[OccupySheffield] [politicsandspiritnetwork] Welfare reform - why disabled people are worried

Thu Jan 12 15:36:14 GMT 2012

Thanks so much for airing your views Amie. I am cc-ing this to Occupy Sheffield / UK list so more people can read your thoughts 
Sent from phone

-----Original Message-----
From: "Amie Slavin" <amie.slavin at ntlworld.com>
Sender: politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:10:29 
To: <politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [politicsandspiritnetwork] Welfare reform - why disabled people are worried

I gather the government report on their own consultation claimed that “some organisations” support the proposed changes.  In fact 98 % of organisations consulted vehemently oppose it.

The feeling being communicated to me, via disability networks, is that this trend of targeting the most vulnerable to pay for the excesses of those who didn’t need help in the first place will not change until people with disabilities are dying in their homes, for real.

Re- visual impairment, in particular, the assessment criteria do not include questions which get to the reality of our needs.  NO acknowledgement is made of not being able to read print, or needing extra help getting around etc.  We can walk, and if we don’t have additional health problems then we sail through the criteria, scoring no points and stand to lose benefit.

I don’t claim out of work benefits, so the ESA stuff doesn’t effect me directly, but I know that those who do are genuinely terrified of the future.  I do claim DLA and have literally ended up in tears of umiliation every time I’ve tried to fill in the form correctly to achieve my entitlement.  

We live in a time when those with disabilities are really supposed to be remembering that our proper place is where we were a couple of hundred years ago.  We should be grateful for our gruel, and should starve quietly if it doesn’tsuit the mainstream to offer it to us.

Angry?  No.  This is real; not posturing.  IN a climate where everyone is struggling, just try to imagine fighting all those same battles without the possibility of earning.

Finally, let it be remembered that the vast majority of disabled people never stop trying to get into meaningful employment.  Contrary to popular belief, people with disabilities have all the same urges to be useful, productive and contributive as everyone else.  We fight tooth and nail for our qualifications and the skills we need to live independently and then we can’t even get interviews for the jobs we are qualified for, unless we resort to lying on application forms in which case, of course, we’ll be weeded out at interview because we lied!

I’ve just this morning been visited by someone from my local council, sent to find out about my income.  I receive 5 hours per week’s worth of support with my house and garden, paid for through the Direct Payments system.

They wanted to see if I should be contributing anything to the cost of the support.

Turns out, though, they’re not interested in my earned income, only my DLA and any out of work benefits.  As I’m not on out of work benefits this means I don’t have to pay anything.  I said to the woman that while I’m not complaining, as this makes me a winner in this scenario, it seems very rough on people who are reliant on out of work benefits.

Her response was that the aim is to stop people relying on the state.

The idea that people choose to live on out of work and incapacity benefits is nothing more than an evil right-wing fantasy.  Sure, the odd few take the piss; they do in every walk of life.  The outcome of this policy, though, is going to be to cause real hardship, inevitably ending in some deaths, not least by suicide, of people who have done nothing less than their best to be a part of society, for the whole of their lives.

I’m wondering whether this truth is going to be recognised before our streets become littered with crip’s (and no you may not use that word unless you are one :o)).

Very glad to see this topic being aired beyond the ghetto though; this at least is good news.

A

From: politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com [mailto:politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of j
Sent: 11 January 2012 14:27
To: politicsandspiritnetwork at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [politicsandspiritnetwork] Welfare reform - why disabled people are worried

Welfarereform-whydisabledpeopleareworried

Wednesday 11 January 2012

This week sees developments in two areas of the welfare reform bill which potentially have huge impacts on disabled people. The benefits affected are disability living allowance (DLA) and employment and support allowance (ESA).

DLA is paid to 3.2 million disabled people. Despite what you may read in the tabloids, DLA is not an out-of-work benefit. If you need to use a wheelchair or someone to help you get out of bed, you will still have those needs if you work; so the benefit to pay for that help stays with you too.

Government 'misrepresentation'

A year ago the government consulted the public on getting rid of DLA and replacing it with a new benefit called personal independence payment (PIP) and produced a  <http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dla-reform-response.pdf> report based on consultation responseswhich was presented to MPs and peers as "proof" that disabled people broadly supported the changes.

