Draft Mesothelioma Lump Sum Payments (Conditions and Amounts) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 Draft Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers’ Compensation) (Payment of Claims) (Amendment) Regulations 2025

Steve Darling Excerpts

Wednesday 12th February 2025 General Committees

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I concur with what the hon. Member for Gordon and Buchan, my colleague to my right—in more ways than one—shared just now.

Social Security Benefits

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 4th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Danny Kruger]

I am grateful for the opportunity. We had a whole series of plans that were sadly interrupted by the general election result, and I will come on in a moment to some of the suggestions I have for where the Government might go.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman was talking about incentivising people into work. In my surgeries in Torbay, I find that an awful lot of people are off sick with hip problems or mental health challenges, and the challenge people have in getting back into work is the broken health system that was left by the previous Conservative Government. I hope the new Government will drive harder on fixing the system, because many people on benefits are keen to get back into work; they are just unfit for work.

[Danny Kruger]

The hon. Gentleman reflects the experience that many of us have had in our surgeries. Nevertheless, I do not think that health reform on its own will do the job. As I mentioned, the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee has looked into the matter and reported last week, pointing out that the increase in welfare claims cannot be attributed to longer waiting lists or, indeed, to worsening health conditions. The welfare problem is outstripping the problems we see in the nation’s health, so we have to do more in the DWP. We wait with bated breath to see some movement on that front.

In fact, it was in this debate last year when we were uprating benefits that the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Alison McGovern), now a ministerial colleague of the right hon. Member for East Ham, said that, “Labour has a plan”. That was a year ago. Seven months ago, Labour won the election. She did not say that the plan was oven-ready, but she implied it. I know the Minister says that the delay is because of a court case that happened two weeks ago, but I do not quite understand how that explains the delay that has been going on for seven months.

Here we are approving a measure that will increase expenditure by nearly £7 billion, as the right hon. Gentleman said, and we have no idea how the bill will be brought down over time. But after much head scratching in the DWP—and, we are told, people pulling their hair out in No. 10—we are getting closer to the big reveal. We hear exciting hints in the media that the Government might scrap the limited capacity for work category altogether, scrap the work capability assessment, merge employment and support allowance into the personal independence payment system, or require people on sickness benefits to engage with work coaches. I am encouraged by all that pitch-rolling.

If the Government are softening up their Back Benchers for serious reform, I applaud them for it, but I will believe it when I see it, because Labour opposed every step towards tougher conditions, more assessments and more incentives to work. They opposed reforms that we were introducing to the fit note system. In fact, I see from a written answer to a question in the other place that the Government say they have no plans to reform the fit note system, which I regret. I wonder whether the Minister could help clarify if that is the case.

On universal credit, it appears that the sinner repenteth, or sort of repenteth. The Government are on some kind of journey. In the last Parliament, they said they would scrap universal credit, then they said they would replace it, and now, as we have heard, they are reviewing it. I am glad to hear that, although the right hon. Gentleman just said that they are reviewing it over the course of this year, so that seems to be unrelated to the Green Paper process, which we are expecting in the spring. I would like to understand how those two processes are aligned.

Rather than scrapping, replacing or reviewing universal credit, I invite the Government simply to use it. It is a flexible system, as we saw during the pandemic, and it works; it just needs to be adapted to the new challenge. In conclusion, let me make a few suggestions for the right hon. Gentleman to consider as he prepares his Green Paper and his universal credit review.

The back to work plan that we announced before the general election would have got 1.1 million people into work, using more support and tougher conditions—“more support” meaning more of the WorkWell pilots that my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately) introduced. I was glad to hear the Secretary of State praising those pilots yesterday, although sadly without attribution. In our view, the work capability assessment should be face to face, and it should be asset-based, not deficit-based; it should be asking what a claimant can do, not what they cannot do. The claimant should begin the journey of recovery—the journey back towards work—then and there. Rather than budgeting for ever higher welfare, as we are doing today, we should be investing in a universal support system to run alongside universal credit.

We also need tougher conditions. We simply cannot have people with a bad back or anxiety being signed off sick for the rest of their lives; they need to know that we believe in them, and that believing in them means having high expectations of them. In exchange for benefits paid for by working people, claimants should take active steps, when they can, to address their physical and mental health needs, and they should work meaningfully on their own health and wellbeing. That will not look the same for everyone and it must not be a tick-box exercise. That is why we need the help of civil society, not just coaches and therapists, providing the human touch and the range of help and opportunities that people need.

