The paper says that n a rare intervention, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities asked about the legislation after receiving “credible information” that it seemed likely to worsen the rights of disabled people:
A letter from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, on behalf of the committee, said it “respectfully requests information” about the bill, and in particular the extent of any impact assessment.
It also sought information on “any measures to address the foreseeable risk of increasing poverty rates amongst persons with disabilities if cuts are approved”.
According to an impact assessment by the Department for Work and Pensions released on Monday, the revised bill will mean 50,000 fewer people are in relative poverty after housing costs in 2030. An assessment of the original plans found the measures would have pushed an additional 250,000 people into poverty, with some charities saying this figure would have been higher.
The letter also requests information on the extent of consultation with disabled people and charities ahead of the bill being presented, and whether the House of Lords would be able to give only “limited scrutiny” if, as expected, it is designated as a money bill, limiting the upper house’s powers.
The UN committee called for scrutiny of politicians and others in the UK “portraying persons with disabilities as making profit of social benefits, making false statements to get social and disability benefits or being a burden to society”.
Pointing to previous UN reports criticising the UK for its record over the rights of disabled people, the committee said it had “received credible information indicating that, if approved, the universal credit and personal independent payment bill will deepen the signs of regression” found in earlier reports.
Whatever this bill turns out to say after all the concessions to Labour MPs, there is no hiding the inevitablity that a large number of disabled people will be worse off.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I am happy to address most contributions, even the drunken ones if they are coherent, but I am not going to engage with negative sniping from those who do not have the guts to add their names or a consistent on-line identity to their comments. Such postings will not be published.
Anonymous comments with a constructive contribution to make to the discussion, even if it is critical will continue to be posted. Libellous comments or remarks I think may be libellous will not be published.
I will also not tolerate personation so please do not add comments in the name of real people unless you are that person. If you do not like these rules then start your own blog.
Oh, and if you persist in repeating yourself despite the fact I have addressed your point I may get bored and reject your comment.
The views expressed in comments are those of the poster, not me.