural problems within DWP extend far beyond the assessment system, touching all aspects of its dealings with disabled people in the social security system.

The evidence, compiled over the last decade by DNS and other journalists, academics and activists, shows systemic negligence by DWP, a culture of cover-up and denial, and a refusal to accept that the department has a duty of care to those disabled people claiming support through the social security system.

Much of that evidence has been brought together in a detailed timeline, as part of the Deaths by Welfare project headed by Dr China Mills and supported by Healing Justice Ldn, which works with marginalised and oppressed communities.

Meanwhile, the anti-poverty charity Turn2us has launched a free online tool that aims to simplify the application process for personal independence payment (PIP), the disability benefit which contributes towards the extra costs associated with an impairment or health condition.

The Turn2us PIP Helper offers step-by-step guidance, an eligibility checker, PIP award estimations, mental wellbeing resources, and essential information.

One of the reasons for developing the tool was to help disabled people obtain some of the £870 million in PIP payments that go unclaimed every year because of people who start claims but do not complete them or who are eligible for higher payments but are not receiving them.

One of the project partners is Disability Rights UK, which said it hoped the tool would “ensure as many disabled people as possible can access the appropriate PIP award”.

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press 

14 November 2024

Co-op faces discrimination claims over inaccessible fridges

A major supermarket chain has been accused of discrimination after installing chilled food cabinets with inaccessible doors, preventing many of its disabled customers accessing fresh produce.

Co-op has installed the inaccessible chiller cabinets in at least two of its stores, but refused this week to say how many others were affected, or if it was rolling them out across its business.

The concerns were first raised by disabled activist Flick Williams, from York, who said the discriminatory action by her local Co-op had made it impossible for her to shop independently.

She said it appeared to be a trend among major supermarket chains.

When she visited her local Co-op in Hull Road last week for the first time in a couple of months, she found it had placed doors on the fridges, which meant she was unable to reach the fruit and vegetables, meat and fish, fruit juices and cheese, puddings and ready meals.

There were also no staff available to help her.

She said her reaction when she realised what the store had done was “absolute dismay because it’s happening everywhere, and I can envisage a time where every single supermarket is the same and I literally have nowhere to shop”.

She told Disability News Service (DNS): “Essentially, they have made it inaccessible for me to shop independently.

“I have no-one else who can shop for me and my 90-year-old mother. It’s really, really depressing me.”

She has tried home deliveries but says she should not have to pay a delivery charge, while the fresh produce that was delivered was poor quality, and she had substitute products imposed on her that she did not want.

Williams said: “It seems that they do not value the purple and grey pound.

“A lot of older people who wouldn’t necessarily identify as disabled are really going to struggle as well.

“Why are they alienating such a huge demographic, a huge part of their customer base?

“We really don’t all have friends and family who can shop for us, and why should we resort to that? Shopping is a basic necessity of life.”

Fellow disabled activist Tony Jennings said Co-op had also installed “discriminatory” enclosed fridges at his local store in Market Street, Ulverston, Cumbria, after a refurbishment.

He told DNS the changes had made the store inaccessible to him – breaching the Equality Act – if he wants to shop for chilled produce as there are often no staff available to help him.

And even if there were staff, he said, he does not want “to trail around the store after a member of non-existent staff – I simply want the Co-op not to introduce barriers preventing me from shopping independently”.

Although the refurbishment widened the aisles and made the checkouts more accessible, it also installed the bank of inaccessible, enclosed chiller cabinets, with doors that open outwards and handles that are too high to reach.

He could previously access the chilled produce independently but now he cannot.

He said older people had also complained that the chiller doors were heavy and difficult to hold open, as they will be for anyone with energy-limiting conditions, particularly as there are now “chillers all down one side of the store”.

He said: “I’m all for saving energy but chillers must be accessible to everyone.

“The Co-op’s appalling discriminatory attitude, installing inaccessible chillers, has alienated disabled shoppers and excluded them from their stores – what are they going to do about it?”

Co-op refused to say why it had installed the new enclosed fridges; whether it had consulted disabled people before doing so; what action it would take to address the discrimination; whether it assessed the equality impact of the closed cabinets before installing them; and how many stores it planned to install them in.

But a Co-op spokesperson said in a statement: “We are fully committed to making our stores accessible and inclusive for all customers and understand accessibility needs differ for everyone.

“Our store colleagues always aim to assist our members and customers as they require it, and anyone requiring support is urged to ask our team members for assistance.

“We are, however, sorry that the customer could not find a colleague to help on this occasion.

“We provide regular colleague guidance and work with disability organisations and our suppliers to meet the diverse needs of our communities.”

14 November 2024

Elections watchdog criticises political parties for failing on accessible manifestos

The elections watchdog has criticised political parties that failed to produce their general election manifestos in accessible formats.

The Electoral Commission has also highlighted how disabled candidates were still not able to secure government funding to support them with their access needs during the election campaign.

It raises the concerns in its report on July’s general election and May’s local elections, which was published yesterday (Wednesday).

Disability News Service reported in June how some of the main political parties fighting the general election had still not published accessible versions of their manifestos, just a week before polling day.

The worst offenders from the main parties were Reform UK, followed by the Green party, the SNP and the Conservatives.

The commission said at the time that it had previously recommended that accessible versions should be published at the same time as the main manifestos.

It says in this week’s report that political parties “routinely fail to provide information about their policies in accessible formats” and that disabled people “should have just as much time as anyone else to understand what the parties stand for”.

It also highlights how disabled election candidates still cannot access financial support to help with their access needs.

It points to the previous Access to Elected Office Fund, which was set up by the coalition government in 2012 but then closed down three years later.

A temporary fund followed in 2018, covering some elections in 2019, 2020 and 2021, before it was closed, and the last government repeatedly promised to set up a replacement.

Although similar schemes have been set up for devolved elections in Wales and Scotland, there is no support for disabled candidates at general elections or in other elections in England.

The report says: “A similar scheme could be set up for reserved elections to remove barriers to candidates engaging in the democratic process, and to ensure voters can hear from a range of campaigners.”

The report also says that more could be done to raise awareness of the support available for disabled voters in polling stations.

It says: “Although Returning Officers provided a range of accessibility equipment and support at polling stations, many people were not aware of the assistance available to them.”

Of those polling station staff who returned an Electoral Commission survey, “almost all” of them “provided most items from the list of equipment that should be provided as a minimum” for disabled voters.

Where polling stations said the minimum equipment was not provided, it was “nearly always” where the equipment was not needed, such as when the polling station did not have any parking available or did not need to have ramps.

Some polling stations went “beyond” the minimum, says the report, by providing additional support such as devices to access the ballot paper in audio format, or a hearing loop.

The commission’s research also found that almost all disabled adults (96 per cent) who voted in person said it was easy to get inside the polling station and vote.

Of those disabled people who voted in person, one in 20 said they needed additional assistance or equipment.

Of this group, about one in five (19 per cent) said the assistance or equipment they needed was not available to them at the polling station.

And about one in 10 disabled voters (nine per cent) said the way elections are run at present prevents them voting in person.

The report recommends that more is done to improve awareness of the support available for disabled voters in polling stations, including placing information on poll cards and local authority websites.

The Electoral Commission’s survey of candidates also found that more than half (55 per cent) of those who responded felt they had experienced harassment, intimidation, or abuse during the election campaign, while more than one in 10 (13 per cent) said they had had a serious problem with abuse.

Disabled candidates who responded were twice as likely to have been physically attacked, hit, or have something thrown at them compared to non-disabled candidates (10 per cent versus five per cent).

They were also slightly more likely to have received social media abuse than non-disabled candidates (60 per cent compared with 51 per cent).

An Electoral Commission spokesperson said: “On manifestos, we have a long-standing recommendation that when political parties publish manifestos, they should make sure accessible formats are available at the same time, so that disabled people have just as much time as anyone else to understand what parties stand for.”

She said that, although the report made no recommendation on the need for funding for disabled candidates, and some other areas of electoral law that need to be improved, “we continue to work closely with the UK government, including through the Accessibility of Elections Working Group convened by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, to take forward other areas of work”.

14 November 2024

Research shows how transport bodies could add accessibility into vital planning tool

Transport bodies planning station upgrades could take easy steps that would allow them to take greater account of accessibility when deciding where to invest, new research commissioned by disabled people has shown.

The research, published yesterday (Wednesday) by the disabled-led campaigning organisation Transport for All (TfA), shows that a key measure used by Transport for London to measure public access to the capital’s transport network does not take account of accessibility.

But if accessibility factors were included in the Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) measure, it could help a “wide range” of organisations, including transport bodies and developers, measure the impact of their proposals on disabled people, and reach different conclusions about where they should invest.

• This could help direct organisations like Transport for London (TfL) to prioritise investment in local areas that have no other accessible public transport options, the research found.

PTAL is used by TfL to rate different locations in the capital on how easy it is for people to access the public transport network, and it takes account of walking distance to the nearest stations or stops; waiting-times; the number of services; and the distance to major rail stations.

But PTAL ignores the accessibility of transport services, and factors such as step-free access, the level of crowding, availability of toilets, and provision of information.

Yesterday’s report, Accessibility Review of the PTAL Index, found that a new Accessible Public Transport Access Level (APTAL) measurement could provide “substantially different” results than PTAL.

Initial research highlighted barriers faced by disabled passengers such as a lack of step-free access; overcrowding; lack of staff; the inability to secure wheelchairs on buses or trains; a lack of priority seating; driver and passenger attitudes; inadequate information; and poor quality pavements and road surfaces.

Disabled people who use public transport and took part in the study told researchers that step-free access was the most important measure to be added to APTAL because for many disabled people “it is the difference between being able to access a station versus not at all”.

The level of crowding was the second-most important measure because “disorientation, noise levels, and difficulty finding space in lifts were acknowledged as affecting a diverse range of people”.

They also looked at access to toilet facilities at stations.

Some potential measures could not be added to the APTAL model for the report because of the lack of suitable publicly-available data.