Most of all, we need a clear message to go out from the Government that unless a person is so severely disabled or ill that they genuinely can never work at all, they will not have a life on benefits. That clear message, enacted through reform that the right hon. Gentleman’s Department must bring forward urgently, is the only way to get our exorbitant welfare bills under control, and to get our workforce and our economy moving again.

--- Later in debate ---

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I would like to acknowledge the very sobering and comprehensive speech given by the hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams). This is disturbing, and one would hope that our DWP, and our Government as a whole, would take a trauma-informed approach to dealing with our communities, as I believe that would stand us in good stead.

I broadly welcome the upratings in the proposals before us for both benefits and pensions, but I will focus first on pensions. Sadly, the Labour Government inherited a system under which, for the last 10 years, we have seen an increase in pensioner poverty. Two million pensioners remain in poverty, and 1 million are on the edge of poverty, and one would have hoped that a Labour Government wanting to cut the number in half and promoting social justice would have driven such an agenda harder in their first seven months in power. The cut to the winter fuel allowance has exacerbated this situation. The hon. Member for East Wiltshire (Danny Kruger) highlighted the backlogs and rightly said that they are totally unacceptable. The reality is that we are seeing pensioner poverty.

Again, we know that women are more likely to be victims of poverty, yet the WASPI women have in effect been victims of a decision of this Government. It was really pleasing that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions welcomed the report, acknowledged it and apologised, but, sadly, she did not actually action the report. That gives me great displeasure, as well as many other people across the United Kingdom.

In evidence to the Work and Pensions Committee, the ombudsman suggested that there is usually a bit of a conversation between the ombudsman and the Government about what an acceptable system or approach to compensation would be. Sadly, however, that never happened as far as the WASPI women are concerned, which is disturbing, and I want to understand why. Why was there the breakdown in communication between the ombudsman and the previous Conservative Government? I am looking to explore that with the ombudsman in another way.

On pensions, I would also like to highlight the housing issues. I served my community for 30 years as a councillor, and I am therefore very alive to some of the challenges people face. Housing is a massive issue, and it is disturbing that, when reflecting on pensions, the cost of housing is rarely taken into account. In 1979, 35% of our housing stock was social rented housing. That figure is now down to 17% across the United Kingdom, and in my constituency of Torbay it is as low as 7%. This means that people, whether pensioners or those on other benefits, in constituencies such as mine where there is a lack of social rented housing are particularly hard-hit by that lack of support; they will have to take money away from putting food on the table in order to pay the rent. It is therefore disappointing that the local housing allowance has not been enhanced in this round. Almost 1 million children across the United Kingdom will be living in households that have this gap between their benefits and the cost of their accommodation and they will be driven even further into poverty.

On universal credit, colleagues have already mentioned the recent Joseph Rowntree Foundation report which highlighted that couples face a £55 a week gap between covering the basics and what they actually receive. That is a little over £2,800 a year, so people are being driven even deeper into poverty just around the basics on their universal credit offer.

Finally, on the carer’s allowance scandal, while we Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s engagement and the review that is taking place, unanswered questions remain. We need to make sure this is addressed at pace to support people, because 136,000 people—the equivalent of the population of West Bromwich—are affected, owing £250 million. They fell foul of a system where people only need to earn £1 more a week and they do not then owe £52, they owe £4,200—tapers need to be implemented.

One of the real challenges we face is that the DWP service is, sadly, broken. It is not fit for purpose and needs redesigning. I have nothing but utter respect for the Secretary of State on this issue, and instead of driving new agendas we need to lift the bonnet and redesign the system, get it for purpose and, most importantly, co-design it with people who are disabled or benefit users, so that it can actually support them.

[Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech about those most in need of benefits and the difference they can make. He spoke about the WASPI women and about children in poverty, but does he agree that veterans could also be helped out more by the DWP, such as by the Government backing the Royal British Legion “Credit their Service” campaign to change legislation so that military compensation is not classed as income when calculating means-tested benefits? Does my hon. Gentleman agree that that group would benefit from such a change?

[Steve Darling]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight that. My hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) and I are awaiting a meeting with the Minister to explore that very issue and the RBL’s campaign.

