Clause 13
Welfare Reform Bill
3:30 pm
Jeremy Hunt (Shadow Minister (the Disabled), Work & Pensions; South West Surrey, Conservative)
I wish to speak to Amendment No. 157, which is on requirements on employers. A concern that many people have about the Bill is that there is not enough in it about how we will improve communications with employers, who are an important part of the equation. Both Ministers will be aware of statistics that show that there is still a huge amount of discrimination by employers. Some 38 per cent. are not prepared to take on anybody with any disability, and63 per cent. are not prepared to take on someone with a background of mental illness. It is important to involve employers in the process, and the amendment suggests that requirements on employers should be part of the action plan.
We have had Sheffield Dave and Derbyshire Dave; may I mention Tunbridge Wells Tim? I have changed his name, because I do not want to put his real name on the record. He suffered an acquired brain injury when he was a teenager when he stepped out of a bus and was mown down by a car that was moving very fast alongside it. He was in a coma for many months. The result is that he has a learning disability that will be with him for the rest of his life. He was supported brilliantly by Kent Supported Employment, which did a fantastic job of placing him in a job. He tried several times to get a job, but he was open about his learning disability and was not interviewed. Then he applied for a job at the Odeon cinema in Tunbridge Wells andwas supported considerably by Kent Supported Employment. He did not mention his learning disability, but as soon as he was invited for an interview Kent Supported Employment contacted the Odeon and explained the situation. The Odeon staff were very willing to see him and he is now doing a brilliant job in that cinema.
When I went to the cinema and spoke to people about it, I asked the staff about the challenges involved. They mentioned the role of the personal advisers who help disabled people to get into employment. They said that it is crucial, and they gave an example. Tim was serving ice cream and some of it dropped on the counter. He started to eat the ice cream that had been dropped. Had they not known about his disability, that would have been a sackable offence. He would probably not still be working there. The excellent relationship that the cinema had developed with the advisers meant that they were able to deal with the situation. As a result, his prospects there are going from strength to strength. That is a good example of why involvement with employers, including, as the Minister rightly said, the Government’s involvement, is incredibly important.
I turn to the comments made by the hon. Member for North-East Derbyshire. There are some brilliant employers—parts of BT, Asda and Royal Mail—that do an excellent job. However, they say that they have been driven to do so by labour market shortages. It made them consider tapping into another labour market: people who have a limited capability for work.
BT has found that disabled employees save it a lot of money. It costs the company £3,000 to £5,000 to employ someone, and if it keeps someone for longer, it saves money. BT found that the retention rate after one year for disabled employees was almost 10 per cent. higher than for non-disabled employees.
There are good stories, but the unemployment trajectory is firmly upward. The hon. Lady also raised the issue of accession states.