The unrepentant Pragmatist
Since his first Parliamentary demo in 1969, he’s been at the
heart of the battle for disability rights. Yet there’s always been a
tension between Sir Bert Massie and some other activists. Looking back
on his career he tells Ian Macrae that he remains unapologetic in
standing by his approach
When first approached about doing an interview for Disability Now, Sir
Bert Massie engaged his characteristic self-depreciating but utterly
Liverpudlian sense of humour, describing himself as “A fossil”.
Elaborating he explains: “I’m a bit out of it now. I’m still involved in
disability organisations – I’m a governor of Motability – but I’m very
conscious that time moves on. It’s now 12 years since I left RADAR, and
it’s nearly four years since I left the Disability Rights Commission. So
I’m slightly out of it all.”
Yet his commitment to the cause of disabled people, our welfare, rights
and equality, remains undimmed. Perhaps just as well in this current
climate.
“I really can’t recall a time”, he says, “when disabled people were under such attack.”
But he feels that, without a position, without an organisation behind
him, his voice, even though it’s the voice of a long-term and credible
advocate and activist risks being unheard or ignored.
“When I was at RADAR or the DRC, when I was fighting battles, there’d
always been a process before the battle. So you went into battle with
legitimacy. The difference about being an individual is that people say,
‘Oh, that’s just his view’. Whereas, when you speak for an
organisation, the policy ought to have been through and tested with that
organisation so that you’re speaking for a wider group of people than
just yourself.”
Not that this stops him from taking up causes and responding to what he regards as misguided government initiatives.
“One of the bizarre policies the Government’s come out with is that
disabled people living in social housing which they’re under occupying,
i.e. there’s a spare bedroom, should move to smaller properties.
“Superficially, that seems a good policy. Let’s make the best use of housing.
“But the minute you begin to analyse it, it falls apart. First of all,
there aren’t all these single bed dwellings for people to move into.
Secondly, is it a good idea? I was a trustee at Habinteg [the housing
association specialising in providing accessible homes], for 17 years.
We always underlet because we knew that, even a fairly independent
disabled person, one relatively small accident and they need someone
with them. So they need a spare room.
“Also, disabled people have disability equipment. I have three
wheelchairs. Other people have respiratory equipment or hoists, a whole
range of stuff. You need to store that, so you might need an extra room.
“So this idea of the Government’s that we can just downsize, it doesn’t add up”
Sir Bert is also concerned at how the Government has been seen to be
actively working against the public image of disabled people in what he
sees as a rather insidious way.
“If you want a system of state social security, the only way that’s
going to be sustainable is if it has full support from the public. So
the social security system needs to be credible so that the public will
support and pay for it. The way you start undermining the system is to
start destroying that credibility and support. And that’s what the
Government is doing. You’re getting press stories about disabled people
being scroungers. They’re not coming from investigative journalists,
they’re being fed in. That starts putting disabled people in the public
imagination as scroungers. So when the Government starts making cuts,
people think, ‘Well, these people should be working anyway’.
“We don’t want to go back to the days when disabled people were being
pitied. But you do need an appreciation that if we are to be full
citizens, these support mechanisms are necessary.”
As a student, Sir Bert was at college during the radical and turbulent
years of the early 70s. But though it was at this time that his
disability politics began to awaken and manifest itself, he was not a
student activist in the traditional mould.
“When I was at Liverpool Polytechnic (now Liverpool John Moores
University of which he is a governor), I was an activist in one way
because I was a member of disability organisations and I was
campaigning. But I wasn’t an activist in the student union field.”
He is not unusual among disabled men of his generation in having made
the move into higher education later than non-disabled contemporaries.
And this is because of the nature of the school system in which he found
himself as a secondary pupil.
“I went back to education quite late because I left school with no qualifications.
“You’ve got to go back to the education system of the 1950s and 60s. If
you were physically disabled like me and you passed the eleven plus, you
could go to grammar school. That would probably have been Lord Mayor
Treloar’s. if you didn’t do that, you went to an ordinary special
school. By and large they were based on standard state secondary modern
schools.