To conclude, I lived through a world of broken children’s services in Torbay, but we rolled our sleeves up, sorted it out and moved from failing to good within two years by getting the right people in place, making sure systems were sorted out and driving culture change. We need that co-design with people who use the system so we can get the DWP sorted as well.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Darling Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

Children in poverty in Torbay make up 23% of our population but 100% of our future. Barnardo’s recently highlighted that the most powerful tool in the Government’s toolbox to tackle child poverty is ending the two-child cap. Only last week, the annual poverty report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation came to the same conclusion. When will the Minister come to that same conclusion and end the two-child cap?

[Alison McGovern]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question and for coming along to our parliamentary engagement session last week, which I hope he agrees was a productive update for everybody. As I just mentioned, I watched from the Opposition Benches as various policies, including the one he mentions, were introduced. We can see their consequences all around us. We cannot promise to do anything that we cannot pay for, but we are determined to have a child poverty strategy that works.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I was pleased to hear that Labour councillors on Hull city council have voted to condemn the Government’s shameful decision not to compensate WASPI women. Has that given the Minister pause for thought?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Torsten Bell)]

I recognise the strength of feeling on this issue right across the House. We carefully considered the ombudsman’s report, but as the hon. Member knows, we do not think it is fair to provide compensation costing up to £10 billion when 90% of affected pensioners knew that the state pension age was rising, and the evidence shows that letters being sent earlier would have made little difference.

Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill

Steve Darling Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 3rd February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) for laying out very concisely some of the challenges in ensuring that the Bill does the right thing without going too far and breaking the things that people want fixed.

Clearly, defrauding the benefits system is wrong. One need only reflect on the level of disinvestment in many of our public services by the previous Government to note how that can bleed the system dry. I reflect on my own Torbay constituency, where the hospital tower block has scaffolding around it not because it is under repair, but to prevent bits of concrete from falling and killing people. I reflect on the lack of investment in our schools; the challenges with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete mean that the necessary capital programme will not happen for the next six years. I reflect on the lack of investment in our police services, which means that the number of sworn officers has massively reduced. Those are serious issues that affect us following the lack of investment under the previous Government.

The Conservative Government were asleep at the wheel during the covid pandemic, as the Secretary of State alluded to in clear terms. Businesspeople in Torbay told me that they felt Rishi Sunak was—

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that we refer to Members not by name but by constituency. I think he was referring to the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton.

[Steve Darling]

My apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. Those businesspeople felt that the then Chancellor of the Exchequer was filling carrier bags full of £50 notes and placing them around towns, expecting people just to pick them up, so low were the safeguards for a number of the covid support schemes.

I will move on to an item that has already been covered by a number of colleagues: the carers scandal. More than 136,000 people—equivalent to the population of West Bromwich—have been left with liabilities of £250 million that they are extremely worried about. The Government have quite rightly commissioned a review, but it is due to report not in the near future but next summer. I challenge the Minister: why not wait for that review’s findings before we push hard on these proposals, so that we can ensure that lessons are learned? We want fraud to be tackled, but we want it done in the right way. There have been just seven working days between this Bill’s First Reading and its Second Reading. Large tracts of the safeguards and the rails around it are out for consultation as we speak, which we need if we are to understand what safeguards there will be to protect our communities.

Colleagues have already mentioned AI, and they are right to have done so, because there are real concerns about a lack of transparency—[Interruption.] Sorry, Jennie is joining in; she is having a dream about rabbits. As Liberal Democrats have already highlighted, we do not know what safeguards there will be around the use of AI. How can we back the Bill until we know what safeguards will exist? I would like to reflect on how the Bill can contain those appropriate safeguards. Sadly, as the hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth highlighted, the DWP is a broken Department.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

Bearing in mind the money that has been claimed back from unpaid carers and our concerns about the DWP, does the hon. Member agree that this legislation would see more unpaid carers or their like come under far harder and harsher penalties?

[Steve Darling]

I welcome the hon. Member’s intervention; he has highlighted a serious issue, and he is spot on. One has only to reflect on the significant backlog, with 90,000 people waiting for their pension to be reviewed as part of the winter fuel allowance issues—that is a massive backlog.

