The Cruellest Cut

So here we are, just over six months into the new Coalition Government's term of office. The emergency budget and the Comprehensive Spending Review are behind us. There was, of course, very little good news for disabled people - some small wins on housing allowance for those that employ a live in carer and an extra slice of local money to be spent on social care. But that was it. The rest was negative - especially plans on work related benefits, reductions in housing benefit, reductions in the value of Disability Living Allowance and so on.

I could go on in detail about the dramatic effects some of these cuts will have on disabled people. But this time I want to focus on the cruellest, meanest cut of all. The Chancellor has announced plans to remove the mobility component from disabled people living in residential care. This will effect every disabled person living in residential care who don't fund themselves. In other words, the vast majority.

DWP tell us that over 60,000 disabled people will be affected. That's 60,000 disabled people who won't have money in their pocket to pay for a taxi, a bus, a train or a tram. That's 60,000 disabled people who will lose their freedom to go out, to work, to socialise, to see friends and family. That's 60,000 disabled people who are being issued with a life sentence, to be incarcerated within four walls for perpetuity, to be prisoners in their own homes.

Many disabled people's organisations are protesting about this dreadful move. The stock answer they get from Coalition politicians is that we face difficult times; cuts must be made or it will be worse in the future; an impact assessment assures us that the programme of deficit management will not have an adverse affect on disabled people. That is, frankly, rubbish.


Take the case of Patricia King's family. "My son is blind, his wife uses a wheelchair and they both have seizures which cannot be totally controlled. They cannot use powered vehicles and depend on taxis/escorts to go out. They are both aged 44 and very active. My son's medical notes state that he needs 'regular and structured activity to afford increased stability of his epilepsy.'. Transport is provided by his local authority (the Ulster Community & Hospitals Trust) to take him to a day centre on only three days per week. For the rest of the week he depends on lower rate mobility allowance for access to activities, Their removal would cause stress and more frequent seizures which can be life-threatening. The consequent illness would mean increased drug treatment which can also be harmful. If the government's proposal is not withdrawn my son will lose over 45% of his total income and his wife will suffer a loss of over 69%. Neither the care home nor the two funding authorities have the funds to make up this shortfall. My son's wife is in a similar position but does not have family who can help her financially".

Now multiply this story 60,000 times and you begin to get a picture of just how cruel and inhumane this cut is. This is an assault on humanity and equality that just must be stopped.

The Coalition tells us that residential care homes and local authorities will provide the necessary transport to enable disabled people to get out. Oh no they won't. Local authorities - themselves facing massive cuts - will hardly be in a position to provide for the need. And anyway, why should disabled people be reliant on scheduled community transport, rather than having the independent means to choose when and where they will travel to?

Residential care homes will be in a similar position. Norwood supports thousands of people with learning disabilities. Just listen to what they have to say in response to the Coalition. "Most of the 300 adults in residential services with Norwood receive this allowance which ensures that they get out to day classes, go out in the evenings and weekends and helps to pay for drivers and transport for holidays. All of these ensure that their quality of life is satisfying and enjoyable. It ensures that the opportunities that we all take for granted are not denied to people with disabilities and that we all have access to what's on offer. It would be a tragedy if this allowance was removed.

The cost to society in terms of depression, loss of independence and even an increased need for institutionalisation would far outweigh any initial cost gain. I cannot believe that any Government would wish to impose such outcomes on a group of adult citizens who already have so many disadvantages to contend with. As a charity, we have no way of making up the shortfall that would be in the region of £375,000 for Norwood and we will therefore be lobbying MPs and officials about this situation."

Disabled people have to fight back. Please - write to your MP (1); write to the Minister for Disabled People, Maria Miller; write to the Chancellor; write to the Prime Minister. If you live in residential care, get your care home management team or the owners to protest. Your family should object too. Get together and demonstrate. This is a cut that common decency and humanity tells us is cruel and vindictive. Let's work together and get it stopped. Now.

