WHEN the United Nations criticised the UK Government for its scandalous treatment of people with disabilities, the responses were varied.
The UN's committee on the rights of persons with disabilities was fairly blunt. The UK is going backwards in terms of the ability of disabled people to exercise choice and control in their lives,. it says.
Special rapporteur Stig Langvad, said the review had been “the most challenging exercise in the history of the Committee". Earlier, at the end of evidence sessions committee chairwoman Theresia Degener had described the impact of austerity in the UK as a "human catastrophe" for disabled people.
The UK Government's response can best be described as huffy denial.
“We’re disappointed this report does not accurately reflect the evidence we gave to the UN, and fails to recognise all the progress we’ve made to empower disabled people in all aspects of their lives," a spokesman said. “We’re also a recognised world leader in disability rights and equality, which is why we supported the development of the UN convention.”
This is pretty extraordinary. The UN committee "failed to recognise" the evidence the UK government presented in the same way a court might "fail to recognise" the explanations of a bank robber caught red-handed. It listened to the evidence, and to that presented by disability and human rights organisations, weighed it up and decided that on balance, it reckoned, it preferred the latter to the word of ministers.
Disability organisations, meanwhile welcomed the conclusions. It was a "grim reality check", campaigners said, and confirms what many groups have been saying about the unfair impact of cuts on disabled people.
Some online commentators criticised the UN for wasting its time. "The committee would be better off dealing with real problems in Syria or North Korea" was the thrust of this commentary.
The Government has already more or less ignored similar findings last year, when a UN inquiry warned of "grave and systematic violations of disabled people’s human rights". But these findings shouldn't be ignored. While they will sound to some like hyperbole, this is not a random decision to pick on Britain. As it reviews different countries' records, where rights are being breached, the committee makes recommendations for change. It made more for the UK than at any time in its 10 year history.
It is not just about the savage impact of cuts on a group of people who already face daily challenges in life, though the UN says austerity policies promoted at Westminster have reduced the standard of living disabled people and their families, raising levels of poverty, particularly for families with children. It is about a failure to meet expected standards in terms of guaranteeing disabled people's rights across a whole spectrum: education, health, employment, access to justice.
I don't quite understand those who dismiss such findings. There's a sort of Brexiteer xenophobia to it. "Who are they to tell us what to do." But this is a committee, which has looked at our record, compared it with other countries, and found us wanting.
Which conclusion could people disagree with? Too many disabled children are segregated in special schools, and inclusive education should be better funded? More should be done to tackle disability hate crime? Disabled people are vulnerable to benefit sanctions and a failing work capability assessment scheme and this should be looked at.
It goes on. Councils are not given enough funding to meet their responsibilities to disabled people. Rules on employment tribunals, medical resuscitation and mental health all allow disabled people's rights to be breached.
All the while the Government says it's a world leader. Selective blindness such as this is not a registerable disability. But it is a national disgrace.
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 here