Access to Work, which is meant to support people with disabilities into work, is sadly another broken system. Quite often, those wishing to receive support find that job offers are withdrawn because their work package has not been pulled together in time. An academic survey has highlighted that over three years, sadly, almost 600 people committed suicide around the management of their support from the DWP. I suggest to the Secretary of State that, while one understands the aspirations of this Bill, it is far too much of a Big Brother Bill. It is far too much of a snoopers charter, and I suggest to the Government that they withdraw it.

Women’s Changed State Pension Age: Compensation

Steve Darling Excerpts

Wednesday 15th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I congratulate the right hon. Member South Holland and the Deepings (Sir John Hayes) on securing this really important debate.

When one reflects on there being more WASPI women in the United Kingdom than the population of Wales, it demonstrates how this is a massive issue for this United Kingdom. In my constituency there are 6,930 WASPI women, and there are a similar number in Newton Abbot over the border. There are 7,400 in South Devon. Yet in the Prime Minister’s constituency there are fewer than 4,000. I smell a rat. I will give credit to those Labour Members who are here but, just as with the winter fuel payments, we can see that sadly certain members of the Government are choosing, because of the arithmetic around pensioners, to make decisions of an ill-advised nature like this.

In her statement on WASPI women, the Secretary of State talked of the fact that the decision was made by a previous Government, and that that was what WASPI women were really concerned about. The reality is—I hope the Minister will address this; other colleagues have raised it—that the report was about the communications and the impact on women. It was not about a previous decision. So that is what the Government should be addressing.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

On that point, my constituent Lauraine took early retirement from the NHS in 2014 to care for her husband. She believed that her state pension would kick in in 2015 and support her in her caring responsibilities, since she never received any notification from the DWP to tell her that it would not. She feels angry and let down. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is shocking that the Government can hear testimonies such as Lauraine’s and still refuse the fair compensation that these women deserve?

[Steve Darling]

Yes, and my hon. Friend also reminds me of Marilyn in my constituency, who suffered a significant illness and would have benefited from compensation—as would Pam, who cared for two terminally-ill family members. I totally agree with my hon. Friend.

What a baptism of fire this is for the new Minister, but we need him to address the real issues. He must not be wilfully blind to the recommendations of the ombudsman. I would also welcome an explanation why an answer to my named day question, which was named yesterday, remains outstanding.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)]

Commendably brief, if I may say so. I call the Opposition spokesman.

Adoptive Parents: Financial Support

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 14th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on securing this really important debate.

I highlight to the Minister the adoption support fund; I would be grateful if he could talk about any long-term plans the Government may have to bake that into Government proposals, because currently it is a hand-to-mouth existence. A week after I got elected, a resident raised with me their concerns. I wrote to the Minister on this issue some months ago, but I wonder whether the Government’s thoughts on the matter have changed.

I speak as somebody who was myself adopted into a very loving family in the 1970s, with Eric and Penny. Eric was self-employed. He was not a toolmaker; he was a lorry driver—a haulage contractor if we were trying to be social climbers. The reality is that it was a really loving family. Of course, as a self-employed haulage contractor, Eric would have benefited from the proposals we heard about from my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove.

The world of adoption and fostering has changed massively. The babe in arms is often not what one gets through adoption or fostering, but children who have had complex, challenging lives and will try to test parents. I have a good friend in Torquay whose child tests him regularly. The child believes that daddy is a monster because his previous daddy was, sadly, a monster to him. It is really challenging for that adoptive family to face that.

I also welcome the comments about Home for Good, which is a service that I brought in to Torbay when I was leader of the local authority. It looks at driving adoption through those with faith and using churches to support those with faith. There is a significant need out there.

Even for purely cynical reasons, I encourage the Minister to reflect on how important it is to support self-employed people so that we enhance the pool, as one only needs to look at the cost of social care to councils up and down the country when a foster placement or adoption—as quite often fostering does turn into adoption—cannot be found. The private sector is sadly making significant profits from that.

Although I am pleased that the Government are making progress in those areas, the best way to make progress is to look at places such as Leeds, which I visited once upon a time, and now also Torbay, becoming UNICEF child friendly communities. That will drive a positive culture of engagement and support for our young people throughout the United Kingdom. I hope that the Minister will look kindly on the proposals from my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove.

Women’s State Pension Age Communication: PHSO Report

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 17th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

First, and for the record, the Liberal Democrats played a significant part in government in introducing the triple lock for our pensioners—it is important that people acknowledge that.

