- News Brief
- Research & Policy
- Culture and Review
- Media Centre
Reach tens of thousands of people instantly by advertising with Ekklesia. Find out more
In January last year (2012) I predicted that thousands of disabled people would lose their Motability vehicles under the Government’s draft criteria for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), set to replace Disability Living Allowance (DLA) under the Welfare Reform Act. When the Government published the final version of the criteria recently, it turned out that the reality is far, far worse than we could have imagined. That is one of the harsh realities of the We Are Spartacus 'Emergency - Stop' report and campaign launched today.
Many consultation responses on the draft criteria complained that the descriptors for Activity 12 (Activity 11 in the draft), addressing physical difficulties in moving around, were unclear and confusing. We hoped they would be clarified; in particular, we expected clarification that being unable to walk more than 50 metres would qualify claimants for the enhanced mobility component and the Motability scheme. But we’re stunned by the decision that to qualify for Motability, a claimant needs to be unable to walk more than 20 metres – a far shorter distance.
This has massive repercussions for the majority of Motability customers who, whilst they might be able to walk 20 metres, do nonetheless have very significant difficulties getting around. Under the second draft criteria, published in January, DWP predicted that 27 per cent fewer working age people would be eligible for the scheme once PIP was fully rolled out. It is now clear from the Government’s own figures that 42 per cent fewer disabled people of working age will be eligible for the Motability scheme once PIP is fully rolled out than would have been eligible had DLA continued unchanged (see Personal Independence Payment: Reassessment and Impacts, published 13 December 2012).
So what will this mean for disabled people? Only those with the greatest difficulty getting around, mainly those who use a wheelchair most of the time, will qualify for the Motability scheme on grounds of physical impairment. Huge numbers of disabled people with serious musculo-skeletal conditions, serious heart conditions or respiratory difficulties, cerebral palsy, neurological conditions such as MS and ME and many, many more will no longer benefit from the scheme. Their car will simply be taken away before they have a chance to appeal.
Those who no longer qualify for Motability are likely to be unable to get to work, attend medical appointments, visit friends, go shopping or, indeed, have much of a life at all. More than a hundred thousand people, who were previously able to get out and about independently, will find themselves staring at four walls; they will need more support for essential journeys, such as medical appointments, and their quality of life will be decimated. When visiting a small supermarket, 20 metres doesn’t even get you from the parking space to the entrance, never mind around the supermarket. In fact, lots of people have to walk more than 20 metres from their car to their front door when they get home again!
Disabled people who live in rural areas will be hurt the most. What little public transport is available is less likely to be accessible. There may be no local shops, no GP or pharmacy nearby; asking for a lift to the GP means asking someone to commit a considerable part of their day to drive a considerable distance.
Recently I used my vehicle to go to stay with a friend in Kent for a couple of days, just for a bit of a break. It’s rather complicated, because I have to take large specially-made supports to shape the bed, my specialist pressure-relieving mattress, oxygen cylinders and a veritable pharmacy of medication, not forgetting plenty of morphine. But the important thing is, I can go; and I can also go to hospital appointments, support my elderly mother and her disabled neighbour, do voluntary work, go shopping etc. But I can only make these journeys because I have my wheelchair accessible vehicle, part-funded by Government grant.
I’ve made a video to show you what I mean (http://wp.me/pXz8s-lw). But it’s not just about me, it’s about all the others who have similar mobility needs to mine.
Then there’s the knock-on effect on the UK car industry and the wider economy. In our report, 'Reversing from Recovery', published in June 2012, the Spartacus network used the DWP’s own projections under the draft criteria to demonstrate the serious consequences of these changes. In short, the Treasury could lose £126 million in tax receipts from motor-related industries. And of course, if disabled people lose their jobs because they can no longer get to work, they will claim more in benefits and pay less tax.
Hundreds of thousands of disabled people whose cars are vital to their life and health stand to lose virtually everything. No car = no independence, no job, no salary (with a consequent risk of homelessness), no social life plus increased dependence on family members, health and social care services and other benefits to survive. This begs the question: how does this cut help disabled people to fulfill the social contract of being part of society and contributing by work, volunteering or being part of their community? Even those held up by the Minister for Disabled People, Esther McVey, as inspirational role models will have their lives cruelly and unnecessarily restricted.
The Government has clearly paid little heed to the impact of this ‘reform’ on disabled people’s human rights. There is no doubt that the PIP criteria for people with a physical difficulty in getting around is retrogressive under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ratified by the UK in 2009. The proposals seriously compromise disabled people’s human rights under several Articles of the Convention, including, among others, the right to live independently and to be included in the community (Article 19), and the right to personal mobility, specifically to….’ personal mobility with the greatest possible independence’ (Article 20).
This attack on the lives of disabled people who have difficulty getting around is NOT a price worth paying. MP’s on both sides of the House of Commons should vote these regulations down. The Government can, and must, do much better than this, if it really wants to build on the legacy of the Paralympics, as it claims.
Adapted from Jane Young's ongoing commentary about these issues: http://janeyoung.me.uk/tag/motability/
* We Are Spartacus Emergency-Stop campaign - http://wearespartacus.org.uk/emergency-stop/
* 'A serious threat to the mobility of disabled and sick people' - http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/17699
* Spartacus on PIP: http://wearespartacus.org.uk/pip-emergency-act-now/
* Petition: Call for call for a Cumulative Impact Assessment of Welfare Reform - http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/43154
* Disability issues on Ekklesia - http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/spartacusreport
© Jane Young is a disability consultant and campaigner, having previously been Disability Equality and Access Officer for Kingston Council in London. She has wide professional experience in relation to disability, social care and related issues and is active within the Spartacus (http://wearespartacus.org.uk) network, and other initiatives for the rights and dignity of disabled and sick people. More information about Jane, along with her writing, can be found here: http://janeyoung.me.uk/Tweet