Lord Freud is being pilloried for raising an issue that warrants discussion

Peter Saunders, 15 October 2014

Welfare Reform Minister, Lord Freud, agreed in answer to a question at a Conservative conference fringe meeting that some disabled people cannot do the same value work as more able people can. For this, he is being crucified.

I would have thought Freud’s observation was true by definition (isn’t this what defines some people as ‘disabled’ in the first place?). But some politicians and BBC journalists found this a startling and offensive thing to say.

The relevance of Freud’s remarks lies in the unescapable fact that, if an employer has to pay a minimum of £6.50/hr (plus overheads, so probably more like 8 or 9 quid), and an employee can only produce goods or services to the value of, say, £2/hr, then either that person will not be employed, or their employer will go bust. Neither of these outcomes is desirable, so we need to face up to the problem and think about a solution.

Freud seemed to suggest that maybe it would be a good idea to lower the cost of employing people with certain kinds of disabilities, so they can get jobs and employers don’t go bust employing them. The shortfall in their income can then be made up with welfare payments.

For daring to suggest such a thing, Harriet Harman, Ed Miliband and various representatives of disability pressure groups have piled into him, demanding that he should be sacked. Freud himself swiftly apologised as Cameron rapidly distanced himself from his remarks. The BBC has led its news bulletins with the story.

This spat is another clear illustration of why most politicians end up saying nothing of interest about anything of importance. It also shows why so many crucial and pressing issues go undiscussed, and why the electorate then becomes increasingly disenchanted and disengaged from the whole political process.

Nobody in politics is allowed to say what they think (even if it is obviously true), and no politician can follow a line of thought which may end up discomforting anyone (even if it opens up crucial policy questions that ought to be openly debated). The reaction to Freud’s comments is enough to make you weep.

Peter Saunders is the author of ‘Beyond Beveridge: Restoring the contributory principle to retirement pensions and welfare benefits’, which can be downloaded here.