The Government’s decision is nothing short of a betrayal of WASPI women. I know that, as in my constituency of Torbay, across the United Kingdom there will be millions of women who are shocked and horrified at that decision. That the Government have inherited an awful state for our economy is no excuse. That the women are being hit by the mistakes of the Tories and that the Labour Government are now using that as a shield is utterly wrong-headed. Will the Secretary of State reflect on the decision?

The matter went to the ombudsman for its considered review, and the Liberal Democrats have long supported the ombudsman’s findings. I am shocked that the Government are taking a pick-and-mix approach to those findings, and we therefore ask the Secretary of State to seriously reconsider the decision.

[Liz Kendall]

I gently say to the hon. Gentleman, who I know was not in the House at the time, that the decision to accelerate the increase in the state pension age in 2011 was taken by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition Government. It was that which angered and annoyed many women and led to the WASPI campaign. We accept that there was a 28-month delay in sending out letters and we apologise for that, but we do not agree with the ombudsman’s approach to injustice or remedy. We do not believe that the letters would have had an impact on most, as the ombudsman said, and when 90% of women knew that the state pension age was increasing, we cannot accept that that flat rate of payment of up to £10.5 billion would be a fair or appropriate use of taxpayers’ money. I know that will disappoint some women born in the 1950s, but we believe it is the right and fair decision.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Darling Excerpts

Monday 16th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I hope the Secretary of State will join me in congratulating Chris McCausland and Dianne Buswell on their victory on “Strictly” this weekend. In the light of that victory, how does she plan to make the Access to Work scheme more fit for purpose, so that it can help more people with disabilities reach their full potential?

[Liz Kendall]

I absolutely join in the hon. Gentleman’s comments. It was a great joy to see that victory at the weekend. We want to see Access to Work working better. We want to get the backlogs down, and for that support to be available to more people.

Labour Members believe that disabled people have the same rights as anyone else to work, socialise and take part in life. That is what we are determined to achieve, not just through the Department for Work and Pensions, but through every part of Government. The hon. Gentleman will know that we recently announced lead Ministers for disability in every Department. That shows how important we take this issue to be.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

A report by the National Audit Office last week highlighted how cliff edges in the care allowance system have resulted in 136,000 people owing £250 million. In the light of that, will the Minister ensure that we stop this injustice and stop the demands until a fairer system is introduced?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

I welcome the NAO report, which I asked for last May, when I was Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee. We are determined to address the problem of carer’s allowance overpayments. The cliff edge could be dealt with through the introduction of a taper instead of the current arrangements, as the Chancellor mentioned in her Budget speech in the autumn. If we do that, it will not happen quickly, because it will be quite a major project, but it is something that we are looking at closely.

International Day of Persons with Disabilities

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I highlight in particular the good work of those at the National Federation of the Blind, who were on the estate today campaigning on floating bus stops. Does the hon. Member agree that the Government need to ban floating bus stops?

[Debbie Abrahams]

The hon. Member—a fellow member of the Work and Pensions Committee—makes a good point. I am sorry that I was unable to attend that event myself, but I will certainly give that matter some consideration, and I hope that the Government will, too.

More than 16 million people in the UK have a disability—nearly one in four of us—and nearly half of all disabilities are acquired during a person’s lifetime. In recognition of that, in 2009 the UK not only became a signatory to the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities, which includes 40 articles ranging from education and work and employment to the right to life, but enshrined disability as a protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010. We should be proud that we as a country have adopted that, but now it is about how we put it into practice, because we have unfortunately gone backwards in many ways.

Despite the important moves that the then Government had undertaken, the austerity brought in by the coalition Government in 2010, and amplified by the Conservative Government in 2015, not only restricted financial and other state support for disabled people—adding further challenges to their lives—but created a culture of fear, particularly for those reliant on social security support who were unable to work. All too often, disabled people were treated as workshy, with the shirker-scrounger narrative perpetuated in policy and practice and, unfortunately, also in our media.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Stephen Timms]

The hon. Member’s constituent raises an important point. Indeed, I was pressed on that point earlier today by Peter White in an interview that will be broadcast tonight. Our ambition is for a national care service. That is what we are working for, with a long-term plan that sits alongside our long-term plan for the NHS. Her constituent is absolutely right to press us to deliver on that goal.