• The research found that including each of the three new measures “significantly changes the score” given to the three central London locations the report examined.
• Map-based graphics in the report show how the areas around King’s Cross with higher scores for access to public transport shrink drastically when including accessibility data on crowding, step-free access and availability of toilets, as they do for Soho and, to a lesser extent, Southwark.
• The researchers concluded: “Accessibility is complex. However, it is possible to measure some aspects of accessibility in a simple and straightforward way.
• “In the future a more accessible PTAL could be used to prioritise investments like station upgrades.”
• Deborah Persaud, TfA’s chair, who took part in the research, said: “London should be a city for everyone, but current planning systems effectively bar disabled people from parts of the city.
• “It’s time Transport for London added accessibility to planning, so London can start to be truly open to us all.”
• Caroline Russell, a Green Party member of the London Assembly, who supported the report, said she hoped it would provide “a much-needed blueprint for improving the way we address and expand accessibility measures in our planning policy”.
• Alex Williams, TfL’s chief customer and strategy officer, said: “Our vision is a London where everyone can move around the city safely, comfortably and sustainably, and access to public transport is fundamental to this.
• “We are working continually to make our network as accessible as possible, but we know there is much more work to be done.
• “We welcome this report from Transport for All and will be carefully reviewing its recommendations.”
• TfL said that more than a third of Tube stations across the capital are step-free, while the mayor, Sadiq Khan, has set a goal of making half of all stations step-free by 2030.
• In January, the mayor announced investment in toilet provision of £3 million per year over five years across the TfL network.
• TfL also said that its new Equity in Motion plansets out more than 80 commitments to make its network fairer, more accessible and more inclusive.

The research for TfA was carried out by Revealing Reality and Frontier Economics, and it was funded by the Motability Foundation charity.

Catherine Marris, Motability Foundation’s head of innovation and policy, said the report provides “new insight into how public transport networks can be made accessible to all, and crucially it is based on user research carried out with disabled people”.

She said the report “adds to the evidence base we have on why accessibility needs to be at the heart of future transport planning, and we look forward to continuing to influence for change in this area”.

14 November 2024

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

Schools should not turn away “difficult” pupils over fears they will harm their results, and face being evaluated on how inclusive they are towards local children, Ofsted’s chief inspector of schools has said. Sir Martyn Oliver, the head of Ofsted, told England’s school leaders that there will be a focus on inclusion in the report card-style inspection reports to be introduced next year: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/nov/08/ofsted-schools-inspection-difficult-pupils-inclusion

Civil servants are looking at the extra costs that assisted dying would impose on the NHS, amid a warning from Wes Streeting that some services may be cut to fund expanded end-of-life care. The health secretary has asked officials at the Department of Health and Social Care to analyse potential implications for NHS services if the right to an assisted death is legalised in England and Wales: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/nov/13/assisted-dying-law-nhs-cuts-wes-streeting

The son of a man with motor neurone disease who died while waiting for a wheelchair from the NHS’s leading provider has accused them of “sincerely failing his dad”. Over the past 12 months, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has seen a sharp rise in complaints about NHS wheelchairs: https://www.itv.com/news/2024-11-08/not-fit-for-purpose-patients-wait-years-for-wheelchairs-from-nhs-provider

A pub called The Midget after an iconic MG car is changing its name following complaints that it is offensive. More than 1,000 people signed a petition to rename the pub in Abingdon, Oxfordshire, which is owned by the Greene King chain. The petition was started by Dr Erin Pritchard, a disability lecturer at Liverpool Hope University, who has dwarfism: https://metro.co.uk/2024/11/08/pub-forced-change-name-people-complain-offensive-21954413/

14 November 2024

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

Mental health bill ‘will not stop us being locked up’, say disabled activists

A long-awaited new mental health bill falls far short of the fundamental reforms needed to ensure full human rights for disabled people, and will not stop them being subjected to forcible detention and degrading treatment, activists have warned.

The government yesterday (Wednesday) introduced its mental health bill into parliament, although it is based on a draft piece of legislation drawn up by the last Conservative government.

But one disabled activist said the new bill would not prevent disabled people being “locked up, abused, tortured, treated inhumanely and left to die through neglect”.

Other campaigners said many of the reforms would be “meaningless” in a system where community care was “chronically under-resourced”.

The last government’s draft bill fell “well short” of compatibility with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), activists warned at the time.

The new bill, which will reform the “outdated” Mental Health Act 1983, includes measures to end the use of police and prison cells as “places of safety” for people in mental health crisis; stop the “inappropriate” detention of autistic people and people with learning difficulties; and introduce statutory care and treatment plans.

The bill also gives patients more say over how they should be treated if they are sectioned under the act, and offers “stronger protections” for patients, staff and the public, the government says.

It also offers patients the right to choose a person to represent their interests and “greater access to advocacy” when they are detained, and reforms the use of community treatment orders so they are only used “when appropriate and proportionate”.

Disabled people’s organisations welcomed some aspects of the reforms, but they warned that the new bill would not comply with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

National Survivor User Network (NSUN), a user-led network of groups and people with experience of mental ill-health, distress, and trauma, said some of the proposals in the last government’s draft bill had “the potential to improve the experiences of people who are detained under certain circumstances”, if they were properly resourced and implemented.

But NSUN said the draft bill had not shifted far enough “towards truly rights-based care” and failed to provide “real alternatives to detention and properly-resourced community care”.

An NSUN spokesperson said: “Black people are over three times more likely to be detained under the Mental Heath Act and 11 times more likely to receive an inappropriate community treatment order, but the [government] press release fails to elaborate on steps toward addressing and reforming what we know to be a structurally oppressive system which further marginalises racialised communities.”

NSUN also said that measures to prevent people in mental health crisis being placed in prison, and ensure patients had as much control over their care as possible, were “ultimately meaningless in a system where community care is chronically under-resourced”, with significant question-marks over any additional funding.

Simone Aspis, project manager for Inclusion London’s Free Our People Now project, which is led by autistic people and people with learning difficulties, said the new bill “focuses on keeping people in psychiatric hospitals against their wishes”.

She said: “We don’t think this bill will stop us from being locked up, abused, tortured, treated inhumanely and left to die through neglect in psychiatric hospitals.”

Although the new bill introduces a 28-day limit for detention for autistic people and people with learning difficulties who do not also have a mental health diagnosis, many of those with another diagnosis or label would not have the same protection.

Aspis said: “We don’t think this will stop us from being locked up.

“Having statutory care and treatment plans for us will have limited impact if mental health professionals still have the power to lock us up, for years on end, without a release date.

“Increasing numbers of young people are being detained and we face widespread prejudice.

“It will take more than just involving more patients, families and carers to change this.”

Aspis said Free Our People Now “would welcome a mental health bill that is in line with our UN human rights as disabled people.

“This would focus on stopping us being locked up in the first place, and keeping us out of psychiatric hospitals for good.

“We need a bill that focuses on giving people with learning difficulties and autistic people the right to the support we need, to live great lives in the community.”*

Fazilet Hadi, head of policy for Disability Rights UK, said the bill would provide “some patient-centred improvements to existing practices and services” but “in no way upholds the civil and human rights of disabled people” under the UN convention.

She said: “Under the convention, disabled people have the right to liberty, the right not to be subjected to degrading and inhuman treatment, and the right to live independently in the community.

“The bill isn’t built on these principles and those in mental distress will continue to be forcibly detained against their will and to be subjected to degrading treatment.

“Whilst the bill promotes increased support in the community, the current underfunding of mental health services makes such a shift unlikely.”

Dorothy Gould, founder of the user-led, rights-based organisation Liberation, said the government’s announcement was “devastating news” because the bill appeared to be “in fundamental breach of full human rights for those of us given a mental health diagnosis”.

She said: “Information released about the bill demonstrates all too clearly that it is thought acceptable for us just to have ‘improved’ rights.

“Why should people experiencing acute trauma not have full human rights?

“Why are we continuing to be treated as second-class citizens like this?

“This is not a bill which brings the Mental Health Act ‘in line with the 21st century’.

“On the contrary, the UK government is continuing to breach our basic rights under the UNCRPD.”

She added: “The government has argued that continuing provision for disability-based detention and forced treatment is needed because of times when we are a risk to ourselves and others.

“However, this does not even seem to be based on adequate research evidence.”

She said: “What is true is that many of us are being traumatised further by the use of involuntary detention and forced treatment at the very times when we most need warm, human and genuinely healing approaches, and that the mental health system has resulted in death levels among us that are at horrific levels.

“It’s a national disgrace, a huge stain on past governments and now on the current government as well.”

She said the bill represented “a blatant failure to tackle the main causes of acute mental distress: discrimination, abuse and hate crime, inequality, poverty, the misery caused by the current welfare benefit system and the failure to provide adequate support for those of us who can work combined with intolerable pressures on those of us who cannot”.

Health and social care secretary Wes Streeting said in a statement announcing the bill: “Our outdated mental health system is letting down some of the most vulnerable people in our society, and is in urgent need of reform.

“The treatment of autistic people and people with learning disabilities, and the way in which black people are disproportionately targeted by the act should shame us all.

“By bringing the Mental Health Act in line with the 21st century, we will make sure patients are treated with dignity and respect and the public are kept safe.”

The government told DNS yesterday that the new bill contains “a number of measures that go further than the previous draft bill”.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) did not clarify how many new measures there were in the new bill, but it provided two examples.

One change from the draft bill is that advance choice documents, which allow patients to set out their choices and wishes on their future treatment, will be written into law.

DHSC said the bill will also strengthen “safeguards for public safety”, for example by requiring clinicians to consult at least one other mental health practitioner before discharging a patient after they have been sectioned.

*Free Our People Now’s Bring People Home from Psychiatric Hospital network has created a list of requests (PDF) which represent “what we want the government to do to stop locking us up in hospital”. It has been signed by 27 organisations

Call for hate crime law reform, as broadcaster says young people too sick to work are ‘parasites’

A right-wing broadcaster is likely to escape police action despite describing young disabled people on out-of-work benefits as “parasites”, in a case that highlights long-standing concerns about inequality for disabled people in hate crime law.