The point of reforming DLA is to cut the disability living allowance budget by 20 per cent, despite the fact that only 0.5 per cent of claims are fraudulent.

However, this week a group of disability rights activists published a report based on freedom of information requests called  <https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B4c1KNg46tHFYmEzZjYwZGItYTBjYS00NWE5LWI0NGUtNmZiM2M0YWVlM2Q3&hl=en_US> Responsible Reform (referred to on Twitter as  <https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23spartacusreport> #spartacusreport), which showed that the government claims of support from the disabled community were misrepresentations.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has refused to finalise PIP criteria until after the welfare reform bill has passed, but  <http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2012/01/whats-wrong-with-personal-independence.html> the proposals would remove so much support from so many disabled people that we're terrified because  <http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/12/not-ok-triggerwarning.html> the results could be so devastating.

The point of reforming DLA is to  <http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2010/06/budget-proposes-cutting-dla-for-20-per-cent-of-claimants/> cut the disability living allowance budget by 20 per cent, despite the fact that only  <http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd2/fem/fem_oct09_sep10.pdf> 0.5 per cent of claims are fraudulent . This means the cut is an attack on genuinely disabled people and it's not a fraud-busting measure, so of course we don't support the changes. Responsible Reform proves that the DWP misled the Commons and Lords by telling them we did approve.

A DWP spokesperson told Channel 4 News: "The current benefit system is not always reaching those who need it most. That is why we are reforming DLA, replacing it with the personal independence payment. This will include a new face-to-face assessment and regular reviews - something missing in the current system - to make sure people are getting the right levels of support.

"Our reforms to incapacity benefit show that we are committed to helping thousands of people move from benefits and back into work and not writing people off as happened in the past. Those found too sick or disabled to work won't be expected to and will continue to receive the help and support they need."

'Difficult to claim'

The other big welfare story this week is ESA, the benefit for people who are unable to work for health reasons which was introduced by the Labour government to replace incapacity benefit. It is notoriously difficult to claim ESA  <http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/10/atos-wca-citizens-advice-right-first-time?CMP=twt_fd> because the assessment process is so very brutal. There are two types of ESA: contributory ESA and income-based ESA.

Income-based ESA is a means-tested benefit, so to get it you have to have almost no savings and no other income in your household (for example, a working partner). Contributory ESA, however, isn't means tested, so can be paid to people with large nest eggs, who live with a working partner or who have received compensation payouts. But it is only available to people who've paid a certain amount of national insurance contributions.

Lord amendment

The welfare reform bill in its current state would limit the time people can claim contributory ESA to only  <http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2012/01/whats-wrong-with-time-limiting.html> one year. This means that if you develop a condition such as cancer and you have a partner who earns more than £7,500 a year, you will lose your income after 12 months and the pair of you would be forced to get by on your partner's income.

 <http://www.disabilityalliance.org/dbcclause51.pdf> Lords Patel and McKenzie have put forward an amendment to lift the 365-day limit, and the Lords will be voting on this amendment on Wednesday. People who are currently disabled are scared the amendment will be rejected; but this will also have implications for anyone becoming ill or impaired in the future who thought they would get support from the welfare state they paid into.

Disabled people aren't asking for funding to live lavish lifestyles.

Disabled people aren't asking for funding to live lavish lifestyles. We're not even fighting for more money than we already have, despite the fact that  <http://wheresthebenefit.blogspot.com/2011/02/how-do-you-spend-yours.html> in early 2011 I calculated that my weekly income for 2010 was £67 short of the amount the Joseph Rowntree Foundation recommend for a minimum standard of living. We just don't want to see the support we depend on removed.

 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2011/nov/16/do-public-spending-cuts-kill> There have already been several suicides associated with not getting benefits in the previous 18 months. That was just admin errors and overzealous assessors. if vast swathes of people lose benefits they'd previously been eligible for, that list will explode.

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1416 / Virus Database: 2109/4136 - Release Date: 01/11/12

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.email-lists.org/pipermail/occupysheffield/attachments/20120112/4e9f6bd3/attachment.html>