The government is using a quite disingenuous argument that continuing
with ILF somehow creates a two-tier stream of state care and support. It also
argues against the cost of having to administer two different levels of care;
and by placing all social care under one authority it would save on
administration.
As a recipient of ILF I can testify to the benefits this
scheme affords. My local authority has assessed me for social care and support
that meets the needs of my personal care, including cooking and some shopping –
around an hour for the weekly shop. In addition to this I receive funding for
laundry, my condition calls for washing and drying of bed linen and clothes on
a daily basis; and I get some a small amount of time for domestic care –
housework.
The local authority care package is an essential part of my
day-to-day living. Without this means of support my most basic needs, bathing, toileting,
cooking, shopping, etc would go undone.
There is more to life than being kept clean, wearing fresh
clothes and well fed while living in a nice clean environment. Just as women in
struggle have called for ‘Bread for all, but roses too…’, disabled people
demand the right to care and support over and above that necessary just to keep
us functioning.
With ILF money I can pay PAs to assist me outside of the
home. Going swimming can be done on my terms, not me being beholden to friends
or family. Similarly I can choose to visit art galleries when I wish to do so. My
disability campaigning is not hindered because I’ve nobody to drive me to an
event.
ILF goes some way in levelling the playing field.
Without this funding many thousands of disabled people will
find it impossible to hold down jobs. A for instance is the length of time
local authorities give for support for a morning slot. Invariably the time
allocated falls far short of that actually needed to properly support someone’s
full care needs.
The work I do, which has me meeting with the public on a
daily basis, calls for a certain degree of grooming and smartness. My current
local authority time slot, an hour, for a PA to assist me with getting out of
bed, toileting, showering, drying and observing areas such as feet, dressing,
ironing my clothing, preparing breakfast, drying and cleaning the wet room, and
clearing away after my breakfast does not cover these activities.
Without ILF to make up the shortfall I would find it
impossible to get ready for work – remember Access to Work only covers the
recipient from front door to work and back again.
But even if I did manage to get into work. My life would
become a cycle of work to home to bed to work to home to bed with no funding to
support any kind of social life. Actually, I’d be one of the more fortunate
people as, provided I retain council funding, I’d be going to work and
interacting with other people that way.
What of the thousands of disabled ILF users who either can’t
get into employment or maybe are unable to work. For many of these people the
prospect of social exclusion is a likely outcome. Loneliness will feature high
in people’s futures. Some will be forced into residential care.
Over the past few decades disabled people have felt, albeit
slowly, inch by achingly inch, a sense of moving forwards. DLA was a
recognition of the extra costs met by disabled people in their day-to-day
living.
Self-directed support a means to enhance individual’s
independence was introduced – sure, it has its bad points.
In 1995 the DDA came into being. Toothless at first.
However, Labour gave it a bit of a bite when it set up the Disability Rights
Commission in 1998.
As a result more disabled people gained employment. And
schemes such as Access to Work have proved a lifeline to thousands of disabled
workers – sadly the LibDems are even making cuts here.
Improvements to public transport were coming on line; as
well as the Motability car scheme that widened the world for hundreds of thousands
of us.