Isabel Oakeshott, international editor for TalkTV, criticised chancellor Rachel Reeves for failing to announce a “crackdown” on young people on sickness benefits in last week’s budget.

Oakeshott told the TalkTV audience: “It is ludicrous. How many young people are supposedly too sick to work and being supported by the state?

“You know, these figures are absolutely off-the-chart, and they are completely unjustified.”

She said last week’s budget had removed resources from those who work “in order to keep on sustaining those who frankly can’t be bothered to get out of bed and get themselves out… to… any kind of job and prefer to just sit on the sofa and order their Deliveroo and drive their Motability free vehicle and take everything that the state can offer”.

Oakeshott, former political editor of The Sunday Times, told presenter Kevin O’Sullivan that “people like you and me and our very many listeners” were “grafting just to try to make ends meet, and basically these people are frankly parasites”.

TalkTV is owned by News UK, whose other outlets, including The Sun and The Times, have long pushed for a government “crackdown” on social security spending.

It is believed that a number of complaints have been submitted to broadcasting watchdog Ofcom about Oakeshott’s comments.

Dr Jenny Ceolta-Smith, a disabled activist and adviser with the charity Long Covid Support, is one of those who has complained to Ofcom.

She told the watchdog in her complaint that the kind of rhetoric used by Oakeshott “causes harm, it is distressing, fear inducing and for those of us who cannot work we feel blamed, vilified and victimised”, while “implying benefit claimants are lazy incites hatred”.

She said there were more than two million people in the UK with long Covid, including many who experience “debilitating fatigue and often need to spend considerable periods of time in bed or on the sofa/chair”.

It is likely that Oakeshott and TalkTV have breached the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.

Section 3.2 of the code says: “Material which contains hate speech must not be included in television and radio programmes… except where it is justified by the context.”

And section 3.3 of the code says: “Material which contains abusive or derogatory treatment of individuals, groups, religions or communities, must not be included in television and radio services… except where it is justified by the context.”

An Ofcom spokesperson said: “Every complaint we receive is assessed against our rules before we decide whether or not to investigate.”

Seven years ago, Theresia Degener, who at the time chaired the UN committee on the rights of persons with disabilities, warned that disabled people could be at risk of violence, and even “killings and euthanasia”, because of their portrayal by the government and media as “parasites” who live on benefits.

She said in the BBC interview, in comments that were never broadcast but were reported by Disability News Service (DNS), that “disabled people being portrayed as parasites, living on social benefits, and welfare and the taxes of other people” was “very, very dangerous”.

She said such attitudes “will later on lead to violence against disabled people, we know it, if not to killings and euthanasia”.

John McArdle, co-founder of the disabled people’s grassroots group Black Triangle Campaign, said: “I find it totally unacceptable that in the 21^st century people should be able to brand a whole section of society as parasites.

“Words have repercussions, and I would like to reaffirm wholeheartedly what Theresia Degener said.”

Oakeshott’s comments have highlighted the continuing contradiction in hate crime law, which allows someone to be charged with stirring up hatred on the grounds of race, religion, or sexual orientation, but not on the grounds of disability.

The Law Commission recommended three years ago that this law should be extended to disability and transgender identity in England and Wales, but the last government failed to implement this and many other recommendations from the report.

Dr David Wilkin, a disabled activist, researcher, author* and support worker for victims of disability hate crime, said the Law Commission had “recognised that disabled victims of hate crime (as well as the transgender community) had no protection in law from those wishing to abuse them or from those wanting to stir up hatred and resentment against them”.

He said: “Were the recommendations of the commission adopted, we would have a robust suite of legislation to protect all disabled people from such crimes.

“For it not to have been put on the statute book is a wasted opportunity.”

He said there was now a good opportunity for the new government to “take a turn away from the divisive behaviour of summer 2024 and introduce new laws to protect susceptible groups”.

A TalkTV spokesperson told DNS: “We are aware of comments made by Isabel Oakeshott on Talk last week on Kevin O’Sullivan’s nightly political opinion show.

“Although Kevin O’Sullivan’s show is built on personal opinions on the news stories of the day, Isabel Oakeshott failed to caveat her comments to reflect she did not mean all benefit claimants were gaming the system.

“In debates on this issue, she frequently emphasises the importance of supporting those in genuine need. We regret any offence caused.”

Asked whether this meant that Oakeshott believed that some young disabled people who do not work were “parasites” but just not all of them, the spokesperson declined to comment further.

She also declined to say if this view was shared by News UK.

There was no mention of any apology from Oakeshott.

The Home Office said Labour had committed to changing hate crime laws on aggravated offences, but not yet on the stirring up hate offence and other recommendations made by the Law Commission.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are absolutely committed to tackling all forms of hate crime and have already committed to protect LGBT+ and disabled people by making all existing strands of hate crime an aggravated offence.

“This government is carefully considering the recommendations made by the Law Commission in its report on hate crime legislation.”

*Disability Hate Crime: Perspectives for Change, was published by Routledge in September

Minister’s pledges are ‘beginning of the end’ of rail assistance ‘chaos’ and ‘nonsense’, says disabled peer

Labour’s rail minister had made a series of promises that could see “the beginning of the end” of sub-standard assistance for disabled passengers on the railway, following lobbying by two disabled peers.

Lord Hendy, former chair of Network Rail, told the House of Lords yesterday (Wednesday) that he was “personally ashamed” of the way the rail industry treated passengers who need assistance.

He said he was sending “a clear signal to train operating companies that they cannot ignore their legal duties to support disabled passengers and to ensure that disabled passengers have proper access to the railway as they need and deserve”.

And he said he had been left “shocked” after being shown the number of different mobile phone apps that disabled people must use to book assistance, a wheelchair space and a ticket for their rail journeys.

He also pointed to the “lack of consistency in train design”, and the “lack of reliable, accurate information” on whether facilities such as station lifts and accessible toilets are working.

As well as promising to improve assistance, Lord Hendy proposed an amendment to the government’s passenger railway services (public ownership) bill, which would amend the Equality Act to make it clear that publicly-owned train companies are subject to the act’s public sector equality duty.

This should make it easier for disabled rail passengers to hold rail companies to account for access failures, as the government gradually takes operators into public ownership when contracts with private companies expire.

The minister’s pledges followed a meeting with two disabled peers – Liberal Democrat Baroness [Sal] Brinton and crossbench peer Baroness [Tanni] Grey-Thompson – and Liberal Democrat rail spokesperson Baroness Randerson.

Lord Hendy said: “Although it is the government’s view that the public sector equality duty [PSED] already applies to publicly-owned train operating companies, we are concerned that that is currently not as clear as it needs to be.

“By adding them to the list of public authorities in the act, we will ensure that there can be no mistake.

“Network Rail and Transport for London are already named in the act, but train operating companies previously were not, which is something that, if this amendment is agreed, we will remedy.”

This amendment to the bill was later agreed by peers.

Lord Hendy said the government’s future railways bill would allow Great British Railways (GBR) – the new over-arching body that will eventually run the rail system – to “begin to take a coherent approach” to access issues.

But he said some of the improvements should not have to wait for that bill to be passed.

He said the government would therefore begin to work with disabled people to develop an “accessibility road map” that would “explain the actions we intend to take to improve things for disabled people or others requiring assistance in advance of GBR being set up”.

He said the road map would include measuring and reporting on lift reliability and maintenance; confirming the legal obligation of rail operators to provide all disabled people with assistance when travelling, “whether or not a pre-booking has been made”; and improving “consistency” in the service provided to disabled rail passengers.

Lord Hendy said the government would also provide funding to improve the passenger assist app, and that this work “must be done” in consultation with disabled people, including Baroness Brinton and Baroness Grey-Thompson, to “ensure that it delivers the assistance that people deserve and addresses their needs”.

Baroness Brinton told fellow peers yesterday that disabled people had “for far too long been ignored by the train operating companies, with complex and different arrangements leading to chaos and unreliable services” and with many disabled people reporting “disrupted or poor services daily”.

She said the PSED amendment was “a big step forward” and the measures announced by Lord Hendy would eventually mark “the end of the current poor levels of assistance for passengers”, which would “transform the lives of disabled rail passengers”.

Last month, Baroness Grey-Thompson and Baroness Brinton described to fellow peers some of their experiences as disabled rail passengers.

Baroness Brinton spoke of the “absolute nonsense” of the multitude of mobile phone apps disabled people need to use to book their tickets and assistance, the “total chaos” of trying to arrange access at unstaffed stations, and the overall unreliable provision of assistance.

Baroness Grey-Thompson said the failure rate with assistance was “way too high, and many disabled people do not even try to travel because of the fear of what they expect”, while she also described the “victim blaming” of disabled people by rail staff when there is an assistance failure, with disabled people “constantly fobbed off and told it will never happen again” when they complain.

She told peers last month: “Quite frankly, I really dislike having to book, but I cannot face having to turn up at a train station and almost feel like I am begging to be allowed on the train.”

Meanwhile, the government has announced that Baroness Grey-Thompson will lead a new taskforce that will work with the industry and consumers over the next nine months to tackle the barriers to air travel for disabled passengers.

Among other disabled members are Sophie Morgan, a television presenter and founder of campaign group Rights on Flights; accessible transport campaigner Tony Jennings; and Helen Dolphin, a long-standing member of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee.

The taskforce will also include representatives of airlines, assistance providers and airports.

The group will agree “short- and long-term practical and achievable actions that can be implemented by the industry, the regulator or the government”.

Transport secretary Louise Haigh said: “For too long, disabled passengers haven’t had the standard of assistance and service they need.

“That’s why we are bringing together this expert taskforce to drive forward change.”

Baroness Grey-Thompson said: “I am looking forward to working with disabled people, industry experts and the Department for Transport to improve access to flying.

“It is essential that the rights of each passenger are protected at every aspect of their journey, so they can travel with the respect they deserve.”

Morgan said the government had “sent a powerful message to the community and airline industry, that change is in the air”.

