Dear Sir(s)
I with many others, believe that there should be a vote of no confidence in Ms Maria Miller MP Disabilities Minister for the following reasons:
1) For failing to fight hard enough to ensure that disabled people receive a fairer assessment of capabilities (specifically the Work Capability Assessment implemented by such companies as ATOS) and which is generally acknowledged to be a flawed test.
2) I and many others believe that, in the light of the recent/threatened cuts to benefits for disabled people, and the cuts affecting disabled people generally, will bring harm, a loss of dignity and a loss of independence to disabled people both at home and where applicable, in their working lives. I and many others believe that her absence at the ‘Hardest Hit March’ on the 11th of May 2011 shows that she is reluctant to engage directly with disabled peoples concerns. Concerns outlined in the following link:
http://blindbabbles.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/disabled-invisible-or-the-government-and-most-mainstream-media-blind-deaf-and-dumb/ 3) To the best of my knowledge, I and many others believe that Ms Maria Miller, in her role as minister for disabled people has not taken a sufficiently strong public stand to protect disabled people from disability hatred, and has allowed ministers to pedal untruths about disabled people, so that the general public end up hating disabled people. Such disability hatred may include acts perpetrated by the media or individual perpetrators of verbal abuse, violence and/or criminal damage when it occurs.
Ms Miller’s belief, expressed in the foreword to the consultation on DLA reform 2010 expresses:
In the foreword to the DLA consultation Ms miller says:
‘Personal Independence Payment will also be a more dynamic benefit – it will take account of changes in individual circumstances and the impact of disabilities, as well as wider changes in society, such as social attitudes and equality legislation.’
I feel social attitudes towards disabled people have not changed markedly for the better. The lumping of disabled people with drug addicts and alcoholics by the media, ably aided and abetted by Ms miller’s lack of rigour in doing her job, stir up the hatred of disabled people held just under the surface of British society. There have been many articles written by the media, aided by Maria miller’s misunderstanding of disability, such as her article in able magazine February 2011,
http://ablemagazine.co.uk/maria-miller-column-able-article-mayjune-2011/Furthermore, Ian Duncan smith’s seemingly willing portrayal of all disabled people as scroungers is illustrated in the following article, where he is quoted as saying
‘Paying a fortune to the five million on handouts - like X Factor reject Wagner Carrillo - is a major reason the UK's deficit soared to a crippling £155billion’
http://thesun.mobi/sol/homepage/news/3254131/We-are-living-in-a-shirkers-paradise-in-the-UK.html?mob=1This type of comment from the work and pensions secretary fuels comments by the general public which are hurtful to genuinely disabled people. I’m sorry, but the deficit was caused by the government’s bale out of the banks, not by the benefits system. It seems this government is keen on blaming disabled people for its ills, and not its own doings. This government-led attack on disabled people has led to survey outcomes like this in a survey of attitudes to disabled people commissioned by Scope:
http://www.scope.org.uk/news/attitudes-towards-disabled-people-survey Iain Duncan Smith is intent on carrying on with a discredited work capability assessment for ESA, which has been roundly condemned here,:
http://www.bhfederation.org.uk/component/k2/item/1083-government-advisers-deliver-fierce-attack-on-work-test.html And here, Professor Paul Greg, the architect of the work capability assessment says it is failing,
http://www.nass.co.uk/news/professor-paul-gregg-warns-that-the-work-capability-assessment-for-esa-is-a-complete-mess-and-badly-malfunctioning/ for being unworkable, mechanistic, and ill thought out. When this government came to office, the work capability assessment was already deemed to be failing many. Why then did the government carry on with it if they are so bent on reform? I think the reason is plain, this government don’t like disabled people. Why else would Maria Miller refuse to attend the hardest hit march on Wednesday 11 May. After all, as the government spokesperson on disability matters, namely the minister for disabled people, who is seen as the flag waver for all policies disability related, Ms miller has responsibility for disabled people, and how the government treats them as well as the right of reply to the call for a steadying hand on the drive for reform of disability benefits.
Re disability living allowance, I feel Maria Miller has failed to protect disabled people from slurs during the reform of DLA, by refusing to refute the claims made by media sources around fraud rates in disability benefits especially incapacity benefit and DLA, and to refute stories pedalled in the media about Howe supposedly easy DLA is to claim for.
One such media led story is this from the daily record in Scotland .
