National Debt: It’s Time for Tough Decisions (Economic Affairs Committee Report) Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Grey-Thompson
Main Page: Baroness Grey-Thompson (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Grey-Thompson's debates with the HM Treasury
(1 day, 20 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I declare an interest as president of the LGA and a recipient of personal independence payment. We are in a difficult economic position and, yes, we have to make difficult decisions. The benefits system currently supports 22.7 million people, which is not sustainable, but the Government’s wider reform strategy hinges on increasing labour market participation to ease long-term fiscal pressure. It aims to encourage more people to work by removing disincentives and providing personalised support. But will these measures result in a meaningful increase in employment, especially for disabled people? We do not need another tick-box scheme.
Tom Pollard, head of policy at the New Economics Foundation, highlights that these economic reforms are straight out of an economics playbook, but they overlook the lived realities of millions and the extra costs of living for disabled people, particularly those managing long-term conditions without consistent care or those who live in regions with low job availability or inadequate support services. It feels like we are about to tighten eligibility without discussing the real barriers to employment. I completely support getting disabled people into work, but we also need to look at the discrimination in housing, education, employment, physical activity, health and social care—and, of course, transport.
The Disability Discrimination Act said that all trains would be accessible by 1 January 2020. Every single Government have allowed derogations, which means that trains will not be step free for another 100 years. That means that people like me, who work, will not be able to get on a train without the support or permission of a non-disabled person for another 100 years. Access For All funding and level boarding must become a priority to enable disabled people to contribute to society; we cannot keep avoiding the issue. I pay tribute to Tony Jennings, a disability rights campaigner who has campaigned pretty much single-handedly to remove discriminatory bans on scooters travelling on trains and trams. Tyne and Wear still bans scooter users. How is a scooter user meant to get to work if they are not allowed to use public transport?
I am unsure how stopping under-22s accessing universal credit incentivises more young people to work when it is increasingly difficult for young people to find employment, regardless of disability. They need to be in work, but we need to find a better way. The words of the noble Baroness, Lady Cash, have given me a little bit of hope but, by pushing more children and more families into poverty, the Government are pushing the barriers to employment further away for those families.
As we have seen in the past, welfare reforms incorporated into previous OBR forecasts have in many cases saved much less than initially expected, as shown by the transition from disability living allowance to PIP and the delay in the rollout of universal credit. An estimated 800,000 people are set to lose their entitlement to PIP, which has often been misrepresented in the media as an out-of-work benefit. PIP can be received both in and out of work, making it less likely that it will boost claimants’ incentive to work. PIP restrictions currently form the largest part of the Government’s potential cuts. This is a failing system. You have to prove what you cannot do to get support and not what you can do and the ways that you are able to contribute. The Department for Work and Pensions’ own figures show that fraud rates are extremely low. There is an issue of overpayment and underpayment—but the system is failing.
I understand that the Minister may wish to write to me, but is he aware that disabled people appear to be receiving emails asking them how they spend their personal independence payment? It is instilling fear, when again there may be a better way of obtaining this information and developing a better process for a failing system.