The UK Government has been accused of deliberately concealing the extent of opposition to reform of a key disability benefit.
The Responsible Reform report has been backed by major disability charities but was entirely researched, written and funded by disabled people, led by a prominent blogger.
Collaborating using websites such as Twitter and Facebook, the team analysed more than 500 responses to the consultation on the future of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) after requesting them under the Freedom of Information Act.
Recent criticisms of the Government's plans from Boris Johnston's office only emerged as a result of their efforts. London's Conservative Mayor said he did not support major elements of the reform programme and added that penalties aimed at clamping down on disability benefit fraud were excessive given that levels of fraud were acknowledged to be low.
The full findings, published yesterday, have been dubbed the Spartacus report. They reveal aspects of DLA reform were strongly criticised in consultation responses from disabled people's organisations, charities and individuals.
Notably 98% of respondents objected to the qualifying period for benefits being raised from three months to six months, 99% of respondents objected to Disability Living Allowance no longer being used as a qualification for other benefits and 92% opposed removing the lowest rate of support for disabled people.
Researchers say the Government has consistently used inaccurate figures to exaggerate a rise in the number of people claiming DLA. The report details what researchers describe as "overwhelming opposition" to replacing DLA with a new Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The Government plans to cut spending on DLA/PIP by 20%.
Sue Marsh, who suffers from Crohn's disease, is the author of the blog Diary of A Benefit Scrounger, and helped co-ordinate the report. She said: "Poorly designed social security reforms have created a 'trust deficit"'among disabled people towards the Government.
"We believe reform must be measured, responsible and transparent, based on available evidence and designed with disabled people at the heart of decision-making. We urge members of the House of Lords to take note of this research and the strength of opposition. It is not too late for them to halt these reforms."
Disability campaigner Sir Bert Massie, CBE, former chairman of the Disability Rights Commission, said the Government had misled the public about responses to its plans: "This report shows that rather than being broadly welcomed by disabled people and disability organisations, the new proposals were subject to widespread criticism and alarm," he added.
The Disability Alliance said the Government's "mis-portrayal" of the DLA consultation responses had been truly shocking, while Richard Hawkes, chief executive of disability charity Scope said: "This report reveals the concerns disabled people have about the Government's reform of Disability Living Allowance. This benefit is a lifeline for millions. We urge the Government to act on these concerns."
A spokeswoman for the DWP said the Spartacus report was a selective analysis of consultation responses, which had looked at 500 responses out of more than 5500 submitted on the Government's proposals.
She added: "Disability Living Allowance is an outdated benefit with the majority of people getting it for life without checks to see if their condition has changed. This has led to hundreds of millions of pounds in overpayments.
"We have been working closely with disabled people and disability organisations on the introduction of Personal Independence Payment and have listened to their views."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article