DWP’s treatment of disabled people under Tories was ‘terrible and inexcusable crime’, says MP

The way the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has treated disabled people in the last 15 years “will go down in history as a terrible and inexcusable crime”, MPs were told this week during a debate on the new government’s budget.

Apsana Begum – who lost the Labour whip in July after voting to remove the two-child benefit limit – said there was “extensive evidence about the serious harm caused to people subjected to dehumanising assessments and sanctions, including reports of deaths* directly related to the social security regime”.

She called for a “long-term overhaul of the social security system”, which she said was “not fit for purpose”.

The independent MP also told the Commons that Labour’s commitment to deliver the same level of savings on disability benefits as the last government had planned was “more than alarming”.

She spoke out after chancellor Rachel Reeves pledged in last week’s budget to “reduce the benefits bill” and “ensure that welfare spending is more sustainable”.

Reeves said last week that the government would “deliver” the same cuts to spending as the Conservative government had aimed to make through tightening the work capability assessment.

Those changes would have been introduced next year and would have seen 424,000 disabled people lose their entitlement to extra support of up to £4,900 a year by 2028-29, cutting spending by £2.8 billion in the four years to 2028-29.

It is not yet clear whether the Labour government will introduce those changes, or if it will make the savings elsewhere.

Begum was not the only MP to refer to the impact of the last government’s welfare reforms on disabled people.

Labour’s Emily Darlington, MP for Milton Keynes Central, reminded MPs on Monday that under previous Conservative governments, disabled people had taken their own lives due to welfare reform.

She said that 14 years of “failure” had also led to “three million people using food banks, more than 700,000 children plunged into poverty, mortgage costs nearly doubled, the worst pay rises since the 1950s… mental health worse than at any time on record, more people sleeping rough and more families without their own home”.

She said the Conservative party continued “to deny, to justify and to refuse to apologise to those people right across the country and in my constituency”.

Labour’s Neil Coyle challenged former Conservative work and pensions secretary Mel Stride to explain why he had insisted there would be no investigation of DWP by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) into its unlawful treatment of disabled benefit claimants.

Stride had repeatedly insisted that DWP would reach a legal agreement with EHRC over allegations of discrimination in its benefits assessment processes.

The commission finally took the step to launch an investigation in May after discussions with the department that lasted more than two years and were supposed to lead to a legally-binding section 23 agreement that would have forced it to take action to address its discrimination.

Stride, who was this week appointed shadow chancellor by the new Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, did not answer the question, telling Coyle instead: “I stand by our record when I was secretary of state for work and pensions, particularly on the support that the department gave to the disabled, not least the results that we achieved in encouraging and helping them into work, which is the best possible outcome.”

During Monday’s debate, work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall again spoke of “near-record levels of people trapped out of work due to long-term sickness” and the government’s plan “to drive down fraud and error in the welfare system”, including its controversial fraud, error and debt bill.

And she told MPs that her employment white paper, which is expected to be published later this month, would describe the “biggest reforms to employment support in a generation”, and “help us meet our ambition to achieve an 80 per cent employment rate” and “turn what is in reality a department for welfare into a genuine department for work”.

Deirdre Costigan, Labour MP for Ealing Southall, said she had visited her local jobcentre last month, and asked staff what support they could offer disabled people to return to work, but she said they “did not have an answer”.

She said: “As a trade unionist, I represented disabled workers for many years.

“So many of them wanted to work but were pushed out of their job because there was no support.

“There are three million people off work on a long-term sickness absence.

“Many would love to work, but the health service is not set up to support them and jobcentres do not have the right tools to help.”

She said Kendall’s plan to “bring jobcentres, careers services, skills providers and health services together will make a huge difference”.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press 

DWP denies destroying documents that would have shown why it weakened rules on secret suicide reviews

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has denied destroying documents that would have revealed why it weakened guidance on when to investigate the cases of benefit claimants who took their own lives, following a probe by the information commissioner.

Repeated searches by DWP civil servants – in response to a request by the Information Commissioner’s Office – failed to unearth a single document relating to the decision.

DWP says it is now impossible to explain “how the decision to change the criteria was made”.

Disability News Service (DNS) has been trying since March to obtain internal DWP documents that would show why the rules on when to carry out internal process reviews (IPRs) were altered in April 2021.

In 2020, DWP told the National Audit Office that it would always carry out one of its secret reviews when it heard of a claimant’s suicide, even if there were no allegations that DWP’s actions had contributed to that death.

But since April 2021, after weakening the rules, DWP now only carries out an IPR following the suicide of a claimant if there is already an allegation that DWP’s actions “may have negatively contributed to the customer’s circumstances”.

That decision meant far fewer internal process reviews were carried out.

In 2022-23, there were 89 referrals from within DWP for an IPR, but only 60 met the new criteria, while in 2023-24, there were 75 referrals and only 53 met the criteria.

DNS had asked DWP, through a freedom of information request, for any documents relating to the decision to weaken the criteria that were held by the team that made the change.

After the department claimed it held no such documents, DNS complained to the information commissioner.

In its response to the commissioner, DWP said it had searched its IT systems, with “file by file checks” of “each of the folders where it would be likely that recorded information would be held”, as well as “full site meta-data searches”.

A second “independent” check was carried out by “an experienced IPR team member”.

None of these checks produced a single document about the decision to weaken the criteria.

The information commissioner, John Edwards, told DNS this week: “DWP confirmed that it was not aware of any specific information that had been destroyed or deleted that related to the request.

“DWP explained that this was confirmed in conversations with colleagues responsible for the IPR team during the period covered by the request.”

When the commissioner raised concerns from DNS that this information should have been “recorded and retained”, DWP told him: “In an operational context, many decisions are made daily, often without them being officially recorded in specific documents.”

It added: “It is also worth noting the events occurring at the time in question, the department was still concentrating on supporting citizens during the pandemic and that may have impacted the decision-making process.”

DWP said it had been unable to confirm if information relating to the decision to weaken the IPR was ever created.

But it added that “if it was created during the period in question, we can confirm that it was no longer held when the original request was received”.

It also told the commissioner that “due to a lack of documentation, turnover of staff and the time that has passed since the period in question”, it could not explain “how the decision to change the criteria was made”.

Edwards ruled this week that, on the balance of probabilities, DWP does not possess the documents DNS was seeking.

He said he “understands why the complainant would believe that information was held” but “cannot determine whether information should be held, only whether on the balance of probabilities, it was held at the time of the request”.

DWP has a long history of hiding and delaying the release of embarrassing information about the deaths of claimants, and destroying incriminating documents.

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the deaths linked to DWP and the years of cover-ups by the department, is published by Pluto Press 

DWP finally admits ordering more than 30 secret reviews into universal credit harm and deaths last year

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has finally admitted that it carried out more than 30 secret reviews last year into cases of serious harm or deaths involving someone receiving universal credit.

Internal process reviews (IPRs) are only carried out if there has been an allegation that DWP’s actions “may have negatively contributed to the customer’s circumstances”, or if it is asked to contribute to a safeguarding or domestic homicide review or an inquest.

The figures will add to concerns about the working-age benefits system, two months after the start of the rollout of universal credit to the remaining hundreds of thousands of disabled people still receiving income-related ESA.

The PCS union has described universal credit as a “dangerously flawed system” in which “the most vulnerable continue to slip through its cracks”.

DWP previously claimed it was just a mistake that figures on how many IPRs into the deaths of universal credit claimants were carried out were omitted from the department’s annual report for 2023-24.

The report, published just after July’s general election, introduced the figures on page 80, stating: “The chart below shows the primary service lines relating to the customers’ cases accepted to IPR across 2023-24.”

But there was no chart in the report that provided that information.

Now, more than three months later, DWP has finally published the missing figures.

They show that 31 IPRs were carried out in 2023-24 into suicides, other deaths, attempted suicides and cases of serious harm involving claimants of universal credit.

They also show 27 were carried out into cases involving personal independence payment claimants, and 15 into disabled people who were receiving employment and support allowance (ESA)*.

In 2023-24, DWP staff referred 75 cases for a possible review, but only 53 met the criteria and were accepted for an IPR.

Despite repeated concerns being raised about safeguarding and the safety of the administration of universal credit, none of the main political parties mentioned the issue in their election manifestos.

In July, DNS described how repeated failures by DWP led to the death of a disabled woman, Nazerine Anderson, after her case was randomly selected for a “performance measurement review” of her universal credit claim.

Last November, another coroner wrote to the department after the death of Kevin Gale, to warn DWP that it needed to act to prevent flaws in the universal credit system leading to further deaths, after Gale took his own life after becoming overwhelmed by the application process.

And last month, DNS reported how a disabled woman left traumatised by the daily demands of universal credit took her own life just seven days after being told she would need to attend a face-to-face meeting with a work coach. Her inquest has yet to take place.

Thanks to a secret DWP decision, the criteria for when to carry out an IPR was weakened in April 2021 (see separate story).

Previously, whenever DWP became aware that a claimant had died by suicide it would order an IPR, even if there were no allegations that its actions had contributed to the death.

But since April 2021, after weakening the rules, DWP now only carries out an IPR following the suicide of a claimant if there is already an allegation that DWP’s actions “may have negatively contributed to the customer’s circumstances” and the claimant has “suffered serious harm, has died (including by suicide), or where it has reason to believe there has been an attempted suicide”.

IPRs are also carried out if DWP is asked to participate in a safeguarding adults review, a significant case review (in Scotland), or a domestic homicide review, or is named as an interested party at an inquest.

*Many claimants will have been receiving more than one benefit

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the deaths linked to DWP and the years of cover-ups by the department, is published by Pluto Press 

Access to Work spending doubles in seven years

Spending on supporting disabled people in work through a disability employment scheme has more than doubled in real terms in the last seven years, new government figures have revealed.

The new Access to Work statistics, published by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), show the amount spent on assistance such as equipment, travel and support workers increased from £127 million in 2016-17 to £255 million in 2023-24, once the effects of inflation have been allowed for.