MENCAP have produced an easy to use letter - have a look at www.mencap.org.uk

Mark Shrimpton - Radar Deputy CEO

RADAR's AGM

RADAR held its 33rd Annual General Meeting (AGM) on October 13^th 2010. Now, I’ve been to a few AGM’s in my time and they can be long winded, bureaucratic and frankly tedious. This AGM was sweetened though by the prospect of the afternoon debate on the Equality Act’s specific public sector duties and in particular the proposal to remove the requirement to involve disabled people. I’ll cover the debate in another blog entry though; it certainly deserves its own write up, as it was an informative, emotive and very entertaining afternoon.

To the AGM then, as it turned out the RADAR 33rd Annual General Meeting was far from tedious, longwinded or bureaucratic. It lasted a little over an hour, the Chair Phil Friend, swiftly dealt with the voting in of 3 new Board of Trustees members. Jane Dale, Stephen Springer and John Willis. All other traditional AGM matters were also dealt with in an equally efficient manner (accepting the last meetings minutes, accepting the finance report and the appointment of auditors).

Phil Friend and CEO Liz Sayce also gave a round up of RADAR’s achievements from the last year, these included:

Securing some major changes to the Equality Bill as it went through Parliament by working with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Disability and with other disability organisations.

Working on the huge issues of poverty and independent living. Distributing large numbers of products that enable individuals to gain independence – last year RADAR distributed over 16,000 keys to accessible toilets, which are for many the key to independence.

RADAR launched new guides on Doing Money Differently, Doing IT Differently, to inspire and give disabled people a vision of what is possible and to arm them with the practical information they need.

RADAR launched new research – including Supporting Sustainable Careers, and Doing Seniority Differently, both ground-breaking in promoting careers, not just jobs for disabled people; and Lights Camera Action showed that public sector organisations can achieve real mainstream outcomes by involving disabled people effectively.

- RADAR have extended their leadership programmes. Last year RADAR won the Muslim Council of Britain’s young beacon award for work supporting young disabled muslim leaders – which helped RADAR reach out more effectively to the muslim community, and helped the MCB reach out more to disabled people. This year RADAR are offering leadership support and mentoring to disabled people from black and minority ethnic communities.

- The radiate network was formed, which comprises of 100 disabled people in the senior jobs in the private, public and voluntary sectors. Following RADAR’s first ever research into ’high flying‘ disabled people’s experiences, the radiate network members are supporting each other, collecting career stories, mentoring people earlier in their careers – and acting as role models. Later this year RADAR will be publishing Doing Careers Differently, full of stories from all types of workplaces to show what disabled people can achieve, with the right support.

So with the usual business out of the way, there was time to discuss the important proposals to merge RADAR, National Centre for Independent Living (NCIL) and Disability Alliance (DA). The Chair, explained the thinking behind the proposals which is: If RADAR, NCIL and DA join forces they can share their expertise, pool resources and reach more disabled people. By joining together like this they will have a more powerful voice for disabled people which in turn will lead to greater influence with government. Personally I think that at a time of spending cuts, benefit reform and general upheaval of public services a strong, united voice made up of disabled people, is definitely needed. Phil Friend stressed that no final decisions on the merger will be made without consulting members of all 3 organisations and RADAR will hold an extraordinary AGM next year to discuss this. I’m sure more information about this will be available very soon.

My impression from talking to members and delegates was that there is a real willingness and even anticipation to discuss and take forward the merger. Exciting times for all 3 organisations.

Natalie Salmon - RADAR Associate and Director HareOnna Diversity Ltd

Deaf diplomat denied new job by Whitehall - RADAR responds

We are shocked that Jane Cordell, a talented diplomat, has been prevented from following her chosen career because the adjustments she needs as a deaf woman are deemed 'unaffordable' by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Government is - in our view rightly - committed to enabling more and more disabled people to find sustainable work, not just in entry level roles but throughout the labour market in line with their aspirations and talents. But this decision puts a cap on ambition. The decision that it is 'unaffordable' to enable a deaf diplomat to pursue her career - despite being the best candidate for the job - gives the message to disabled people that actually, the highest level jobs will be debarred. That some disabled people are just too expensive to employ and will never achieve equality.

