Just a thought. In absence of an official (normative) interpretation of what
constitute 'ability to work', I gather the term could be constructed by
disabled people/researchers in at least four areas (I only quote 3 so add
another if you want):
-capability (and willingness) to undertake housework for oneself and/or
others
-capability to be hired formally for someone else (employment)(luck counts
here as much as having the right skills/contacts/ suit-uniform, etc)
-capability to undertake informal (paid or non paid) employment- related
activities(there are a range of activities here from moonlighting, changing
a flat tyre or acting as a moderator/contributor of a discussion list)
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anna Ravetz" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:17 PM
Subject: WELFARE REFORMS THAT WILL IMPACT ON AL
> Hello Paul,
> I researched the Welfare Reform Green Paper - predecessor to the
> Bill - when it came out. There was no firm estimate
> (based on real data or statistics) of the number of disabled people
> in the UK who are NOT capable of work. A figure of 1 million people
> who 'could' work was made much of. As there are about 2.7
> million incapacity claimants in all, this would suggest that
> 1.7.million are unable to work.
>
> However, the figures for those who 'can' and who 'cannot'
> work are really not based on anything. The Government was clear that
> the 1 million figure was a 'belief' which then became an
> 'aspiration'. It was clear on reading the Green Paper that the 1
> million figure was based on nothing at all, except, presumably, the
> need to have a nice round number for political purposes. From the
> development of the Green Paper I suspect it was simply plucked out
> of the air. There certainly wasn't a real assessment of the
> conditions experienced by disabled people, the numbers affected by
> each condition, and how much the various conditions could be assumed
> to affect capacity for work. Yes, I know this would have been medical
> model but even medical model would have been preferable to some
> politician suddenly deciding it's convenient for the government that
> more disabled people work, and announcing, all of a sudden, that
> they 'can' work.
>
> So with regard to your question, no, there aren't clear and reliable
> figures for the number of disabled people who cannot work. I think
> it's important to say, also, that the climate has now shifted.
> Formerly there was an assumption that if you have a condition -
> and have passed an extremely rigorous test - you may be assumed to be
> unable to work. Now there is an assumption that EVERYONE can work
> with the right support. In this climate, I don't think we can expect
> much official recognition, in terms of statistics, that there are
> substantial numbers unable to work.
>
> Hope that this is useful,
> Anna Ravetz
>
> ________________End of message______________________
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
(www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about the list
administratione should be sent to [log in to unmask]
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
>
________________End of message______________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about the list administratione should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|