“People didn’t leave those with an education. Certainly at my school, if
you were still alive at the age of sixteen, that was seen as quite an
achievement.
“So you learned to read and write, and did a bit of geography – you
learned that Rome was somewhere far away and warm. But there was no real
sense that this was a group of disabled children who were being
educated.“
The usual follow-up at that time to such an education was a job in a
factory. But, as a disabled youngster, this was not an option
necessarily available to Bert.
“I did spend a few weeks working for a company called Disploy, but I decided that life was too short.
“I went to see the Youth Employment Bureau. There I met a youth
employment officer. She did some tests on me like picking up drawing
pins as I recall. And she said I was basically unemployable, a point of
view many people have since agreed with.
“I said I needed some money because I came from a large working class
family where money there wasn’t. She said the only job they had was as a
lift operator and I said I’d take it.”
Getting that job did two things. It gave him the opportunity to explain to people that a job driving a lift “had
its ups and downs”, and it gave him quite a lot of time to invest in developing other income streams.
“I set up a company selling foreign stamps and I also had a printing
machine on which I produced personalised stationery, so I was trebling
my salary.“
There followed a short spell at a vocational college and then a return
to Liverpool and work in a number of jobs in the commercial sector. Then
he was asked to do two things. First he became chair of a PHAB
(Physically Handicapped and Able Bodied) club, and then became involved
with the Disabled Drivers Association.
“I was campaigning against the invalid car and trying to get it replaced
by a Mini. That campaign eventually led to the Mobility allowance and
the establishment of Motability.”
Sir Bert strongly believes that his disability politics arose out of his personal campaigning.
“The campaign against the ‘Noddy car’ was because I had an invalid
three-wheeler and you couldn’t take your girlfriend out in them, not
legally anyway. And so I thought how nice it would be to have a Mini.
But I couldn’t afford a Mini.
“When I was running the PHAB club, I was involved with a lot of younger
disabled people. They were having problems which struck me as being
bloody unreasonable. And I thought,’We can sort this out’, so I began
helping them. And as you become more and more adept at using the system,
you become a campaigner.”
Bert’s involvement with the PHAB organisation, which existed to bring
disabled people and non-disabled people together for the benefit,
largely, of the disabled people, was his first encounter with the other
side of disability politics where such initiatives were regarded as
patronising and inappropriate.
That uneasy relationship with what was then becoming the disability
movement continued to be uneasy and at times difficult when he joined
RADAR.
“There was a certain frustration that RADAR was an influential
organisation but there weren’t enough disabled people involved with it.
That to me was preposterous. If you think of the disabled people who
were involved with RADAR; for example, on the education committee we had
Vic Finkelstein.“
As director/chief executive of RADAR, Bert was closely involved in
working within the political system to bring about anti-discrimination
legislation. During the 1980s he saw numerous bills go into parliament,
only to be defeated by the government. And he was criticised for taking
what was often seen as a pragmatic approach, always doing the expedient
thing, thereby letting himself down.
“I don’t know whether it let me down or not, and that doesn’t really
matter. What I think is more important is that it hasn’t let disabled
people down. It’s actually served disabled people extremely well.
“With regard to supporting what became the Disability Discrimination
Act, I said at the time, this is incremental, we can build on it. And we
did get a Disability Rights Commission with a new Labour government. We
also got regulations on inclusive education and accessible transport
brought in. Now had I said in ‘94, we get everything or nothing, we’d
have had to persuade a new Labour government to bring in a whole new
bill.
“So if the accusation against me is pragmatism, I say, guilty. But I think it served disabled people well.”
So does he have any regrets?
“Oh, thousands of things. Not taking the best picture in the world,
writing the best novel in the world, even writing the autobiography
which I’ve been threatening to do.
“But what I’m conscious of is that disabled people still live in
comparative poverty. Disabled people are still disproportionately
represented on all the indexes of deprivation in this country.”