Spending rose even faster last year, increasing by 34 per cent, from £191 million in 2022-23 to £255 million in 2023-24.

The largest proportion of spending was on support workers, with £178 million spent last year, followed by £43 million on travel to work and £21 million on aids and equipment.

The number of disabled people receiving Access to Work (AtW) support increased by more than 15,000 last year (from 34,800 in 2022-23 to 49,920 in 2023-24), a rise of 43 per cent.

There are now more than twice the number of people receiving Access to Work support than there were in 2017-18, when there were just 22,460.

But the figures also show that the average level of support per disabled person has fallen significantly in the last six years.

In 2017-18, the average level of support was £5,922, but last year it was only £5,112.

There are also continuing concerns with the way the scheme is run.

Last month, Disability News Service reported that disabled people working in the creative and cultural sectors were increasingly seeing cuts to the support they receive through AtW.

And employment minister Alison McGovern said early last month that there were about 55,000 AtW applications yet to be dealt with, in a response to a written question from Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson Steve Darling.

Despite the figures apparently showing a significant investment by the last government in supporting disabled people in jobs, Conservative ministers rarely if ever highlighted how much they were spending on the scheme.

At last year’s Conservative party conference, the minister for disabled people, Tom Pursglove, twice spoke about the importance of the scheme without mentioning a huge real terms increase in spending of 15 per cent on the previous year.

Instead, Conservative ministers focused their efforts on attacking disabled people who were not able to work and were economically “inactive” and receiving “welfare”.

Prime minister Rishi Sunak spoke at the 2023 conference of how supporting so many disabled people on out-of-work benefits was “not good for our economy” and “not fair on taxpayers who have to pick up the bill”, and he called it a “national scandal”.

The chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, spoke at the same conference of 100,000 people every year who were leaving jobs “for a life on benefits” after being found not fit for work.

For years under successive Conservative-led governments from 2010 onwards, spending on the scheme was restricted, with the numbers of disabled people receiving AtW support only passing the 2010 level in 2018-19.

Delay in publishing Leadbeater bill ‘is truly shocking’

Disabled activists have criticised the “truly shocking” failure of an MP to publish a bill that aims to legalise assisted suicide, just three weeks before it is due to be debated – and voted on – by MPs.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s terminally ill adults (end of life) bill will be debated by MPs on 29 November.

But the bill has yet to be published, although it is now due to be released early next week after reports of growing concerns.

Disabled campaigners who have raised serious doubts about the safety of legalisation, say the failure to provide MPs and the public with enough time to analyse the contents of the bill shows a “shocking lack of democratic process”.

Disabled activist and author Ellen Clifford, coordinator of the coalition of UK disabled people’s organisations that monitors implementation of the UN disability convention, said: “The lack of published text is yet further evidence of why MPs must vote against this bill.

“The private members’ bill mechanism gives too little space for appropriate scrutiny and oversight for a matter of this significance.

“I would urge everyone who can to contact their constituency MP and make the case that even if they think they are in favour of legalisation, they cannot let the Leadbeater bill pass.”

Paula Peters, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts, said it was “absolutely reprehensible that Kim Leadbeater’s bill has not been published and no text is available”.

She said: “MPs have no idea what is in the bill. This is a shocking lack of democratic process.

“This is literally life and death to disabled people. It’s terrifying.

“That MPs have no access to a bill they are supposed to debate and vote on is truly shocking.”

Peters called on disabled people to write to their MP about the bill and the “deep concerns” over the long-term impact of legalisation in countries such as Canada, where “medical assistance in dying” was the sixth highest cause of death in 2022.

A spokesperson for Leadbeater said today (Thursday): “The bill will be published early next week, giving MPs the best part of three weeks to study it before the debate on November 29th.”

Opposition to the bill among MPs – or at least to plans by its supporters to rush it through parliament – appears to be growing.

The Guardian reported last week that there was anger among new Labour MPs “about the speed of the bill” and “a strong feeling that the vote should not take place until the government can show significant improvements to the state of the NHS”.

Among senior figures in the government who have raised concerns about the bill and plan to vote against it are health secretary Wes Streeting and justice secretary Shabana Mahmood, both of whom would have key responsibilities for implementing any new law.

Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall and culture secretary Lisa Nandy are both reported to be in favour of the bill.

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

England’s overstretched adult social care services need urgent government intervention to stabilise them financially as rising costs and demand play havoc with council budgets, care bosses have warned. The financial challenge is “as bad as it has been in recent history”, the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services said, with services under “intolerable pressures”. Four out of five councils are on course to overspend their adult social care budgets, while more than a third have been forced to tear up savings plans and impose a fresh round of cuts mid-way through the year: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/06/adult-social-care-in-england-needs-urgent-help-from-ministers-say-bosses

The government is looking again at whether disabled people in England should be able to claim more than £30,000 to make adaptations to their homes. Ministers have agreed to review the cap on the Disabled Facilities Grant after a court challenge. The upper limit for claims in England has not been raised since 2008 and a pledge to increase it, made in 2021, was shelved by the last government: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmzjdllex9o

MPs are launching an inquiry into the cost of “inaction” on the adult social care crisis. After years of failure to fix the broken system, the health and social care committee will look at the impact on the NHS and local councils. It will also examine how any cost of inaction is felt if people feel the need to stop or cut their working hours as they wait for care or become full time unpaid carers: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/mps-launch-inquiry-cost-inaction-34026259

Parents have said their disabled children have been left “humiliated” at school after being told they must carry lanyards that detail their impairments. Disabled pupils at Werneth School in Stockport, Greater Manchester, have been told to wear or carry sunflower lanyards or face disciplinary action. One mother said it was “disgusting” that her 12-year-old autistic son Finlay had been “forced” to carry the pass, adding he had been targeted by school bullies as a result: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdrdxzx2e1jo

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

This year’s Disability History Month theme is Disability Livelihood and Employment. Disability History Month (DHM) runs from 14th November to 20th December 2024.

Read more on DHM.

Get tickets to the online launch event here.

Fear, anger and confusion as budget blundering creates chaos over government’s plans for ‘fit for work’ test

The new Labour government’s policy on social security reform is in chaos after it issued contrasting statements and briefings on budget day about whether – and how – it would press ahead with planned Conservative cuts to spending on out-of-work disability benefits.

Disabled activists warned that the government’s refusal to clarify the position on reforms to the work capability assessment (WCA) would only add to the distress being felt by hundreds of thousands of claimants.

The confusion surrounds whether the government would implement controversial reforms announced by the last government that would tighten the WCA.

The changes would be introduced next year and would see 424,000 disabled people lose their entitlement to extra support of up to £4,900 a year by 2028-29.

It came as a high court “disclosure hearing” is due to take place today (Thursday) as part of a legal challenge into whether last year’s consultation on these changes to the WCA were lawful.

The full hearing of the legal challenge, taken by disabled activist and author Ellen Clifford, will take place on 10 and 11 December.

Yesterday’s chaos started with comments by chancellor Rachel Reeves, who was delivering her first budget speech.

She spoke of the need to “reduce the benefits bill” and “ensure that welfare spending is more sustainable”, and told MPs that Labour had “inherited the last government’s plans to reform the work capability assessment”.

She said: “We will deliver those savings as part of our fundamental reforms to the health and disability benefits system that [work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall] will bring forward.”

Although many disabled activists assumed she was referring to the plans to tighten the WCA – as did mainstream media and charities – there was no mention of any such cost savings in the budget documents.

When Disability News Service asked the Treasury why no savings were mentioned in the budget report and to clarify Reeves’ comments, a spokesperson claimed the chancellor was referring to “the government’s already-stated intention to reform or replace the work capability assessment”.

He added: “We’re taking the time to review this in the round before setting out next steps on our approach in the coming months.”

It then emerged that social security and disability minister Sir Stephen Timms had been briefing some disability organisations about the budget after the Reeves speech.

Reports from those who attended the briefings suggest that the government has not yet decided whether to go ahead with Conservative plans to tighten the WCA.

Sir Stephen reportedly said that a similar level of savings on social security would have to be made, but not necessarily by reforming the WCA in the way proposed by the last government.

But he is also reported to have said in another briefing that he would not go ahead with the Conservative WCA plans.

The chaos follows months of confusing and misleading statements from the new government on its plans for reform of disability benefits and disability employment.

Only last week, employment minister Alison McGovern appeared to quash claims made by Kendall – her boss – in a BBC interview that she was planning to send work coaches onto mental health wards.

And earlier this month, DWP refused to clarify comments by the prime minister which suggested that all claimants of long-term sickness benefits would be expected to look for work under Labour’s social security reforms.

Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) expressed anger at the confusion and lack of clarity on the government’s plans, and at the apparent commitment to further cuts to disability support.

Bob Ellard, a member of DPAC’s national steering group, said: “Disabled people are scared and angry, having waited too long for the budget expecting the burden of government failure to fall yet again on us.

“We’ve been led to expect better from Labour, only to find their attitude is just as uncaring and vicious as before.

“Our needs have been ignored as usual, and now more of us will suffer and more of us will die due to Reeves’ callousness.”

Rick Burgess, a spokesperson for Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People, said: “The lack of clarity on the WCA causes distress, as does the messaging around benefits that ministers have engaged in.

“The savings the government envisage logically can only come from fewer people getting disability benefits, yet disabled people are not reducing in numbers, we are increasing – not least due to long Covid – so this can only mean disabled people will be refused the support they have a right to while being hounded and spied upon by the state.”

Caroline Collier, from Inclusion Barnet’s Campaign for Disability Justice, said a “cloud of uncertainty still hangs over disabled people and the financial support they are entitled to expect”.

She said: “The sooner that cloud is lifted, the better – and we shall be holding the government to its word that disabled people will be fully consulted.

“And this absolutely needs to be an agenda that allows all disabled people a decent standard of living, provides genuine employment opportunities without compulsion and treats disabled people with respect.”

Budget failed on addressing systemic challenges facing disabled people, Treasury is told

Labour’s first budget for 15 years has failed to do enough to address the “systemic challenges” faced by disabled people across society, user-led organisations have warned the Treasury.

