Parliament security confiscates ‘political’ book on DWP deaths from activists before PIP cuts debate

Parliament has refused to criticise a security officer who confiscated a book about benefit deaths because it was “too political” as three disabled activists arrived to watch a debate on disability benefit cuts, and quizzed them about their medication.

The three activists were astonished when the security officer confiscated political leaflets and a copy of The Department*, a book that exposes links between the Department for Work and Pensions and countless deaths of disabled benefit claimants.

The trio – Paula Peters, Andy Mitchell and Anna** – were left shocked and shaken as they were passing through House of Commons security, after the security officer questioned two of them about why they needed their medication, and even examined the contents of their notebooks after searching their bags.

The security officer pointed to the book, and told Anna she could not take it inside parliament because it was “too political”.

She also confiscated a Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) “welfare not warfare” badge, copies of a DPAC anti-cuts leaflet, a pro-Palestine leaflet, a bag of DPAC badges Mitchell was planning to take to a trade union conference, and a leaflet about the left-wing We Demand Change alliance, all because they were “political”.

All three had checked the list of banned materials on the parliament website before their visit, and the items confiscated were only covered by the list because they appear to have been seen by the security officer as “political or offensive slogan materials”.

Anna said the book – written by Disability News Service (DNS) editor John Pring – was particularly important because they had wanted to show it to MPs after the debate.

She said: “It was literally what we were going to hear MPs talk about.”

She said she was now worried about returning to the House of Commons.

Anna said: “They were asking us why we were taking our medication. I said: ‘I’m not telling you.’ It was so invasive.

“I have been an activist for a long time and I have never experienced anything like it before.”

She added: “I am really concerned that this kind of behaviour is going to increase, and this policing of language and activism is just going to get worse.”

Peters, a member of DPAC’s national steering group, told the security guard: “We are disabled people, disability activists, and you’re treating us like criminals. This is not OK.”

The three activists had been heading to watch MPs debate the government’s planned multi-billion pound cuts to personal independence payment (PIP).

The security checks are carried out by both police officers and parliamentary security staff.

Peters told Pring: “They really got irate when they saw your book.

“They said: ‘Oh no, you can’t bring that in here. That’s political.’

“It was just a horrible experience. It was the heavy arm of the state. They are trying to gag the truth about the impact of austerity.

“They can take all the leaflets and badges and books they like, but it won’t stop us; we have a right to be in parliament and lobby MPs.

“They know the impact of 15 years of austerity, they know disabled people have died as a result of the impact of benefit cuts, they know about Philippa Day, they know about Jodey Whiting, they know about David Clapson.

“DWP knows, past and present ministers know, they know what the impact of these cuts will be, they know.”

She said she had been attending parliamentary events for more than 15 years, and had not experienced anything like this level of hostility.

That morning, the three activists had passed easily through security at another parliamentary building, Portcullis House, with the same possessions.

After last Wednesday’s debate on cuts to PIP, secured by veteran Labour MP Diane Abbott, the trio were escorted by the security guard and a police officer to the House of Commons exit after collecting their confiscated belongings.

Parliament’s press office confirmed to DNS that some items were confiscated by security staff and later returned.

It said that “political or offensive slogan materials” are included on the list of items that are viewed as “restricted”, but that there are no rules preventing reading materials being brought into parliament, although security staff and police officers may use their discretion in taking action.

It later confirmed that there had been no recent changes to its policy on what items can be brought into parliament.

But it declined to say if parliament condoned the actions of the security officer, and declined to provide an on-the-record statement about the decision to confiscate the book and the leaflets.

Instead, a spokesperson for parliament said in a statement: “We recognise the importance of democratic access to the Houses of Parliament and facilitate the visits of thousands of people to the estate each week.

“Security staff and officers work within publicly available guidance to decide on what items may be brought onto the estate, and we welcome feedback from visitors on their experiences to help us make improvements to our services.”

The Metropolitan police had not commented on the incident by noon today (Thursday).

The debate on the PIP spending cuts saw angry Labour MPs attack their own government for its proposed cuts to PIP spending.

Abbott had told the debate: “The only certain way that cutting PIP saves the billions of pounds that the government want is by making PIP recipients live on less, and this is something that ministers claim they do not want to do.”

Fellow Labour MP Rachael Maskell said: “After 14 years of battling, here we are, with Pathways to Work, taking away money, agency, dignity, independence and the essence of life itself.

“I fear, like many do, that people will take their lives, once again crushed by a system that fails to believe and points the finger rather than offering the hand, turning hope to despair.

“Poverty, dependency and harm – if not physical, most definitely psychological – await.

“Colleagues, we are better than this. Let us vow to stop such pernicious cuts and rewrite the story with the voices, experiences and hope of disabled people.”

Sir Stephen Timms, the minister for social security and disability, had defended the PIP cuts.

He said the government would “make the costs of PIP sustainable and address the unsustainable increases that have led to an almost doubling of the real-terms cost of the benefit, from £12 billion to £22 billion, since the year before the pandemic.

“Last year alone, it increased by £2.8 billion beyond inflation. I think everybody who has spoken would recognise that we simply cannot let that trend carry on.”

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

**Not her real name

Picture (from left to right): Paula Peters, Andy Mitchell and Anna, after leaving parliament. Picture by Paula Peters

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…