Just think what this decision will do to the aspirations of disabled people, at different levels in public and private organisations. Currently the employment gap between disabled and non-disabled people is 29% (50% disabled people; 79% non-disabled people). There is also a significant disability pay gap that gets less attention than it should. The pay gap between disabled and non-disabled people is 20% for men, 12% for women. There is also a major 'seniority' gap: RADAR's research found non-disabled people are twice as likely as disabled people to be a Board level Director; three times as likely to be a Director of head of Department and three times as likely to earn 80,000 or above.

Is it any surprise that many disabled people who are trying to follow their aspirations sometimes give up hope - feel it will never be possible for them to make the most of their talents? They see so few disabled people ahead of them, in more senior roles. But progress was beginning. The decision that Jane Cordell cannot fulfil her potential risks stopping that progress in its tracks.

And if those aiming to rise up the ranks get disheartened, what does that do to disabled people not in work at all?

By the age of 19-21 44% of disabled people are not in education, employment or training - almost twice as many as young non-disabled people (23%). Others are simply working beneath their potential: disabled graduates, even more than non-disabled graduates, working on supermarket tills because it's harder for them to get internships (you cannot get Access to Work support for an internship, whereas you can for a job - but often you can't get the job without the experience of an internship - Catch 22). And employers are not always willing anyway to give them the same chance.

Jane Cordell is a recognised role model for disabled people, coaching and mentoring younger colleagues and offering support and inspiration. Holding back a role model is always unwise. She could have been an incredible international role model and ambassador for Britain.
The decision doesn't even make sense financially. As Charles Crawford, former Ambassador notes in the Independent, there are very few significantly disabled people in senior civil service roles. Making the adjustments needed in this case would not open the floodgates. But there really is a cost to discouraging our most powerful disabled role models from progressing. It is the cost of reducing the confidence of disabled people in the fairness of our workplaces - and it can affect everyone from aspiring managers to those living on benefit. Many were only just beginning to think that maybe equality was on the way. This is a real setback to that hope.
There is also one technical point to consider. One reason Jane was refused the adjustments was that Access to Work (which provides for the adjustments that go beyond what is expected of an employer to provide) was withdrawn from people working in Government Departments. And there are proposals to withdraw it also from other public sector organisations. This is incredibly short-sighted. Every pound spent on Access to Work reaps 1.48 to the Exchequer. Government should invest in disabled people's talents and contributions - not penny pinch away their support and leave equality a distant dream.

Liz Sayce – RADAR CEO

Making disability rights a reality - How can we make progress in the current climate?

Round table conference blog, a personal perspective by David Stocks

On Thursday 28th October, a meeting took place in the Holiday Inn in Bloomsbury, which could possibly lead to a new unified approach to disability rights and a transformation in thinking on disability issues. A transformation with far reaching affects; from within government, industry and the general public at large. A bold statement I know, but one whose foundations were laid through the bringing together of leaders from the private, public and third sectors. It was this conceptual idea for the meeting, that provided the arena for the cross fertilization of thinking from these often disparate sectors. It proved to be a forum that brought fourth fresh insights and original ideas, in the important area of disability rights.

After a welcome by Liz Sayce and opening remarks by Baroness Jane Campbell, Roger Berry gave an excellent introductory presentation, highlighting some shocking figures:

• Only 50% of Disabled People are in Employment, well below the national average.
• Even more shocking only 25% of People with Learning Difficulties are in Employment.
• Worst of all, only 20% of people with a mental health problem are in employment.

Coupled with this, under the current criteria for poverty:

• 30% of Disabled people live in Poverty
• The realistic figure is actually far worse, as much as 60% of disabled people live in poverty, if the extra costs of disability are taken into account .