The first budget speech of chancellor Rachel Reeves included no serious attempt to address the crises in accessible housing, adult social care and inclusive education – although there was some new funding – or the huge barriers in accessible transport.

Instead, there was a clear focus on “cracking down” on benefit fraud and investing in new schemes to push “inactive” disabled people into work.

Reeves mentioned the government’s fraud, error and debt bill, which the chancellor said would provide “direct access to bank accounts to recover debt”, strengthening the powers of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

The budget report highlights how the bill will also introduce “new powers to check benefits are being paid correctly using data shared by banks and financial institutions”, which disabled campaigners have warned will see DWP ordering banks to “spy” on the accounts of benefit claimants.

Reeves also confirmed that next April’s annual increase in working-age benefits would be just 1.7 per cent, because of the low rate of inflation in September.

The only direct mention of disabled people in her speech was when she said ministers would deliver the cuts to out-of-work disability benefits planned by the last government, although her comments sparked huge confusion among activists, disabled people’s organisations, charities and the media (see separate story).

Despite the failure to place any focus on disability equality, Reeves did announce a £1 billion increase in spending on special educational needs (SEN), a real terms increase of six per cent; and £600 million extra in grant funding for social care, although it is not yet clear if this is solely for adult social care.

Her speech came just days after a report published by the government found that tens of thousands more disabled children could have their needs met in a mainstream setting rather than a special school, if there were major improvements to the SEN system (see separate story).

The budget report also reveals an £86 million increase in spending on the Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG), which will support “around 7,800” more adaptations to disabled people’s homes, although Reeves made no mention of this in her speech.

That figure suggests DFG spending – which currently helps to adapt about 50,000 homes a year – will rise by nearly 14 per cent in 2025-26.

The budget report makes clear that work and pensions ministers plan to set out their plans for reforming disability benefits early in 2025.

Reeves said the government would soon publish its Get Britain Working white paper, which she said would take “an integrated approach across health, education and welfare” to addressing the “root causes of inactivity”.

The budget report says the government is providing “record levels of capital investment in health” to help reduce NHS waiting-lists and “thereby supporting people into work”.

And it says the white paper will show how the government will “test new approaches and collect robust evidence on how to tackle the root causes of ill-health related inactivity”.

It will set up eight “trailblazer” areas across England and Wales that bring together health, employment and skills services to “improve the support available to those who are inactive due to ill health and help them return to work”.

This will include NHS England “health and growth accelerators” in at least three areas to “develop evidence of the impact of targeted action on the top health conditions driving economic inactivity”.

The government will also spend £115 million next year on a new supported employment programme, Connect to Work.

From 2026-27, the Connect to Work programme will support nearly 100,000 disabled people a year, with councils able to “tailor their delivery” of the scheme “in ways that meet their local needs”.

In total, the budget report says, the government will spend more than £800 million on disability employment support in 2025-26.

The budget report also says the government will spend £120 million in 2025-26 to support the purchase of new electric vans and support the manufacture of wheelchair-accessible electric vehicles.

In response to the budget, DPO Forum England – whose members include nearly 50 disabled people’s organisations, such as Greater Manchester Disabled People’s Panel, Inclusion London and Buckinghamshire Disability Service – has written to the Treasury to express its concern at the measures announced by Reeves.

It said the budget “fails to address the level of poverty experienced by disabled people” and that it saw the focus on getting the “economically inactive” back to work as “targeting vulnerable groups like the sick, disabled, and young people with mental health issues”.

It told the Treasury: “The increases in disability benefits, social care, and special educational needs funding are a drop in the ocean compared to the actual funding shortfalls, which are estimated to be much higher.”

The forum said the budget had failed to “adequately address” the “systemic challenges” around inclusive education, carers’ support, and the institutionalisation of disabled children.

And it said the budget “appears to further the troubling regression of disabled people’s rights, falling short of the support required to rectify these issues and build a genuinely inclusive society”.

Julia Modern, senior policy and campaigns manager at Inclusion London, said the budget was “a huge missed opportunity to reset the relationship with disabled people”.

She said: “The chancellor claims her budget shows ‘no return to austerity’; she really should have added ‘except for disabled people’.

“While we are pleased to see modest increases in some budgets for essential services like the NHS and an additional £600 million for local government-provided social care (a drop in the ocean compared to the scale of crisis in the £28 billion a year system), there is nothing in the budget to address the huge rates of poverty among disabled people.

“Instead, our social security is being eroded.”

Disability Rights UK (DR UK) said the budget represented “a failure to make real change”.

A DR UK spokesperson said: “Despite the minimal uplift in spending to fund our crumbling public services, the budget doesn’t give disabled people the confidence that the services we rely on every day will tangibly get better.

“At the end of the day, the biggest announcement was one our community had been expecting: more disabled and working-class people seeing their benefits cut whilst there will be no real difference in our local services.”

Gabrielle Johnson, communications and membership manager for National Survivor User Network, said there was frustration “at the ongoing neglect of appropriate social security for those most in need of state support” and the government’s decision to “reinforce harmful rhetoric” through measures in its fraud, error and debt bill.

They said the bill would give DWP “access to benefit recipients’ financial records without their consent, criminalising disabled people and creating fear and anxiety around penalisation”.

And they said the Get Britain Working white paper evoked “familiar and damaging messaging around the inherent value of human life as a tool to economic productivity”.

Johnson said: “Seriously ill and disabled people, including those with lived experience of mental ill-health, distress and trauma, deserve dignity, care and personalised support, but our government seems unable to meet even the very basic needs of those made vulnerable by the policies they continue to implement.”

SEN improvements ‘could see tens of thousands more disabled children educated in mainstream schools’

Tens of thousands more disabled children could have their needs met in a mainstream setting rather than a special school, if there were major improvements to the special educational needs (SEN) system, a report published by the government has found.

The report, commissioned under the last government, summarises the first phase of the Delivering Better Value in SEND programme, which aims to find ways to improve “outcomes” for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) across 54 local authorities.

Each of the 54 councils received a £1 million grant to support their work.

The stories of more than 1,650 children and young people with SEND were analysed, leading to the conclusion that if the system was improved, 65 per cent of those children and young people could have had their needs met in a more effective way.

Such an improvement could lead to 35,000 more children having their needs met in a mainstream setting rather than a specialist placement, the report says.

The report concludes that the proportion of children and young people with SEND in mainstream schools would ideally increase from 42.3 per cent to 49.9 per cent, with those in resourced provision* and SEN units attached to mainstream schools increasing from 2.3 per cent to 12.9 per cent, and those in special schools falling from 37.9 per cent to 21.8 per cent.

The research also highlights 17 ways in which changes to the local education system had the biggest impact on outcomes for children and young people with SEND.

Nearly all of them related to improvements made by mainstream schools.

These included providing teaching assistants; adapting the curriculum; other children being inclusive of disabled children; disabled children being able to access after school clubs; making secondary schools a more welcoming environment for disabled children; and improving training for mainstream school staff in how to support disabled children.

The research was published as a National Audit Office (NAO) report concluded that, if left unreformed, the SEN system was “financially unsustainable”.

The NAO report also found that, since 2014, the Department for Education (DfE) has been aiming for mainstream schools to be more inclusive, but there was “limited evidence of progress”.

DfE said earlier this year that just 69 per cent of primary school and 73 per cent of secondary school leaders were confident that their schools could effectively support pupils with SEN.

NAO said DfE had increased high-needs funding, with a 58 per cent real terms increase between 2014-15 and 2024-25 to £10.7 billion, but “the system is still not delivering better outcomes for children and young people or preventing local authorities from facing significant financial risks”.

The Alliance for Inclusive Education (ALLFIE), which submitted evidence to the NAO study, welcomed the report, and said it did not “shy away from the broken state of the SEN system and the urgent need for change”.

Michelle Daley, ALLFIE’s director, said DfE must take “concrete action to build public confidence in a system that truly serves all children and young people”, including those in under-resourced areas and for families of disabled children from marginalised communities.

And she said this action must include “phasing out funding for segregated provisions and establishing clear, sustainable, and long-term goals for inclusive education in mainstream settings”.

Dr Edmore Masendeke, ALLFIE’s policy and research lead, said the NAO report showed how government polices “continue to favour segregated provisions over inclusive education in mainstream settings” and highlighted how DfE had failed to make a “clear commitment” to define “inclusive education” or to set “specific, measurable outcomes for mainstream settings to support disabled pupils effectively”.

He said the NAO report suggested that DfE wanted to develop more segregated units attached to mainstream schools, which ALLFIE strongly opposed because it would perpetuate disablism and discrimination.

Daley said the NAO report highlighted a “troubling narrative” that blamed disabled children and young people for high spending on SEN and lowering school performance “rather than addressing the systemic inequities within the education system”.

She said this “scapegoating” diverted attention from the systemic failings within the SEN system, and the disablism in the assessment systems that hindered disabled pupils’ academic progress.

Despite the NAO report, Catherine McKinnell, the minister for school standards, said the Delivering Better Value in SEND research was “light at the end of the tunnel”.

She told MPs that it suggested that if the SEND system was “extensively improved through early intervention and better resourcing in mainstream schools”, it would mean tens of thousands fewer education, health and care plans would be needed, and tens of thousands more children would be educated in mainstream settings rather than special schools.

She said: “That can pave the way for a sustainable system in which schools cater for all children, and special schools cater only for those with the most complex needs.”

She said government measures to improve the system would include strengthening how schools are held to account over inclusion; improving SEND training for early years staff “to ensure that children’s needs can be identified at the earliest point”; a review of the curriculum and assessments; and changes to Ofsted inspections.

McKinnell told MPs that the current system had “totally lost the confidence of families” and that families and disabled children were “being failed on every measure”.

Munira Wilson, the Liberal Democrat education spokesperson, said the NAO report had confirmed that the SEND system was “in crisis and on the brink”.

She said: “The last Conservative government’s abject failure to tackle the systemic problems facing SEND provision has been laid bare for all to see.”

Wilson said MPs had been “inundated with casework from concerned and often desperate parents who just want to know that their children will receive the support they need without waiting for months or years”.

*Resourced provision is where a disabled child has a place at a mainstream school, but also has some support from specialist services based at the school

Government pledge to scrap discriminatory ban on online attendance ‘could be first step towards inclusion’

Disabled politicians have welcomed the government’s pledge to scrap the ban on councillors attending meetings online, which should see an end to some of the discrimination they face when trying to play a role in local government.

Labour’s deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, has promised to change the law to allow disabled councillors and other elected members to take part in meetings remotely if they face barriers to attending in person.

Ministers believe that granting local authorities the power to allow councillors to attend hybrid or remote meetings* would both increase the diversity of local councillors and “enhance the resilience” of local authorities in the face of local or national emergencies.

They also believe it would “modernise democratic engagement, raise standards and widen the range of candidates standing for council by removing unnecessary barriers”.

The last Conservative government repeatedly rejected pleas to scrap rules that currently prevent disabled representatives and others from taking part in council meetings remotely, despite some Conservative MPs and peers urging them to change the law.

During the early stages of the pandemic, emergency regulations allowed council meetings to be held online – or in a hybrid combination of in-person and online attendance – but they were scrapped in May 2021.

Since then, it has been illegal for councils in England to hold hybrid or virtual meetings, although the Welsh government passed laws allowing remote meetings three years ago, while Scottish local authorities have been able to do so for 20 years.

Angela Rayner, who is deputy prime minister and secretary of state for local government, has now launched an eight-week consultation on plans that would allow both “remote attendance” and “proxy voting” at local authority meetings in England.

Proxy voting would allow an elected member to give their vote to a colleague to use on their behalf if they are unable to attend a meeting, for example during maternity, paternity or adoption leave.

Rayner said in a speech to the Local Government Association last Thursday that the measures would make it possible “for people from all walks of life to have a stake in local democracy, whether they have caring responsibilities or aren’t able to make it to the town hall in person because of illness or disability”.

Ministers say they believe the new laws “will encourage a wider diversity of people willing and able to stand and actively participate in local democracy by creating improved conditions where meetings are accessible and inclusive”.

Disabled former councillor Blossom Gottlieb welcomed the government’s announcement.

She was elected as a Green councillor for East Hampshire District Council in October 2021 but did not stand for re-election in May 2023 because of the current laws preventing councillors taking part in meetings remotely.

She was not allowed to vote or speak at meetings because she could not attend in person.

She helped the Green party campaign for a change in the law.

She told Disability News Service: “This ableist law did stop me from continuing as a councillor, which was exceptionally disappointing.

“I am utterly delighted change has finally been made, and am proud of the part I played.

“It will benefit so many people, not only increasing inclusivity in local politics by making it more accessible to the disabled population, but also to anyone who has caring responsibilities, such as those looking after their parents or children, or anyone experiencing temporary mobility issues.

“I had almost lost hope for my political career, but this news might just reignite it, who knows.”

Another former disabled councillor, Nico Reznick, also welcomed the government announcement, but only if it was a first step towards “meaningful” inclusion in society for disabled people and Labour did not use it as “a smokescreen to try and cover a larger issue”.

She became disabled after contracting Covid early in the pandemic while working in a care home, and was left clinically extremely vulnerable.

Wanting to continue to serve her local community, she became a member of her town council but was faced with “token” efforts to ensure access and inclusion, with meetings “cramped, poorly ventilated affairs, with no requirements for attendees to stay away if ill”.

Although she was allowed to attend meetings virtually, she was not allowed to table motions or vote unless she was physically present, even if she sat in an empty office in the same building.

She was told that the ban on remote attendance applied nationally, while her local Conservative MP refused to lobby on her behalf.

She eventually stopped taking part in council meetings as the experience was “just too demoralising”, and a waste of her time and limited energy.

She said the discrimination, apathy and lack of compassion she faced added to her sense of “exclusion, isolation and mounting depression”, when all she had wanted was “a way to serve my community within my limitations”.

Although she welcomed the announcement, she said: “The government needs to do far, far more to include disabled people in the conversations that end up deciding so much about our lives.

“The pandemic (still ongoing, if ignored) is creating more disabled people every day, and the last few years have seen us increasingly vilified in the media as burdensome scroungers and fakers.”

She pointed particularly to concerns around messaging on social security and the potential legalisation of assisted suicide.

Reznick said inclusion for disabled people had to be improved “at all levels of local and national government”.

She said: “We want and deserve a voice.

“Hopefully, this move will be the first step of many that will help disabled individuals take their rightful place in society.”

Another to welcome the announcement was Mike Jewkes, Labour’s disability officer for North Warwickshire and Bedworth, who said the current rules were one of the key reasons he did not seek to stand in the last county council elections.

He told DNS: “I felt I couldn’t stand in the county elections as public transport accessibility in rural areas is abysmal and for me it would be a trip of two or three trains or four buses with a mobility scooter to attend.

“I feel that [if hybrid meetings are allowed] not only will this assist in better representation from the disabled community but also will assist parents to be more involved, along with carers and anyone who leads a busy life but wants to add something to their community.”

*Remote meetings are those where everyone attends online; with hybrid meetings, some attend online and others attend in person

Government must reverse Tory policy on adapting to climate change, say disabled activists after court defeat

Disabled activists have called on Labour ministers to reverse the position of the last government on adapting to climate change, following a high court setback.

The high court ruled on Friday that the last government’s climate adaptation plan was lawful.

Doug Paulley, and fellow disabled campaigner Kevin Jordan, had joined with Friends of the Earth to challenge the UK government’s failure to protect people, property and infrastructure from climate change’s foreseeable impacts.

Their lawyers had argued that the current version of the government’s National Adaptation Programme (NAP) breached both the Climate Change Act and the Human Rights Act.

Paulley, Jordan and their lawyers are now considering an appeal against the ruling*.

Paulley had argued that disabled people were disproportionately affected by the impacts of climate change but had been “badly let down” by the last government’s NAP.

He said the Conservative government’s NAP completely failed to address the threats disabled people face from extreme weather, such as flooding and heatwaves, and power cuts during storms.

The legal case also argued that searing summer temperatures significantly impacted him because of long-term health conditions that make him susceptible to over-heating, causing distress and discomfort, and risking serious harm.

Jordan was made homeless shortly before last Christmas, when his house in Hemsby, Norfolk, was demolished after coastal erosion fuelled by rising sea levels and severe storms caused by climate change put it in severe danger of falling into the sea.

Friends of the Earth wants the new Labour government to agree that the NAP is inadequate and to amend it along the lines of recommendations from the statutory Climate Change Committee, the government’s independent climate advisor.

Paulley called on the new government to “ensure they include disabled people and our needs in all policy development from the beginning”.

He told Disability News Service: “Only by involving us and our organisations from the start can our experiences, expertise and needs be properly included.

“Climate change is happening, people are suffering, disabled people are always first against the wall in any crisis or emergency, and we need the government to do what it can to mitigate the impact and protect us as much as possible.”

He pointed to the disproportionate impact on disabled people of natural disasters caused by climate change, such as flooding in Germany in 2021 and Hurricane Katrina in the US.

Paulley, who praised the collaboration between environmentalists, disabled people and lawyers, added: “Climate change is an existential threat to disabled people.”

Jordan said he was “extremely disappointed” by the judgment.

He said: “Without a tougher set of government policies to protect us, more people will face the horror of seeing their homes, lives and livelihoods threatened by the growing impacts of our rapidly changing climate.

“It’s bad enough that communities like mine have already lost so much through the lack of foresight and planning for the foreseeable effects of climate breakdown.

“I don’t want anyone else to endure what we’ve been through. But many undoubtedly will, unless the government strengthens its adaptation plans.”

DEFRA declined to provide a statement on the new government’s position; on whether it would work with disabled people on this and other policies that would impact them; and on why the new government continued to fight the legal case when it appeared to align with Labour’s election manifesto promises.

But DEFRA said it understood that preparing for the future would mean tackling the climate and nature emergencies, but also adapting to the changes they will bring.

It welcomed the court’s judgment that the NAP was lawful but said it was committed to strengthening the approach to climate resilience and would bring forward plans in due course.

*Although they lost the case, the court ruled that the last government had breached the Equality Act’s public sector equality duty, but as it carried out an equality impact assessment after being notified of the legal case – even though this did not lead to a change in policy – it was found to have retrospectively met its legal duties

Regulator’s state of the nation report stays almost silent on safety and quality of adult social care

The care regulator’s annual assessment of “the state of health and care” in England includes almost no discussion of the quality and safety of adult social care services, analysis of the report has revealed.

Large sections of the Care Quality Commission’s State of Care report are devoted to discussion of the quality of care in the NHS, including in mental health services, cancer care, maternity care, dementia care, and services for children.

But there is no analysis or discussion of the safety and quality of a wide sweep of long-term adult social care services, such as home care and residential home provision, other than a small section that praises the work of the minority of “outstanding providers”.

A Care Quality Commission (CQC) press release says the report is supposed to look at “the quality of care over the past year”, but at no point in the 180-page report does CQC discuss the overall quality and safety of adult social care services in England, even though it should have access to that information through its programme of inspections.

Instead, the report’s adult social care section focuses on the number of requests for council support, the number of people waiting for care services, the number of delayed discharges, staff vacancies, recruitment of care staff, and bed occupancy rates in care homes.

In the report’s appendix, there are two tables which provide figures for how adult social care services were rated, but there is no comparison with previous years.

The report does discuss the safety and quality of intermediate care – short-term services usually provided by a mix of health and social care professionals.

And there is a section on “restrictive practice” in services for autistic people and people with learning difficulties, which includes concerns about the inappropriate use of chemical restraint and about “closed cultures” where staff do not speak up about abuse.

The report says that CQC analysis of information provided by care homes found that in settings where more than half of residents were recorded as autistic or having learning difficulties, the incidence of restraint was on average nearly 12 times higher than in care homes where nobody was recorded as being autistic or having learning difficulties.

