The ILF is about quality of life – and you can help save it

Tags

disability, disabled, government, health, independent living fund, Paula Peters, people, politics, social security, Vox Political, welfare

Paula Peters is a friend of Vox Political who campaigns on behalf of the disabled (she has disabilities herself). Here, she writes about the value of the Independent Living Fund, which is scheduled to be closed by the Conservative-led Coalition government next year.

If you are disabled, you will appreciate what Paula has to say; if you are not, please try to imagine what it must be like to cope with debilitating conditions that can turn even getting out of bed into a feat of endurance. That person, one day, could be you. That’s why it is important to keep this fund open.

“I got up this morning, brushed my teeth, showered, ate breakfast, got dressed, checked my e mails, went to work, had lunch with colleagues, met with friends on the way home from work, popped in on my mum to see she was alright before coming home to do a couple of hours work on my open university degree before bed. I was able to do all this because the money from the Independent Living Fund that helps pay my personal assistant to support me to do the things I can’t manage to do directly because I have a condition that means my hands do not work and I get around using a wheelchair” – ILF receipent.

The money from the ILF helps pay for a personal assistant and enables disabled people who need support to have a quality of life do the same things everyone else can do. Live.

The government says, “ILF receipents will be reassessed by their local authority, and will be funded by the local authority”. The money given to the local authority to meet a disabled persons support needs will not be ring-fenced. The local authority can spend that money meant for disabled people and their support needs on other resources. Disabled people who need the support fear LESS or NO support at all and then being placed into residential care, far from friends and family.

Imagine this: Your local authority has cut your support needs, you would have to rely on the local pop in service, carers you do not know keep you clean, warm up a meal in a microwave, at a time convenient for the carer, but not at a convenient time for you. If you need night care you would then be forced to wear incontinence pads or even worse, be catheterised.

You would then be able to shower only once a week, have no social life, have to perhaps use a hoist and then be excluded from everyday activities outside, forced to give up the pets you rely on for company, no garden, forced into isolation, having to sack the personal assistant you relied on for many years, with no redundancy payment to give them.

Now you are thinking you do not want to go on anymore. It’s “how do I go on like this with little support”, and you are now isolated at home, cut off from society and from friends and family – and the lack of support means no independence, no social life, can’t work, no quality of life; it would make anyone feel down and even depressed. It’s awful to contemplate, isn’t it?

Disabled people want rights, rights to live independently in the community, to have our support needs met, so we can have a quality of life, and do the same things everyone else does. Live.

Society forgets that we are human beings – people. We are mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, neighbours, friends, colleagues; but society sees the impairment, not the person we happen to be. We are judged, discriminated against and called a drain to society. Well, we are not!

People can be born with an impairment, or at some point in their lives be struck down with a devastating illness, hit by a car, lose mobility, need to use a wheelchair to get around, have a breakdown, could lose a job and need to claim benefits to live. The social security system was put in place to protect those who needed the support, who may be too ill to work. If it happened to you, you would need the support every day to carry out the simplest of tasks. Life is unexpected, it’s cruel, and it’s tough, it can change in a flicker of an eyelash and it can happen to YOU!

Life is really hard as a disabled person every day. Trying to manage life with all the same worries as non-disabled people, money, keeping a job, family issues, health issues… How to get around using public transport. It’s bloody tough.

“The Independent living fund gave people with severe impairments the support needed to live life as we chose, so we could work, go shopping, feel part of society, a human being. A non disabled person is not used to thinking about how they would go to to the toilet, get in and out of the house, get to work, but we need to plan all those things in advance and ensure we have the support to do them.” – ILF receipent.

Our demand is to keep the ILF open, open it up to new claimants and open independent living to all disabled people so we can keep our independence and, with support, have a quality of life. And live.

All I ask of you is for your help. Help us save the Independent Living Fund from closing on 30 June 2015. As disabled people, we want rights. Rights to live as independently as possible, having a quality of life, despite what we face everyday with our various impairments and illnesses.

Why? Because we’re worth it! We are human beings, and we want to be treated as such, not as stock as the government and large swathes of society think we are. We are worth it! Help us keep the independent living fund open and help us with the fight for our rights so we can have a quality of life, living in society as best we can.

(C) paula peters 2014

You can help by joining the ‘Save The Independent Living Fund Postcard Campaign’.

Simply visit https://www.facebook.com/ILFpostcard?fref=ts, click on the ‘About’ link and follow the instructions.

