Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy
The difference being that Lord Freud wasn't saying that the disabled should not take home the minimum wage, just that employers should not need to provide all of it if the disabled employee was sufficiently impaired so as not to be able to make a full units of work contribution and that govenment should subsidise employment of said person.
But as usual the disability charities and Labour have jumped on the bandwagon just reading the lurid headlines in the tabloids without ACTUALLY looking at the proposal which might allow severly disabled to actually so some usefull work, especially to them, instead of languishing at home.
|
It's the way he worded it that caused problems. Saying that they are not worth the minimum wage was probably the worst way he could phrase it.
The idea itself however isn't as problematic and could well be a good idea if it's implemented properly. Any proposal would need to be carefully constructed to ensure it could not be used as a loophole for people to exploit. However if it was implemented in a way that people weren't forced to take them and disability benefit was not dependent on doing this work then it could be a good policy - especially if it was a bonus
on top of their benefit.
I would give charities a break through. They're just responding hard on any suggestion, even if it was unintentional, that disabled people aren't 'worth as much'. It is after all their job to advocate for the disabled. It's also not as if the current Government, with ATOS and the like, have been that helpful towards these communities so it's not as if they should have been expected to give him the benefit of the doubt.