We fully recognise that we need to adequately support people through the benefits system, but we know that many of those who are out of work through ill health or disability would, as my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth said, love to be in a job. At the moment, they face insuperable barriers that prevent that, including at times the benefits system. It is tough to bring up a family on universal credit. If someone can persuade my Department that they are too sick to work, they will receive some extra cash, but then no help at all to return to work. The system should not work in that way, and that is what we are determined to change.

[Steve Darling]

The Minister talked about barriers; one significant barrier that people with disabilities face is discrimination. Some people who have protected characteristics have the full force of the law behind them when they are discriminated against, but my concern is that people with disabilities do not necessarily have that and have to go through the civil court system. Does he believe that is right?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

I am glad to be able to tell the hon. Gentleman, who raises an important point, that in the race and disability equality Bill, which my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth referred to, we will deliver on our manifesto commitment to disability pay gap reporting for large employers. We will also place the full right to equal pay for disabled people explicitly on the statute book. That will be an important step forward in addressing the concern that the hon. Gentleman expresses. That right is implicit in the Equality Act 2010 already, but we will put it explicitly on the statute book.

Earlier today, I visited Google’s impressive accessibility discovery centre at King’s Cross to look at the latest advances in assistive tech. In our forthcoming Green Paper, I want us to look at what more we can do to support access to assistive technology, which can increasingly support disabled people in work.

Our manifesto committed us to championing the rights of disabled people, working with them. I have started to meet regularly with a range of disability groups, including: the Disabled People’s Organisations Forum England, which is made up of members from more than 40 organisations led by disabled people; the Disability Charities Consortium, which includes nine of the biggest national disability charities; and our regional stakeholder network—nine networks across the country of members of the public who are willing to use their lived experience to improve the lives of other disabled people in their area. I also meet the Government’s disability and access ambassadors, senior business leaders who encourage improvements to the accessibility and quality of services for disabled people across 20 sectors, from advertising to universities.

We support the British Sign Language Advisory Board, which was set up in the aftermath of Rosie Cooper’s British Sign Language Act 2022. We will shortly publish the 2023-24 annual British Sign Language report, which I think is the second such report since the Act was passed, describing what Departments are doing to promote and facilitate the use of British Sign Language in their public communications.

Earlier this year, the equality hub in the Cabinet Office was replaced with the Office for Equality and Opportunity, which will deliver our commitment to breaking down barriers, boosting opportunity and putting equality at the heart of all the Government’s missions. I want to work with other Departments across Government, so that disabled people get the support that they need to overcome the daily barriers that they face. Floating bus stops are an important issue that we need to reflect on and work on across Government.

I am pleased to announce today the appointment of new lead Ministers for disability in each Government Department. They will represent the interests of disabled people and champion disability inclusion and accessibility in their Department. I will chair regular meetings with them and encourage them to engage directly with disabled people and their representative organisations as they take forward their departmental priorities. I look forward to this new group of lead Ministers for disability together driving real improvements across Government for disabled people.

My focus as Minister for Social Security and Disability is primarily on domestic disability policy, but I make the point that I am also responsible for UK implementation of the UN convention, which my hon. Friend referred to—the convention was extended to Bermuda to a few weeks ago—underlining the Government’s commitment to protecting and promoting disabled people’s rights across the UK and around the world.

A great privilege of my job was to attend the Paralympic games in Paris in August, which was a fantastic event. Earlier today, I attended the launch of the strategy of the Activity Alliance, which brings together disability sports organisations around the country. In its new strategy, it highlights the benefits for society of disabled people being able to be more physically active. One of the things that they want to talk to me about is removing the barriers in the benefit system that sometimes make that extremely difficult.

I very much congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth on bringing forward the debate. I am delighted that we have had good attendance in the House this evening. I look forward to working with her and other Members to ensure that disabled people have the power, the rights and the opportunities that everyone else does.

Question put and agreed to.

Blind and Partially Sighted People: Employment Support

Steve Darling Excerpts

Wednesday 20th November 2024 Westminster Hall

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

Thank you for your sterling chairmanship, Dr Huq. I thank the hon. Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova) for securing this debate on an issue that is extremely important, particularly in the light of the recent report. It is extremely helpful that we have the opportunity to debate this matter and engage with the Minister. As the Liberal Democrats work and pensions spokesperson, and as someone who is registered blind, I hope I can bring something to the table.

