A report published today (9 April) aims to kickstart a significant new debate about the failure of sickness and disability support in the UK, why and what must be done to improve it, and how current systems should be re-designed so that all members of society can achieve their goals and aspirations.
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 thousands 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 more will no longer benefit from the Motability vehicle scheme under new government proposals, writes Jane Young. Their car will simply be taken away before they have a chance to appeal. In this article she explains what is happening under proposals for the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and how concerned individuals and organisations can respond.
Today (19 November 2012) at 12.30pm the latest phase of a big online campaign to raise awareness about the injustices wrought by the flawed Work Capability Assessment (WCA), which is being used to block vitally needed benefits for many sick and disabled people, becomes visible.
After a walk through “the little world of poverty enclosed within the workhouse walls”, Charles Dickens concluded that “We have come to this absurd, this dangerous, this monstrous pass, that the dishonest felon is, in respect of cleanliness, order, diet, and accommodation, better provided for, and taken care of, than the honest pauper.”
The former UK minister for employment Chris Grayling was adamant that he was "unreservedly and implacably opposed to a real world test" when it comes to assessing people with disabilities and serious illnesses in terms of their fitness for work and eligibility for benefits. That position remains unchanged.