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. Broken OfBritain

    #spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

  2. StaceyUK

    #spoonie ALERT! Pls add comments here http://bit.ly/m1rLoI At the moment, it's a right wing moan-fest.

  3. Broken OfBritain

    RT @leftfootfwd: The shocking impact of Osborne's heartless cuts on the disabled: http://bit.ly/jwU185 by @suey2y #TBofB

  4. scandalousbill

    Anon,

    You say to Sue,

    “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…”

    Now you well know that social housing, housing benefits, child support or benefits in general, are not reducible to, or the same as, the benefit provisions made available to the disabled. I think you would also agree that the challenges confronted by those who suffer long term illness or physical disability are different from those of us who, thankfully, do not have such afflictions, (e.g. going up a flight of stairs may not be a problem for you or me, but it is a different story for a person who is wheelchair bound.) We perhaps could also agree that for those so afflicted to enjoy a quality of life closer to our own, that special equipment, facilities, and care, etc, may be required. So, we can say that there are additional costs associated with these factors.

    With regard to your general point, you might recall that Sue in the OP cited the Scope report that notes:
    “The £9 billion of cuts will affect every aspect of the day-to-day support disabled people rely on to live – including housing, living costs and social care support. Examples of this are, by 2015:
    • 170,830 families where both parents care for a disabled child will lose £520 million
    • 516,450 disabled adults whose partner is a full time carer will lose £1.258 billion
    • 98,170 single disabled people will lose £127 million
    • 114,066 disabled people moved from incapacity benefit (and ESA) to Job Seekers allowance will lose £994 million

    http://www.scope.org.uk/news/disabled-people-hit-by-welfare-cuts

    This is a good start to view the number of households to which Sue refers. So, how many of the numbers cited above are paid rentals at rates that you could only dream of? All of them, the vast majority, some of them, or, what I would say is more likely, very few, if any of the above. If you can provide statistics that prove otherwise, I would invite you to do so!

    Secondly, he losses cited by Scope are combined and include housing, living costs and social care support. Losses in one area, (e.g. full time carer) can combine with or be impacted by losses in another, ESA removal after 365 days. While the individual’s need for the support continues, the support provided is eliminated. It is not unreasonable to conclude that such losses will impact other basic needs, i.e. paying rent, utilities, food, etc. As these losses impact at the same time rentals in both social and private housing are on the increase, the likelihood of resultant evictions is indeed high. You will recall that the coalition has mandated with the removal of secure tenancy that new tenancies to be set at a fixed percentage according to the local market rate. What argument and evidence can you provide to illustrate your point that no one will be evicted because of coalition policy?

    Finally, if you take the time to view the exchange between Timms and Grayling on Welfare reform cited by Sue, you will quickly see for yourself how out of touch the Tory coalition has become.

    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/welfare/110503/am/110503s01.htm

  5. Barbs

    Great blog Sue, some of the comments are coming from a place of not being aware of the facts. Sue puts a lot of research into her facts and figures – unfortunately a lot more than the govt and media does with their disablist propaganda. Anon y mouse – The solutions to your problems are simple a) landlords need to face a cap on how much rents they can charge. b) the minimum wage needs to be increased to the amount recommended by the EU which is at least 60% of the average wage. Their is no need for cuts – the green party for one has outlined how they can manage the deficit and the economy without cuts by things like closing tax loopholes, dealing with tax evasion and avoidance would help a lot, the robin hood tax etc. Us at the bottom of the pile like the sick and disabled, those on minimum wage and those who are unemployed need to be on the same side – we are all being ****ed by this govt and until we all see this and are on the same side – the govt will quite happily use divide and rule tactics to keep us saying – why have they got a big house when I havnt etc. etc.

    NB – People are dying and have died due to the policies being used by this and the previous government concerning the sick and disabled!

    Re shared housing for the 25 to 35 year olds – this has a completely differnt impact on the sick and disabled than the healthy non-disabled. Who would like to live in a house with somebody with a mental health problem, or someone who was screaming in pain at various points or cleaning up someone sick for them, or someone with all sorts of health conditions that would impact on other people in the shared house and god help people with hidden disabilities who would be getting moaned at all the time for not doing their share of the house work etc. due to the other people not understanding the impact of their health condition. The disruption, stress and logisitcs of moving house for the sick and disabled is also a nightmare and thats if they can find someone to rent to them on benefits! I think the average single room rate is about £45 per week – a tall order to find in itself!!

    I love your blogs Sue – always informative, well researched and very readable – keep up the fab work you do 😀 xxxx

Comments are closed.