Earlier this month, a review ordered by the last government found “significant failings” within the CQC.

The review of the effectiveness of the commission found an “urgent need” for a rapid turnaround in the way it operates, with the proportion of health and care settings that had never received a rating rising from 13 per cent to 19 per cent over the last five years.

The State of Care report found that, in 2022-23, the number of new requests for council-funded adult social care support that did not result in a service being provided had increased by 27 per cent since 2017-18.

And it said that people in black or black British ethnic groups were over three-and-a-half times more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act than people in white ethnic groups.

The report also raised concerns over the increasing number of people who need the protection provided by the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) system.

The safeguards were introduced nearly 20 years ago and were designed to protect the human rights of adults in care homes and hospitals who do not have the capacity to consent to their care arrangements and need to be deprived of their liberty.

The report says: “Too many people are waiting too long for a DoLS authorisation, while variation in the level of knowledge of staff means that others may not have a DoLS authorisation in place when they need one.

“For many, the current DoLS system is not providing the vital safeguards they need.

“After a decade of chronic and widely documented issues, urgent action is required to ensure the system does not continue to fail people in the future.”

In response to concerns raised by Disability News Service about the report, a CQC spokesperson said: “This year our State of Care report focuses on the urgent issues facing care services for children.

“The report builds upon findings from previous years’ reports of which adult social care was a main focus.

“On adult social care we draw attention to the fragility of the sector, highlighting the delays in local authority support and the impact this can have on care.

“The report includes experiences of those living with and supporting people with dementia, as well as the impact workforce pressures are having on the sector.

“We also highlight significant concerns in the care provided to those with learning disability and autism, emphasising inadequate support, and the need for improved safety and quality of services.

“We continue to closely monitor adult social care services and the level of care being provided.”

The commission said it was working to improve and develop its approach to assessments, and was unable to compare ratings with previous years as they are in a transition period.

Title of assisted suicide bill is ‘misleading’ and ‘argumentative’, say disabled campaigners

A disabled people’s organisation has called on MPs to try to change the “misleading” and “argumentative” title of a bill that aims to legalise assisted suicide.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s terminally ill adults (end of life) bill is set to be debated by MPs, and voted on, at the end of November.

But Buckinghamshire Disability Service (BuDS) believes the short title of Leadbeater’s private members’ bill does not accurately describe what the legislation would do if passed into law.

Whereas the bill’s short title suggests that the proposed legislation will assist with palliative care and other arrangements for those who are terminally-ill, in fact it would legalise assisted suicide in England and Wales for the first time.

BuDS has written to the speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, to ask him to intervene in the naming of the bill.

In the letter, BuDS says that parliamentary rules are clear that the title of a bill should not be misleading or “argumentative”.

BuDS says the long title makes it clear that the bill is “concerned solely with providing assistance to terminally ill adults to take their own life”, so the short title is “misleading”.

It also says that the use of a “euphemistic” phrase like “end of life” is “both argumentative and sloganistic”.

BuDS suggests in the letter that a more “factual and straightforward” title for the bill might be the assisted suicide (terminally ill adults) bill.

Disability News Service has been told by the Commons that the “orderliness” of a bill’s title is considered by officials acting under the speaker’s authority before its first reading, but that it can also be debated during the bill’s passage through parliament.

MPs will have the opportunity to table an amendment to change the title of the bill at its second reading on Friday 29 November.

BuDS has also written to Leadbeater to ask her to withdraw the bill so the issue of legalisation can be considered in depth by a Royal Commission or a select committee inquiry.

Andrew Clark, chair of BuDS, said: “As a large network of disabled people, we continue to strongly feel that a private members’ bill is not an appropriate way to deal with such an important issue as assisted suicide.

“We have written to Kim Leadbeater MP asking her to withdraw her bill so that the issue of assisted suicide can be considered by Royal Commission or similar.

“Government legislation could then be brought forward to implement the commission’s recommendations, should it be necessary.

“However, if the lobby in favour of assisted suicide is determined to try to rush the legislation through in the form of a private members’ bill, we do think that the bill should at least be honest about its content.

“The long title of the bill (already published) makes it clear that it is not about general end of life issues.

“On the contrary, it deals only with assisting terminally ill adults to end their life.

“That is ‘assisted suicide’, and the bill should be called an assisted suicide bill.”

Leadbeater had not responded to a request for a comment by noon today (Thursday).

Meanwhile, opposition to the bill among MPs – or at least to plans by its supporters to rush it through parliament – appears to be growing.

The Guardian reported this week that there was anger among new Labour MPs “about the speed of the bill” and “a strong feeling that the vote should not take place until the government can show significant improvements to the state of the NHS”.

Among senior figures in the government who have raised concerns about the bill and plan to vote against it are health secretary Wes Streeting and justice secretary Shabana Mahmood, both of whom would have key responsibilities for implementing any new law.

The Guardian also reported that work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall and culture secretary Lisa Nandy are both in favour of the bill.

This week, Streeting told BBC Breakfast (watch from one hour 40 minutes) that it was “an incredibly difficult and complicated issue” and a “finely-balanced judgement”.

He said: “We are all wrestling with this across the political divide.

“I’ve made it clear that I’ll be voting against… that’s mainly because I don’t think that palliative care/end of life care is where it needs to be to give people a real choice.

“I am concerned about the risk of people being coerced into taking their lives sooner than they would have liked, or feeling – even without pressure from their families – sometimes guilt-tripped, feeling like a burden, and I’ve had to weigh up all of those issues.”

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

The earnings limit placed on people who claim government support for taking care of disabled, sick and elderly loved ones will rise by £45 a week, the chancellor has announced, after a six-month Guardian investigation into the carer’s allowance scandal. The changes will enable full-time unpaid carers who provide care for at least 35 hours a week to earn up to £196 a week from next April without forfeiting carer’s allowance benefit, currently £81.90 a week: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/oct/30/carers-earnings-limit-to-rise-by-45-a-week-in-wake-of-allowance-scandal

A woman whose nine-year-old daughter became the first person in the UK to have air pollution recognised as a factor in her death has settled legal action against the government for an undisclosed amount. Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah’s daughter Ella had a fatal asthma attack in 2013. In 2020, Southwark Coroner’s Court found air pollution “made a material contribution” to Ella’s death: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx6leg4nqo

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

⚠️TW⚠️ Assisted Dying

Read this post from Not Dead Yet UK on seven things you can do to help oppose the assisted dying bill

https://ndyuk.blogspot.com/2024/10/what-you-can-do-to-oppose-assisted.html?m=1

Click on the link above for more detail. Ways to support this campaign include:

Write to your MP

Make a video to share on social media

Watch Liz Carr’s documentary ‘Better Off Dead?’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001z8wc

Save the 29th November in your diary – this is the date of the 2nd reading of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Write to your MP

Email your MP to ask if they’ve read it

https://www.writetothem.com

DRUK

Disabled Activists Deliver Book Exposing Deaths At Hands of DWP To Every Member of Parliament

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/disabled-activists-deliver-book-exposing-deaths-hands-dwp-every-member-parliament

Disabled Activists Host Sit-In Outside Parliament After They Were Refused Entry To Meet With MPs

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/disabled-activists-host-sit-outside-parliament-after-they-were-refused-entry-meet-mps

Guardian

Labour MPs to be given book about the ‘enormous suffering’ caused by Tory welfare reform

https://www.theguardian.com/books/article/2024/aug/02/labour-mps-to-be-given-book-about-the-enormous-suffering-caused-by-tory-welfare-reform-the-department-john-pring

DNS

Crowdfunder will pay for 400 books to educate every Labour MP on decades of DWP violence

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/crowdfunder-will-pay-for-400-books-to-educate-every-labour-mp-on-decades-of-dwp-violence/

Crowdfunder’s final push could see book on ‘violent’ DWP sent to politicians across the country

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/crowdfunders-final-push-could-see-book-on-violent-dwp-sent-to-politicians-across-the-country/

Commons confirms MPs received DWP ‘violence’ book, as Reeves warns of ‘difficult’ decisions on ‘welfare’

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/commons-confirms-mps-received-dwp-violence-book-as-reeves-warns-of-difficult-decisions-on-welfare/

Big Issue

 

DWP says there’s ‘more learning to do’ as every MP given book on deaths of disabled benefit claimants

https://www.bigissue.com/news/activism/dwp-benefits-disabled-people-mps-book-the-department/

‘I’m going to die and I’m still not sick enough for PIP’: The reality of DWP disability benefits system

https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-disability-benefits-pip-claim-james-oliver/

The Canary

Disabled people stage SIT-IN at parliament as security BLOCK delivery of DWP exposé ‘The Department’

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2024/09/02/dwp-protest-parliament/

Morning Star

Disabled activists to deliver a book for every MP on austerity’s impact on their community

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/disabled-activists-deliver-book-every-mp-austeritys-impact-their-community

Socialist Worker

The state’s benefit ‘negligence’ causes deaths, misery and fear

https://socialistworker.co.uk/background-check/the-states-benefit-negligence-causes-deaths-misery-and-fear/

ITV News

Mum of woman who took own life after benefits stopped ‘wants answers’ from government

https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024-09-02/mum-of-woman-who-took-own-life-after-benefits-stopped-wants-answers

https://youtu.be/WumAE33JRak

Podcasts

 

Pod Save the UK

Is Britain’s benefits system broken? w/ Caroline Selman and John Pring

https://www.crooked.com/podcast/is-britains-benefits-system-broken-w-caroline-selman-and-john-pring/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWltDYDuFLM&t=5s

Radicals in Conversation

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence

 

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0P1Ux8XClPor8zIqsz2YRY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2BYvcwLNBc

Reviews

https://nowthenmagazine.com/articles/john-pring-a-devastating-read-john-prings-the-department-lays-bare-the-slow-bureaucratic-violence-of-the-dwp

https://www.independentliving.co.uk/industry-news/review-the-department-by-john-pring/

https://anticapitalistresistance.org/a-national-scandal-but-will-labour-fix-it/