Capability, winning and work

The Paralympic Opening event was a celebration of diversity and capability. It showed  how disability should not be understood as a limitation but that great achievements are possible despite disability. David Cameron stated that he hoped the Games would ‘inspire a lot of people and change people’s views on disability’. The Paralympics are a showcase for capability, often in the face of adversity.

Britain is also engaging with the idea of capability in regards to disability in terms of it’s welfare reform.  Iain Duncan Smith states of the new disability benefit: ‘It is a gauge of…capability’. The Personal Independence Payment (PIP) will replace other disability benefits. It will streamline these benefits, allegedly making the system easier to engage with. The level of benefit claimants will receive reflects how severely their daily living abilities are affected by their limited capabilities. If it is deemed that their daily living is not at all affected by their condition they will not receive benefit. This new system emphasises identifying what a claimant can do rather that what a claimant can’t. This should be welcomed by many as a better approach to disability.

This new approach however is disturbing in terms of what qualifies as a disability. As a recent Channel 4 documentary revealed, the conditions set to actually qualify as disabled are very high. In this programme one trainer for the assessments, being covertly filmed, asserted that if you have one finger, you are capable of work. Often disabilities are hidden, such as those regarding mental health, or can cause claimants’ capabilities to fluctuate from day to day. This emphasis on capability rather than disability appears to not fully engage with a wide range of hidden or transient disabilities. If the disability is not easily quantifiable then they will not be able to claim disability benefit.

In regards to benefits then, the concept of capability is not being celebrated but being used to undermine those who suffer from a disability and consequently withdraw state support. The implications of not being categorised as disabled in terms of benefits are disturbing. If claimants are classified as fit-for-work then they will only be allowed to claim job-seeking benefits which include rigorous conditions that need to be met. Those who are disabled, just not according to the new government guidelines, will often fail to meet these requirements due to being physically or mentally unwell. Their benefits will then be sanctioned.

This new approach to welfare would therefore not classify the athletes celebrated at the Paralympics as eligible for benefits. In regards to the new welfare reform our athletes who we have rooted for over recent weeks can be classified as disabled to win us gold but not to qualify for public money. The Government is using the concept of capability and disability in two ways. On one hand it is celebrating the capability of Britain’s disabled citizens by holding the Paralympic Games. On the other hand it is using capability to penalise the most vulnerable in society.

Helen Taylor is a post-graduate student at Cardiff University