‘MPs and the Media Cast Benefit-Claimants as Freeloaders – This Discrimination Is What Keeps Them Out of Work’

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

The past week has been a big one for disability-blaming. Forget migrants (for a moment), disabilities are now apparently the reason our economy and public services aren’t working.

‘Benefits Pay More Than Being In Work’, said Thursday’s Telegraph front page, furious that the sickest, or most disabled Brits, may receive more from the state than if they worked a minimum wage job.

The paper did not mention that being disabled can cost more than minimum wage. Nor did they speak to a single disabled person. But they were in good company. The Daily Mail front page declared: ‘Proof Work Doesn’t Pay Under Labour’.

Despite these alarming declarations, in the UK and US, welfare is taking a beating, and the primary targets are those in need of health welfare.

Donald Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ slashed MedicAid for 12-16 million Americans, while the UK moved to save billions on health-related benefits. Labour promised its Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment (PIP) Bill would “promote work and address perverse incentives”. But it was forecast to push 250,000 people into poverty. Not jobs.

Brits are often told welfare is the biggest burden on our budget, yet we are rarely informed that we spend less on benefits than almost every other European nation. Comparing welfare spending as a share of GDP, the UK is right at the bottom of the pile, ranking 25th out of 28 European countries. We spend half what France, Scandinavia, Italy, Austria, Germany and Belgium do, falling just below Croatia, Romania and Hungary in the listings.

Both our front pages and frontbenchers are telling us a story. A narrative that comforts the well-off by casting benefit-claimants as freeloaders, letting privileged people off the hook. But let’s assess the evidence. Because like most powerful lies, it has some grounding in reality.

The rationale is rooted in legitimate questions arising from a steady uptick in both health-related benefit spending and health-related non-employment.

Labour is targeting sickness and disability benefits because both have ballooned in recent years, largely due to a post-COVID spike in mostly mental health and obesity-related claims. But instead of reigning in spending by addressing the issues driving demand, Labour plans simply to tighten the purse strings. That’s more likely to push people onto the streets than into work.

The evidence is in experience. Many disabled people will tell you the PIP benefit has been vital to enabling work. ‘Personal Independent Payments’ are designed to cover some of the day-to-day costs incurred by disability or chronic illness.

Lianna, a lawyer we spoke to, uses hers to afford accessible commuter routes. Rather than de-incentivising her labour, PIP enables it.

In many cases the disincentive isn’t benefits, it’s discrimination. Negative stereotypes fuel this and become self-fulfilling.

Ellen Jones, an accessibility strategist with lived experience, explained: “People with mobility disabilities will be considered as demanding ‘special treatment’ for having a ramp to get into their office. It’s something I see over and over again. Peers think that a disabled person’s getting special treatment, it causes conflict and makes leadership reluctant to hire disabled workers.”

These attitudes can drive disabled people into ‘economic inactivity’, which is exactly the statistic whose alarming growth Labour has used to justify cutting benefits.

“It makes you feel like you don’t belong, and employment isn’t for you,” marketing director Alana told Media Storm. “You need to find another way to survive, but the reality is that there aren’t many other ways to survive.” She ended up illegally subletting her apartment.

Governments and media persistently fail to understand the ground realities. Why? They persistently refuse to speak to the people living them. Remarkably, Labour’s benefit-cutting bill involved no formal consultation with disabled people. That’s not oversight– it’s exclusion.

Labour could have spared themselves the embarrassment of U-turning on welfare cuts had they had done their basic homework. They are now left flailing to plug a £5 billion hole in the budget. So naturally, this is disabled people’s fault, right?

The Independent appears to think so, judging by their anxious headline: “Which tax rises could Rachel Reeves introduce to pay for the £5bn welfare U-turn?” (since reworded). They could just as well have asked “Which tax rises could Rachel Reeves introduce to pay for corporate bailouts, or tax evasion…?” This is manufactured blame, framing disabled people as culpable for policies they were not even consulted on.

Unsurprisingly, the news outlets and political groups publicising negative disability stereotypes are notoriously unrepresentative within their own ranks. Creative Diversity Network’s annual report found just 9.7% of the UK’s TV industry had a disability, well below the UK workforce estimate of 20% and population share of 24%. A vicious cycle kicks in, as disabled people are denied the platforms they need to correct the false stereotypes barricading them in the first place.

“There’s this mentality that disabled and chronically ill people just want to live off the state, they don’t want to work” Maria, a photographer, told Media Storm.

This debate isn’t just about numbers—it’s about societal priorities. Do we want a Britain where disabled people are blamed and abandoned? Or one where accessibility is integral—both in words and budgets?

Media Storm’s latest episode ‘News Watch: Diddy’s domestic abuse, disability-blaming, welfare ‘U-turns’, and Gaza aid traps’ is out now.