Roger stressed his concerns about cuts to housing and the enormous affect this will have on disabled people, along with cuts to DLA.

Roger’s figures certainly had an impact on me. When it came to my turn to speak, I raised my concern that having a bipolar mental health condition, put me in the bracket of least likely to be in work. However on the plus side, a recent study on bipolar demonstrated that with my condition, I am much more likely to be a genius than the rest of the population. This in turn made me, "The most unemployable genius in the country."

Obviously, at least to me, there is some discrepancy in being viable to work and being given the opportunity to work. This I hoped would be addressed. To further illustrate the barriers faced, I mentioned a chance conversation I had with a HR manager. She informed me that, the worst disability to have as far as seeking employment is concerned, is mental health.


There was a lot of talk about localism. Jonathan Shaw, former minister for disability, mentioned that there is a new Localism Bill being put together. A few people discussed the transparency that local authorities will have to adopt. This means, the public gets to see what the local authorities spend their money on. Scary times for local authorities.

Scary indeed! Through localism, local authorities have a duty to consult the community in all its diversity, on how it spends its money. In fact, through localism, Local Authorities are accountable to their communities - rather than central government.

Although there was strong concern in the room that this would mean cuts to disabled people, I pointed out that it could actually be an opportunity. Who am I to say that local authorities won't know what they are doing, but just perhaps, there might be huge opportunities for disability organisations to advise local authorities on spending and disability issues at large. This could include planning, commissioning of services and also provision of services. Although I readily admit that there is a great risk to disabled people through localism, especially housing, I still think there is an opportunity there for greater involvement.

It was during the break, as it is with many meetings and conferences, that my most valuable insights were gained. One of the representatives from industry and commerce spoke to me about HR. She told me that the CIPD (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development) does not cover mental health in training and there is no wonder that there is such a lack of understanding amongst HR professionals on mental health. This is rather worrying and is an area that I intend to address as best I can. Employer education on disability was one of the key issues that came out of the day. I believe that building a portfolio of personal stories, where disabled people are leading successful careers, is of paramount importance. This will demonstrate to employers what an asset disabled people are to businesses and how to best work with us.

I spoke about how RADAR's leadership programme addresses this issue. Through RADAR's leadership programme, we are developing future disabled leaders. We have already had notable successes, at various different levels of leadership. Our highest profile successes have resulted in three of our leadership candidates becoming public appointees and two receiving MBE's.

I have assembled a huge catalogue of leadership personal stories, from grass roots upwards, which admirably demonstrate the skills waiting to be untapped in the disabled community. I believe in proactively getting these stories out as far and wide as possible. Only by seeing the evidence, are we going to get employers to shift their thinking.

There were a lot of calls to get more active and although comments such as throwing red paint and chaining yourself to railings were said in jest, there were a number of people in the meeting that felt we need to shout louder. I am not sure if that was the consensus, but with the threat of more disabled people living in poverty, it is rapidly becoming a possibility.

Following the meeting, more networking took place, where I learnt a lot about Dragon voice recognition software. Jonathan Whitmore from Nuance, the company that builds the software, spoke to me at length about it. What really struck home though was Peter Apps use of it. Peter is a political risk correspondent from Reuters. He is a quadriplegic, who still manages to meet the heavy demands of his job, through using Dragon software. I spoke to Peter and Jonathan about it and was amazed how effective it was. What better testament to the software than a busy media job. This story demonstrated how much could be achieved, by industry and disabled people working together. If more businesses worked together with disabled people in employment, there wouldn't be these appalling statistics on poverty and unemployment.

Liz Sayce emphasized at the end, the need to focus on a few key issues, bringing a cohesive voice for disabled people and tackling critical disability rights matters in a focused way. I think Liz is right and I believe that this meeting has laid down the foundations for a much bigger mechanism, one that will bring in a new era of disability rights and a fairer society for disabled people.

David Stocks - RADAR Head of Leadership and Empowerment