Dear the Daily Star/reader,

I read with utter dismay your article on Friday the 28th of December –

The amount of £13 billion is not extreme, for many disabled people what they get is simply not enough. It may be that some claim what they should not, and that many are not helped into employment that could be, but for many genuinely disabled people the money has to not mearly provide a “lifestyle/food” but (especially now with all the spending cuts to NHS and Social Care) treatments, transport to obtain services and care, social support etc.

The article is very misleading – “disability benefits” can cover a mass of benefits, allowances and support given to disabled people, so is this an overall figure? Are they comparing like with like in other countries? What is “national output”? Is this the best figure actually to compare with for how much it costs to support people with a disability? The implication is that the total figure is too high, but what if, when you take out the scroungers and work shy, but paid disabled people what you should, you got a higher figure?

In order to target the overall amount and numbers of people on disability benefit we are hitting everyone with a disability. The higher the disability the higher will be their living costs, and the less likely they are to be able to make savings from an already well over-stretched budget.

You invest with disabled people, they are more able to invest in Cameron’s Big Society pledge.

On a side issue I greatly welcome the idea by Kerry Katona in today’s Daily Star (Saturday 29th) to set up a rehab centre for those with drug addictions and mental health problems. This idea resonates with me.