Sometimes saving a person’s quality of life can be as easy as buying a stamp.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political needs your help!
This independent blog’s only funding comes from readers’ contributions.
Without YOUR help, we cannot keep going.
You can make a one-off donation here:

Alternatively, you can buy the first Vox Political book,
Strong Words and Hard Times
in either print or eBook format here:

‘Moaning’ Work and Pensions committee lets IDS ‘off the hook’

Tags

'ad hoc', Access to Work, allowance, Anne Begg, appointment, assessment, benefit, benefit cap, benefits, bodyguard, civil service, Coalition, code, committee, Conservative, Dame, Debbie Abrahams, Department, diabetes, disability, disabled, DWP, Ed Balls, employment, ESA, evidence, Facebook, fault, fraud, government, Grant Shapps, Iain Duncan Smith, Job Centre Plus, jobseeker, Jobseeker's Allowance, JSA, lifestyle choice, Mike Penning, Mike Sivier, mikesivier, mortality, Nicola Clubb, Parliament, Paula Peters, Pensions, people, politics, sanction, sick, social security, statistic, Statistics Authority, support, Tories, Tory, UK, UKSA, unemployment, Vox Political, WCA, welfare, whistleblower, work, work capability, work capability assessment

It is said that you can get the measure of a man, not from his words, but from his actions. Iain Duncan Smith brought bodyguards to the Commons Work and Pensions Committee yesterday. (Monday)

Why did he need the muscle? Probably because he knew how his behaviour would be received. This is a man who is absolutely not going to accept criticism, in any form at all.

The man whose benefit reforms were mocked by Ed Balls last week as “In Deep Sh…ambles” batted away concerns about inaccurate statistics as somebody else’s fault and, when confronted with a whistleblower’s claim that jobseekers were being sanctioned indiscriminately, said he wanted to see the evidence.

That’s a bit much, coming from the man who is still withholding the mortality statistics of people going through the assessment regime for Employment and Support Allowance. Where is that evidence?

Our evidence that he had a bodyguard comes from Paula Peters on Facebook, who attended the meeting. She wrote: “The police, and they were armed, hustled him into the room. He had a bodyguard in the room with him! What the hell for? We are entitled to watch proceedings and follow due process.”

Dame Anne Begg, chairing the meeting, pointed out that the UK Statistics Authority has received more complaints about the Department of Work and Pensions’ use of statistics than any other government department.

His response: “Yes, but I’ve had two letters. One was about two years ago, concerning something about the use of them on immigration, but they let that one sit – and the last one was where we had a discussion on the use of where I referred to those going back to work on the back of the benefit cap. They said that … I should not make the link. I believed it to be the case – that those people were going back to work due to the fact of reducing the cap; that’s my belief. They said it should not remain as a flat statistic, which we’ve accepted.”

So in that one respect, he admitted that he was wrong.

But he also said: “We have published, over the period that I have been there, over 500 statistical releases. We’ve also started the innovation of ‘ad hoc’ releases – which, actually, we were congratulated for by UKSA… We try and publish as regularly as possible… We try to sell a positive message, and I know there have been issues around negativity with regard to disability benefits.”

Pressed on the fact that Grant Shapps had claimed nearly 900,000 people shuffled off ESA because they weren’t willing to take the work capability assessment, the Secretary of State denied responsibility: “We didn’t actually – and have never – given them that idea about those figures. It was something that they put together and released themselves. I wasn’t even aware that they were going out with that comment at the time… I have had conversations with him and others about being careful to check with the department.”

Committee member Debbie Abrahams wanted to know about the claim by a whistleblower in Job Centre Plus, that JSA claimants were deliberately being set up to fail, contrary to the Civil Service code, with ploys including making appointments without telling the claimant, in order to create an easy opportunity for a sanction and thereby distorting statistics – not after they had been collected but in the collection itself.

She said the whistleblower had tried to raise the issue with managers at all levels, but had been rebuffed each time.

“Well, I’m not aware of that,” drawled Mr Duncan Smith, “and I have to say that I would like to see his evidence for that. With respect, he is making an allegation about some of the incredibly hard work that job advisors do. There’s always one or two people who have a different view about operating in an organisation. I happen to believe that, unless it is proved to the contrary, people in Job Centres do a very good job, work very hard, and they apply sanctions within the rules.”

Challenged on this by Dame Anne, he started to claim that sanctions are always issued because of failure to comply with the strictures imposed on claimants, provoking an interruption from Debbie Abrahams that caused his mask to slip momentarily. “I have listened a lot to what has been said – and moaning about this… You’ve had a fair crack at this.”

So there you have it. Statistical errors are nothing to do with Iain Duncan Smith. Sanctions are always applied fairly and never to distort the statistics.

And anyone who thinks otherwise is “moaning”.

Paula Peters, in her Facebook post, said that disability minister Mike Penning met people from organisations representing the disabled. She reported his words as follows:

“Our disabilities are our fault.

“Diabetes is a lifestyle choice.

“Everyone who claims benefits is frauding the system.

“Everyone who uses the access to work programme is frauding it.”

The public verdict on the meeting has been universally negative. Nicola Clubb (again on Facebook) summed it up well: “I have just watched an hour’s worth of IDS and the DWP evidence to the Work and Pensions Committee and they let him and his three cronies off the hook.

“They did not push him him to explain his use of dodgy stats, they just asked him about a couple of pieces of data released by people.”

Vox Political is funded entirely by donations and book sales.
You can make a one-off donation here:

Alternatively, you can buy the first Vox Political book,
Strong Words and Hard Times
in either print or eBook format here: