Clegg's hidden agenda conned voters

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg's commitment to reforming Disability Living Allowance was noticeably left out from the Lib Dem manifesto, says Anne Wollenberg

There was barely a whisper about disability in the Liberal Democrats’ 2010 election manifesto, other than a pledge to extend Winter Fuel Payments, now unlikely to go ahead.

But in fact, the party had very quietly declared plans to reform Disability Living Allowance (DLA) before the general election.

In a policy document, the Liberal Democrats Policy Briefing on People with Disabilities (available at libdems.org.uk/siteFiles/resources/PDF/Policy%20Briefing%20People%20with%20Disabilities.pdf), they said: “A more detailed assessment should be available to assess the additional costs of disability benefit.”

But no public announce­ment was made and when the party told Disability Now why disabled people should vote Lib Dem in the general election, they did not mention these or any plans to make changes to DLA.

Now Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has said all parties have long championed a simpler medical test for DLA. Addressing the House of Commons on 21 July, he said: “It has been proposed by Members from all parties for many, many years that one way to proceed is to have a simple medical test.” 

Clegg added: “I meet people who say they themselves would prefer a simple medical test to know whether they continue to be entitled to receive that benefit.”

If the Lib Dems suggested it for “many years”, it seems most voters never got to hear about it. When Disability Now called the party press office, a spokeswoman said:  “People want efficiency in the eligibility testing process. People who are being assessed want to feel like the process is efficient and straightforward. That process being more detailed doesn’t mean it’s less efficient or straightforward.”

When asked how the process could simultaneously be more detailed but involve a simpler medical test, she said: “It’s a matter of semantics.”

As a DLA claimant weighing up the pros and cons of each party, I had read the briefing on disability and contacted my local Liberal Democrat candidate, Steven Toole, prior to the election. After querying where I had found the information, he assured me the Lib Dems did not plan to make it harder to access DLA.

Clegg’s championing of a simpler test suggests otherwise, given previous changes to the way benefit claims are assessed have led many disabled people to believe a simpler test means one that is harder to pass.

As a result, some disabled Lib Dem voters say they feel confused and betrayed. “I did go through the manifesto before voting for them and didn’t see anything that caused any alarm bells,” says one DLA claimant, who asked not to be named. “It was only when I watched the budget that I found out about their thoughts on DLA.

“When I heard Nick Clegg saying disabled people keep telling him they want a simple medical test rather than a form to fill out, I was dubious. That appears to be a misinterpretation of people’s words. It appears the Government wants to listen to the views of the right-wing press who think we are all faking it.”

Anne Waters, who is disabled and voted for the Liberal Democrats, says: “The Lib Dems have fallen behind the Tories to make this society less fair, especially to the most vulnerable. I will never vote for them again.”

“The gist of the pre-election plan was about meeting additional costs,” says Liberal Democrat MP Steve Webb, the Work and Pensions Minister. “The rates of benefits don’t bear any particular relationship to anything. They’re just amounts. Why are they those amounts, and not higher or lower?”

Webb says these plans were not about cutting or increasing DLA. The aim was to assess the actual costs of disabled people’s mobility and care needs. He says neither coalition party wants to cut spending on DLA: “Given a free hand, neither party would be starting from here.”

However, he seems to have accepted the tabloid-friendly claims that fewer people should receive it. “The idea is to prioritise DLA recipients who are most in need of the cash,” he says. “What seems unlikely to me is if the numbers keep going up after years and years, is it reaching the right people? Is it achieving what it’s meant to achieve?”

Somehow, it seems unlikely that a simpler medical test is really the key to finding out.