Anger and frustration after unions refuse to back disabled people’s manifesto

Disabled union delegates have been accused of failing to support the disability movement after refusing to back a motion at their annual conference that called on political parties, and the TUC, to support a manifesto drawn up by disabled people’s organisations.

Opposition to the Disabled People’s Manifesto appears to have started with the refusal of the influential National Education Union (NEU) and the NASUWT teachers’ union to support its demands on inclusive education.

The manifesto, put together by DPO Forum England and supported by 40 disabled people’s organisations (DPOs), calls for a “right for every Disabled and Deaf student to get appropriate support to attend and remain in a fully inclusive mainstream education setting”.

It also lays out a “radical reform programme” across the areas of representation and voice, rights, independence, and inclusion, which is aimed at tackling “disablist policy making and systemic oppression and injustice”.

Despite DPOs expecting a motion supporting the manifesto to be approved, it was opposed by NEU, NASUWT and even the TUC disabled workers’ committee, the body elected annually by disabled delegates to the conference, and which advises the TUC on disability policy.

The committee told the conference in a statement that it supported the “vast majority” of the manifesto, but that the document “does not call out the resourcing and funding crisis facing schools when it comes to the delivery of SEND*”.

It also said it was concerned that the manifesto’s wording was “still subject to change” and that it did not want to commit the TUC and its affiliated unions to “a manifesto that could be altered”.

There was frustration and anger from disabled activists this week at the actions of union delegates at the conference in Liverpool.

Simone Aspis, a lifelong campaigner for inclusive education, and a former policy and campaigns coordinator for The Alliance for Inclusive Education, but speaking on behalf of her consultancy Changing Perspectives, said she was “angry” and “very disappointed” by the unions’ actions and their failure to support the manifesto.

She said: “Ever since I have been involved with the disabled people’s movement, I have never really felt that unions have really supported disabled people in terms of advocating for their rights.”

But Aspis, who attended a segregated special school herself, said she would not have expected the unions that represent school teaching staff to vote any other way “because they are worried about their workers losing their jobs in segregated provision” and have a “vested interest” which should be examined.

She added: “It will take some very brave union to actually say, ‘This is where we want to go and some workers will lose their jobs, but we really want an inclusive society.’”

Bob Ellard, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts, said: “Solidarity of the left with disabled people only seems to apply when organisations want something from us, but not when we ask them to do something for us.

“Again and again over years, disabled people have been let down by people who style themselves fighters for social justice.

“Are we surprised by this? No, we’re used to it.”

And Professor Peter Beresford, co-chair of Shaping Our Lives, said: “There isn’t a public service which hasn’t been damaged and subverted by the privatising and small state politics of at least the last 15 years.

“We know that well-thought-through and well-resourced inclusive education is in the best interest of all school students, properly implemented.

“We know that successive Conservative administrations have shown no commitment to the diversity of children’s educational needs and have done little to support truly inclusive education, more often the opposite.

“But knowing this does not mean that we lose sight of the principles of inclusive education or our long-term commitment to them.

“There is now real hope for ideological change in the UK; now is the time to recommit ourselves to disabled people-led inclusive education, not to weaken our support for it.”

Jonathan Bellshaw, a member of the disabled workers’ committee and a Communication Workers Union delegate, had spoken against the manifesto at the conference.

He told the conference that “we have to be very careful when we say let’s use mainstream for SEND”, and he told delegates that when he had been a school governor there was a disabled pupil “who was not suitable for mainstream school”.

Among his other concerns was that the manifesto’s two-week timeframe for dealing with requests for reasonable adjustments was not realistic because, he said, Brexit meant it now takes more than two weeks to obtain specialist chairs from Europe.

Kat Downs, from NASUWT, questioned the demand for accessible housing in the manifesto, because she said it wasn’t clear who would decide whether housing was accessible, and she did not trust “the government and the planning laws”.

She said that, as an autistic teacher, she supported “the right for anybody to choose where they want to be educated”.

She said: “Class sizes right now, in some schools, are way in excess of 30, 34, 35.

“If I was an autistic person sat in one of those classrooms right now, I would not be maintaining mainstream education.”

Kevin Daws, from the University and College Union, had led support for the motion, and told delegates that the document “reaffirms our commitment to the social model of disability” and is “a manifesto for change, a manifesto which provides a new deal for Deaf and disabled people”.

He said: “The manifesto is a call to arms, it’s saying that we as disabled people are proud.

“We’ve had enough of the warm words. We demand a change. And the manifesto is a tool with which to engage with us.”

Austin Harney, a delegate from the PCS union, seconded the motion, and told the conference that it was important to “build alliances” with disabled people’s organisations by supporting the manifesto.

In response to concerns raised by NEU and NASUWT, Daws told delegates: “We should remember that having segregated schools for people with special educational needs is actually based on a medical model of disability and is designed to isolate those people, exclude them from mainstream education.”

And he pointed to government evidence that found that greater inclusion in mainstream settings “can improve the academic achievement for children and young people with special educational needs”.

He said the manifesto “actually includes a demand to commit an extra three billion pounds per year for education support to fund SEND; in other words, properly-funded special educational needs within mainstream schools”.

And he reminded Bellshaw that the demand for a response to reasonable adjustment requests within two weeks was current TUC policy, and had been approved by the disabled workers’ conference in 2022.

The manifesto has been put together by the country’s leading disabled people’s organisations, and disabled activists had hoped that backing from the TUC Disabled Workers’ Conference would help pressure the Labour party ahead of July’s general election.

But opposition from NEU – whose delegates wore “disability pride” tee-shirts to the conference – NASUWT and other unions, meant a motion supporting the manifesto was defeated by 67 votes to 52, with 20 abstentions.

A spokesperson for DPO Forum England said: “We are disappointed the motion in support of our manifesto did not go through.

“However, we are grateful and proud that 52 representatives voted for it.

“We will build on this support, recognising a huge need for DPOs and the unions to work together to create spaces for solidarity among disabled people.

“We know there are fundamental disagreements and we urge the unions to work with us to create opportunities where campaigners for inclusion can be at the table, explain their vision and be heard.”

*Special educational needs and disabilities

Picture: Delegates voting against the motion

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…