The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled

If the Welfare Reform Bill passes, the results will be horrific and at the Department for Work and Pensions, they are confident that it is a price worth paying.

Sue Marsh blogs at Diary of a Benefit Scrounger

Recently, it was reported that Crisis, the charity for the homeless, had warned 11,000 young disabled people were at risk of losing their homes due to the coalition’s housing benefit cap:

“Although 4,000 of the most vulnerable disabled claimants will be exempt because they need help through the day or night, most ill and disabled people will be forced to move into cheaper accommodation, often outside the area where they live.”

Those aged 25-34 will now only be able to rent shared accommodation rather than a one bed flat, on average, losing £41 per week towards their rent. The article makes the point that:

“This disturbing cut will force people suffering serious physical disabilities or mental illness to share with strangers, even if it damages their health.”

Well, yes it will and it is shocking. Not too shocking of course until we start to see things that make us feel uncomfortable. Not too shocking until we pass twisted bodies on the streets, their collecting cup lodged into their wheelchair handles, but shocking nonetheless.

Actually the really shocking thing is the accumulation of all the cuts faced by sick or disabled people and the effect it will have on their lives and almost certainly, their homes.

We already face the squeeze that able bodied people face. The VAT rise, the high inflation, the public sector cuts, the pay freezes, but overwhelmingly this group already live in poverty. On top of all of this, Scope report that sick and disabled people will lose £9.2 billion over the term of this parliament.

“The government’s proposed welfare reforms will see 3.5 million disabled people lose over £9.2 billion of critical support by 2015 pushing them further into poverty and closer to the fringes of society.”

The figure 9.2 billion is more than 10 per cent of Mr Osborne’s entire UK cuts to reduce the deficit. A full 10% taken from those with extra costs, extra needs and very, very difficult lives; it doesn’t matter how often I write it, I am shocked and terrified by its implications.

That’s 3.5 million people. Again, I write it and can hardly believe it’s true. Many don’t yet know what they face. Some will never know – their disabilities are too severe – but they will be affected just the same.

I have no idea how many of those 3.5 million will lose their homes, but the maths seems fairly clear. The entire cost (xls) to the welfare budget of sickness and disability benefits is £16 billion. 9.2 billion is over half of that.

I’m sure that unlike me, you won’t want to read this lengthy transcript of the Welfare Reform Bill committee, currently on its last stages through parliament, but I wish you would. After all these points were made and more, after a full discussion of the horrors that lie ahead for the sick and disabled, the poverty they are facing, the categorical failure of work programmes to help when their benefits are removed, Chris Grayling, Minister of State for Work and Pensions, had little to say.

To summarise, his answer was “I don’t care, we can no longer afford it…”

I don’t exaggerate – I wish I did. You can read it for yourselves. So, if I were you, I’d get used to seeing sick or disabled people on the streets. If this bill passes, the results will be horrific and at the DWP, they are confident that it is a price worth paying.

152 Responses to “The shocking impact of Osborne’s heartless cuts on the disabled”

  1. me

    I predict Sue Marsh will not answer the question over whether it is fair for minimum waged workers to subsidise housing benefit of 30-40k per year.

  2. Sue Marsh

    Anon E Mouse – You’re obviously intelligent, so it is clear that I shared the FullFact link with you because all of the stories came from DWP press releases.

    I am indeed now ignoring you as you are rude, offensive and continually ignore any answers I DO give you. As you always do when I write for Left Foot Forward. It doesn’t matter how many times I answer your questions, you twist what I say.

    If you want more information from someone who knows much more about Housing Benefit reform than me (as I’ve pointed out, my article is about sickness and disability cuts in general) then I’m sure you’ve noticed that this very site has just posted an article about it! I’m sure it will help.

    I am more than happy to answer genuine questions, debate serious points and try to engage with those who show an interest, whether they agree with me or not.

    That is not the same as a full day of insults and attack with no genuine responses to anything I say.

  3. Robert

    The real problem is you open up the doors to people to come here, you then refuse to build social housing, in the hope the battle to get a mortgage will help the banks, we all know how that turned out.

    Brown and Blair worked out the battle plans for the disabled and sick, everything the Tories are doing would have been done by Brown or one of his cronies, stopping DLA for those people in a care home shown on Panorama, they do not deserve this benefit, the creep also wanted to stop all DLA.

    problem for me right now is of course seeing the difference between Labour and the Tories, oh I know Sue would love to see Blair back, and then she could swoon about her working while the rest of us battle to find an employer willing to give us a job.

    I think it’s totally wrong for people to get a house or a home which cost more then some people make in a month be they disabled single mothers or anyone else. fair rents use to be Labours call, not higher rents.

  4. John Hargrave

    The impact upon disabled people due to these cuts will mean a lot of people, already in accessible accommodation, will be forced to live in places not suited to their needs, which in itself is a disgrace. Disabled people already have to bear an unfair burden of these cuts, kicking them out of their homes will just exasperate the situation.
    Anon E Mouse why do you hide your identity from us, if you are going to heap tirades of diarrhoea soup upon us, then at least let us know who you are.

  5. Anon E Mouse

    Sue Marsh – Well done. You still didn’t answer whether you think it’s right or wrong for a minimum wage worker like myself to pay taxes to pay for rents for others at rates I could only dream of. What a surprise.

    Those stories you link to may have come from the DWP but that is not a “poison pen” from Cameron and to suggest so is deceitful and pathetic from the commentator.

    And for you to suggest I was stating something not true is offensive and just plainly dishonest.

    What you don’t like Sue Marsh is that people here clearly don’t share your misleading position – take Robert above for example reminding us of Labour in the past and “Fair Rents” and your position of desperation to get Labour back into office despite their appalling record of inequality and warmongering. And their support of greedy landlords with our money not theirs.

    If you post the stories on this fine blog then you should be able to defend your position or don’t post the item.

    You have been shown to be deliberately misleading and dishonest by the other commentators here and your response is to smear me with your “rude and offensive” remarks about me instead of answering my question.

    Is it fair Sue Marsh? Everyone reading this knows your position on fairness it appears…

Comments are closed.