I am sorry to say that, as has been said, there is sadly still significant discrimination against blind and partially sighted people. Taxis, hotels and restaurants are pinch points where disabled people going about their business often hit hurdles. Hon. Members have alluded to the kindness of strangers, however, and before I had my guide dog, I would occasionally try to use the underground in London. My belief in humanity would always be reaffirmed, as there was much kindness from strangers—the milk of human kindness is out there.

As the Liberal Democrats spokesman, I endorse the findings of the report that we are debating. The most important thing is to ensure that we do things with people, rather than to people, so co-design is extremely important. Tackling discrimination must be part of our agenda, because sadly it is alive and well, and we must strengthen the legislation on it.

Part of the challenge is the legacy of more than a decade of Conservative-led Governments, who have not tacked these issues. Mental health is a particularly challenging area. People who are blind or partially sighted face challenges and hurdles in their lives, so we need to be alive to the fact that the black dog of depression and mental health issues may not be very far away from them. Enhancing our mental health services as part of our general approach would be a real step change in support.

Once upon a time—in the ’80s—I went to the Royal National College for the Blind in Hereford, so I belong to the 1980s Royal National College Facebook page. When I became aware that this debate was coming up, I reached out to people who had gone to the college to see how the world treats them now that they are 50-something, as I am. Although a number of them had positive employment experiences, others had experienced real challenges. Somebody in their 50s told me that they had had less than a year’s gainful employment during their life, which is shocking. They said that they were able to find voluntary work, but that there were blockages in the way to longer-term employment.

Access to Work is a significant issue, as delays to it have doubled to more than 55,000. We must tackle that issue to drive the positive change that we want to see. People from the Royal National College also spoke to me about the Disability Confident employer scheme, as they are not sure whether it is just virtue signalling and not worth the paper it is written on.

[Marsha De Cordova]

The hon. Member touches on the Disability Confident scheme. Does he agree that for the scheme to be worth the paper it is written on, it needs to have proper quality frameworks in place, so that those who become Disability Confident employers actually employ disabled people? Currently, some employers with that status do not employ a single disabled person.

[Steve Darling]

The hon. Member has clearly been reading my notes, because my next point was that someone cannot be a Disability Confident employer and not employ anyone disabled—she is spot on. I have made some inquiries in this area since getting elected in July, and the problem is that the Government do not measure Disability Confident employers. When I went to my local jobcentre, it said that it did not have to report up to top shop at all, and the Library was not aware of any monitoring by the Government. If we do not measure it, it does not count, so that is a real issue.

Going back to my trip down memory lane to the Royal National College for the Blind, one of the issues I heard from former college friends was that we should not have to go out and champion the Access to Work scheme ourselves; Government should be doing that. It should not be one of Government’s best kept secrets, but sadly it sometimes is. People also described it as an overcomplicated system that had resulted in their not being able to employ support workers as agents. They said it was too complicated and there were too many delays in obtaining support through that scheme.

I represent Torbay, and a resident there tells me that after 30 years of solid work for the national health service, she decided to change employment to Devon in Sight, an outstanding local charity that supports blind and visually impaired people across Devon. Sadly, though, it took three months for payments to come through from Access to Work, which left her with significant financial liabilities. Fortunately she had flexibility in her own finances, but if the next person was coming out of a period of employment and faced financially straitened circumstances, it could have resulted in their not being able to continue with their employment.

I am also aware of a lady from the midlands who was recently made redundant by a large national charity, for which she was a rehabilitation officer. She is now looking to change to a local charity undertaking similar work, but Access to Work is only offering her a support worker one day a week. That is impacting on her personal wellbeing, as she is having to take up the cudgels and battle the scheme over what seems a bizarre offer of help. I would like to challenge the Minister on how we ensure that, when we design new schemes, we are working with people; I would welcome some assurances on that.

I would also like assurances around a project plan for Access to Work. I mentioned that there are 55,000 people in the backlog. I would welcome assurances from the Minister on how we are going to tackle that, with a project plan to do so within a reasonable length of time. Have they done the sums around that? What assurance can the Minister give that it will be up to a 28-day turnaround? Finally, I would like some assurances around Disability Confident, so that it can be a scheme that is valuable, drives positive change and, most of all, drives positive culture change in our society, so that people who are blind or partially sighted can play the active part in our communities that they should be undertaking.