Disabled people face societal and financial challenges because of the bedroom tax and PIP. Photo: Flickr/Dominik Golenia
Show Hide image

Benefit payment delays and the bedroom tax impact terribly on disabled people's lives

The impact of the bedroom tax and outstanding PIP claims not only affect disabled people financially, but can lead them to feeling excluded from the community.

This year has been an extremely challenging year for many disabled people and today is a perfect example of just some of those challenges. Figures released by the Department for Work and Pensions have revealed that thousands of people are still waiting to be assessed for Personal Independence Payments and are struggling to access this vital benefit. Alongside this, an opposition debate on the bedroom tax is a reference to yet another policy that has had a hugely negative impact on disabled people.

The latest figures on PIP show that nearly half of claims (excluding those made by someone with a terminal illness) are still outstanding. Currently there are 245,000 new claimants and 46,600 DLA reassessment claimants still waiting for a decision on whether they will receive their benefit.

DLA played a huge role in covering the extra costs that can come with being disabled and supporting people to live full and active lives. It is vital that PIP now takes on this role.

Being assessed or reassessed for benefits is an extremely stressful process. A long wait for a decision can leave disabled people in limbo, unsure if they will get the support they need. For the deafblind people Sense supports the worry of assessors not understanding their disability and being unable to provide them with a fair assessment is also very real. Sensory impairments are complex and require specialist knowledge of the impact on a person’s day to day life. Over the past 18 months we have heard examples of people who are deafblind not being provided with the appropriate communication support or of assessors being unable to understand the impact of having both a sight and hearing impairment.

Similarly the bedroom tax has posed a huge challenge for many disabled people, who find themselves forced to pay extra for a "spare room" they need because of their disability. Space for extra equipment related to their disability or a room for an occasional overnight carer are both reasons that a disabled person might legitimately need an extra bedroom for and should not be forced to pay extra for.

The irony of the bedroom tax for some people who are deafblind is that in order to live independently they may need extensive mobility training so they can navigate around their home safely. Forcing them to downsize to a smaller property will then result in a person needing further mobility training and potentially a live-in carer to support them during the process. This is not a cost-effective measure and is an extremely stressful prospect for someone with little or no sight and hearing. It is wrong that these needs are not automatically exempt from the bedroom tax. Of course people can appeal, and in some cases an individual's needs will be taken in to account. But again, this is a very stressful and not a situation that disabled people should have to face.

Disability benefits such as PIP aren’t just about the basics like food and heating that we often associate with welfare. They are about ensuring a good quality of life for disabled people. When we talk about PIP delays or the impact on the bedroom tax we aren’t just looking at the financial cost, it’s so much more than that. It’s about people being able to be part of their community and not feeling excluded because of their disability. These issues with benefits are also set against a backdrop of huge cuts to who is eligible for social care, leaving many disabled people struggling to get by. It is vital that these issues are prioritised in 2015.

Richard Kramer is deputy CEO of deafblind charity Sense

Richard Kramer is Deputy Chief Executive of deafblind charity Sense.

Getty
Show Hide image

How Theresa May laid a trap for herself on the immigration target

When Home Secretary, she insisted on keeping foreign students in the figures – causing a headache for herself today.

When Home Secretary, Theresa May insisted that foreign students should continue to be counted in the overall immigration figures. Some cabinet colleagues, including then Business Secretary Vince Cable and Chancellor George Osborne wanted to reverse this. It was economically illiterate. Current ministers, like the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd, also want foreign students exempted from the total.

David Cameron’s government aimed to cut immigration figures – including overseas students in that aim meant trying to limit one of the UK’s crucial financial resources. They are worth £25bn to the UK economy, and their fees make up 14 per cent of total university income. And the impact is not just financial – welcoming foreign students is diplomatically and culturally key to Britain’s reputation and its relationship with the rest of the world too. Even more important now Brexit is on its way.

But they stayed in the figures – a situation that, along with counterproductive visa restrictions also introduced by May’s old department, put a lot of foreign students off studying here. For example, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in the number of Indian students coming to Britain to study in the last five years.

Now May’s stubbornness on the migration figures appears to have caught up with her. The Times has revealed that the Prime Minister is ready to “soften her longstanding opposition to taking foreign students out of immigration totals”. It reports that she will offer to change the way the numbers are calculated.

Why the u-turn? No 10 says the concession is to ensure the Higher and Research Bill, key university legislation, can pass due to a Lords amendment urging the government not to count students as “long-term migrants” for “public policy purposes”.

But it will also be a factor in May’s manifesto pledge (and continuation of Cameron’s promise) to cut immigration to the “tens of thousands”. Until today, ministers had been unclear about whether this would be in the manifesto.

Now her u-turn on student figures is being seized upon by opposition parties as “massaging” the migration figures to meet her target. An accusation for which May only has herself, and her steadfast politicising of immigration, to blame.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

0800 7318496