Monday, 9 January 2012

How the government misled MPs to deprive disabled people


 

January 9, 2012 at 10:01 am

A report published today finds that Government misled MPs and Peers over hostility to disability benefit reform. It finds that Parliament has been given only a partial view of the overwhelming opposition to the Coalition’s planned reforms of a key disability benefit, Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
It also finds that this opposition was previously not released to public scrutiny by the Government.
The report is based on responses to the government’s own consultation on its planned DLA reforms, which were only made public once disabled people requested them under the Freedom of Information Act.

The key findings include:
• 98% of respondents objected to the qualifying period for benefits being raised from 3 months to 6 months
• 99% of respondents objected to Disability Living Allowance no longer being used as a qualification for other benefits
• 92% opposed removing the lowest rate of support for disabled people
In all three cases, as well as many others, London’s Conservative Mayor, Boris Johnson also objected to the proposed changes.
The Mayor would call for the Government to retain the three-month qualifying period as the increase to six months will mean that people with fluctuating conditions have increased difficulty meeting the qualifying period. People with fluctuating conditions face the same barriers that all disabled face in relation to higher costs of living and DLA is essential to maintain a decent quality of life.
We would recommend that the passporting system remains the same as under DLA as it has worked well when signposting people to additional benefits to which they may be entitled.
Report was entirely researched, written, funded and supported by disabled people.
It suggests that the government’s DLA consultation breached the government’s own code of practice and was “highly misleading”.
On Wednesday, 11th January, the House of Lords will be debating the Welfare Reform Bill.
Its authors now hope to use the report to persuade members of the House of Lords to back an adjournment debate calling for a pause of at least 6 months. In that time, plans for PIP should be reconsidered with the views of disabled people properly taken into account.

Liberal Conspiracy

No comments:

Post a Comment