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health-news/2011/04/28/midwife-with-one-leg-sees-benefits-slashed-because-she-can-still-walk-86908-23091892/ The comments reflect the confusion around DLA. But in response to comment from the general public such as those on the page linked to above, Ms miller doesn’t say she’ll advertise DLA better, thus telling the general public what it is for. She says, along with Iain Duncan smith, that she will reform it, to weed out scroungers, and better target it. I feel, to better target a service at a key audience, scrapping the service, then making a new one does not better target it, nor giving the line that reform is needed because Maria miller believes that:
'Indeed, 130,000 of those who were first awarded DLA in 1992 have either not had a change to their award, or their award looked at, so we have had no way of knowing if it is accurate. “ (Maria miller MP Able Magazine February 2011,'
http://ablemagazine.co.uk/maria-miller-column-able-article-mayjune-2011/gives the government the right to reform the whole benefit system.
I feel that, if people haven’t been seen for years, the government could send review forms. Ms Miller says thousands of people on indefinite awards have not been seen for fifteen years or more. If she knows that statistic, then she must know to whom those statistics relate, why not call them in for a DLA medical under the existing system? Instead, this government seek to reform DLA and other benefits rather than using what powers they have already got under the existing system. I suggest reform of DLA costs more money than a simple retest of those claimants who have not had reviews for years. The reform of the test for DLA is not necessary in my view, especially when immediate savings of twenty percent are sort from an acknowledged fraud rate of 0.5 percent of the DLA caseload
George Osborne, in the emergency budget of June 2010, states that a cut of 20 percent is needed in the DLA caseload. That target was set before any retesting of existing claimants, meaning that the test itself would need to be made more rigorous to achieve the cuts. With a fraud rate of 0.5%, seeking a cut of 20% cannot be done without denying independence to genuinely disabled people. To my view, a cuts agenda like the one Ms Miller and her secretary of state, goaded by a chancellor who wants to cut expenditure at all costs is ethically wrong.
The final indictment of Ms Miller as minister for disabled people is also provided by the foreword to DLA.
In the DLA consultation paper Ms Miller states:
‘Just as we are committed to providing unconditional support to those who are unable to work, we know that work is the best form of welfare for those who are able to do so. That’s why I want as many disabled people as possible to benefit from employment – it is not acceptable for anyone to be trapped in a cycle of dependency. By giving people the right level of support through Personal Independence Payment, I hope that many more disabled people will be able to work and enjoy the advantages that an active working life can bring.
This is why I believe the time is right to reform DLA. We need to create a new, more active and enabling benefit of which British people can be proud – a benefit fit for the 21st Century.’
I would like to remind Ms Miller, DLA is a benefit paid to disabled people to help with the costs of being disabled, whether the disabled person is in or out of work. DLA is not an out of work benefit. Her assertions here are flawed and I feel have tainted her personal reputation and that of her office. I thought a minister for any department’s job is to fight for that particular department’s interests, not to work against the people for whom the department is working.
Maria miller, I feel, is the minister against disabled people, put in office by the government to preach to disabled people about what the government wants to do with their lives.
In my response to the draft criteria for PIP, I wrote that:
'What she and her ministers are hoping to do is strip the levels of support back so disabled people need to go to work, just to afford the larcenous prices to achieve their own independence . If this is the truth, this is disgusting. Disabled people need assistance to get independence, the market does not solve this without unacceptable costs. I was under the impression DLA, and its replacement PIP, was to be a benefit paid to disabled people, whether they were in or out of employment. I think the government need to look into the extra costs for disabled people, have a serious look, disabled people know how much their aids and adaptations cost. I think, before the government start stripping benefits back on the assumption that attitudes to disabled people have fundamentally changed for the better, or that aids and adaptations are freely or cheaply available, they need to get a real world picture. Look at the reasons behind the updating of mobility component of DLA for blind people for instance. This was updated due to the high costs of transport for totally or near totally blind people as it was seen, rightly, after a lot of lobbying, that totally blind people incur higher transport costs. The care component of DLA was updated from lower to middle rate for severely sight impaired people due to the cross over between care and mobility, the “getting around unfamiliar areas, and to a toilet in unfamiliar areas, test,” as it were. I do not think access to gender specific toilets, or transport will become magically accessible in 2013.'
It is for the above reasons that I and many others believe that Ms Maria Miller MP is out of touch with the worries, concerns and outrage felt by disabled members of society and therefore, urge ministers to press for a vote of no confidence in Ms Miller.