Here we are, then – a little video I filmed on the quiet of the now-departed (post-reshuffle) Minister of State for Disabled People Mike Penning talking total bollocks at the June Independent Living Fund adjournment debate. I had to film this one on a little camera that I rested on my knee under the desk. Things were fraught at the House of Commons that day. There was an official in the room who told me off for stepping over a little rope instead of walking around it. After that, he kept looking at me like he was measuring me for a coffin. I got the distinct feeling that the very fact campaigners and journalists turned up for the ILF debate that day was getting on people’s nerves. I arrived 15 minutes early for the debate and wasn’t allowed to wait outside the room. Officials told me to go away and come back. It really was that kind of day.

Anyway – thought I’d post this video for the record. Mike Penning’s failure to support independent living for disabled people ought to haunt him forever. It will if he has any sort of conscience. This issue will not go away.

As many people know, the Independent Living Fund is a vital pot of money used by severely disabled people to pay for the added carer hours they need to live their independent adult lives. Earlier this year, Penning announced that the fund would close by the end of June next year and that people would have to rely on councils for social care. No matter that last year, the court of appeal overturned an earlier government attempt to close the ILF. Penning and Iain Duncan Smith have insisted that this attack on disabled people continue.

That ILF closure will be disastrous for ILF recipients – and for the idea that disabled people should be able to live, like everyone else. This is a crucial point – and it’s the reason why the fight for the ILF is both escalating and winning people round. There’s something fundamental to the notion that everyone is equal in this battle. As I’ve said before – saving the ILF is not just about saving a pot of money. It’s about saving the idea that disabled people deserve to live and to get out there and live. Penning argued, of course (he did it again at the adjournment debate) that councils will be able to pick up the tab for care costs for this group of people. That is garbage and everyone knows it. Councils can’t meet social care costs as it is. As readers of this site will know, I’m already talking with severely disabled people who have real problems finding adequate care. ILF recipients will join these people in their problems if their fund closes. The fund should be kept and opened up to all who need it.

Penning did tell one truth at the adjournment debate, right at the start of his speech:

“Can I guarantee that no one in receipt of ILF money today will be adversely affected by the changes that we are going to make? No, I cannot, and no minister of any colour or persuasion could.”

People know this and are responding accordingly. About ten days after he gave this speech, ILF recipients occupied the grounds of Westminster Abbey to draw attention to the threat the ILF closure poses.

Which brings me to – protests about social security cuts:

During that adjournment debate, the MP Mary Glindon observed that a group of ILF recipients had recently turned up to the DWP offices at Caxton House to protest at the ILF closure and to hand in a letter which outlined their concerns. The doors at Caxton House were shut in their faces. I know this, because I was there. I took this film on that day. “Those people simply wanted to hand a letter in to the Minister’s office, but no one was available, and I had to take the letter in by the back door,” Glindon told Penning.

Said Penning: “I am sure that it [the event] was peaceful, well-mannered and nice, but that is not always the case. If the hon. Lady looks at the side of the building she will see that paint has been thrown over it and there have been really nasty incidents outside.” (There’s a clip at the end of the Penning video above where he says that).

Interesting. I sent an FOI to the DWP to ask about the paint throwing and the “nasty incidents”. The response showed things were really not as dramatic as all that. They certainly weren’t as dramatic as Penning would lead you to believe…The paint throwing was apparently noticed in February this year. The DWP didn’t know when it was thrown, or who threw it. So that was all a bit hopeless. You can see the sad little dribble of paint they photographed in the picture they sent me here:

As far as Penning’s “nasty incidents” went, the DWP reported three events in its FOI response to me.

The first was a 2012 “invasion” (their word) of the DWP’s Caxton House reception area by protesters, which the DWP said prevented “normal access.” I was at that protest myself. My overriding memory of it was that the thing was seriously overpoliced and ended in scuffles in which a disabled protestor was injured. The police did a hell of a lot of pushing and shoving that day. You can see that in the video I took here:

Remember: people at that protest were demonstrating against horrendous social security cuts and the Atos regime. They had and have every right to make a vociferous protest against those things. Protesting against that sort of government extremism is not extreme. It is an entirely rational response.

Next, the DWP FOI response mentioned the May 2014 protest at Caxton House, too (I was at that one as well and filmed it here. There was no violence. There was a group of disabled people in wheelchairs trying to deliver their letter about the ILF as discussed above and asking people who came and went from the building if anyone had ever set eyes on Mike Penning. People were starting to wonder if he actually existed at that point.

The DWP also cites a 9 June 2014 protest where staff had to walk past protesters to return after a fire evacuation – you can watch that here. Protestors had a loudhailer and banners, and they chalked names onto the pavement. The FOI response says that police were not called.

People have the right to protest. They certainly have the right to protest about this government’s out-of-control social security cuts. And of course people wanted a response from Penning on the ILF. They wanted him to abandon his plans to close the fund. But Penning made it clear that the closure would go ahead – that came through loud and clear at the ILF adjournment debate. That left and leaves people with no option except to go back to court, which they are doing, and organise protests where they get in the establishment’s face. The ILF closure plan must be thrown out.

Until it is, people are perfectly entitled to demand that it is thrown out. Such protest is entirely justified. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the establishment that has done the escalating to date. I’ve been to plenty of these protests and was at the recent Save the ILF occupation of Westminster Abbey grounds – a peaceful but ridiculously over-policed event where a small group of disabled campaigners and supporters tried to set up a camp to draw attention to the government threat to the ILF. Look at the number of coppers that turned out for that one. Look at the vile policy protestors are campaigning against. It’s very clear to me who started all of this.

I find it very interesting that the mere act of protesting these days – that is, standing outside a building with banners, loudhailers and leaflets – is written off as nasty or extreme and used as a justification to stick to a massively unpopular decision, and to ignore the people whose lives are being destroyed by that decision. Without ILF money to pay for personal assistants, ILF recipients face lives at home with grossly inadequate levels of care, or stuck in carehomes. Nobody deserves that. Nobody voted for that. It is this government that is extreme. Even Nick Clegg is getting that. So, you know – expect a goddamn response. It amazes me that people on the receiving end of the coalition’s appalling attacks on social security have kept their cool for as long as they have. The government keeps escalating. Who knows what the future holds.