May appoints minister to tackle loneliness issues raised by Jo Cox

Tracey Crouch tasked with implementing recommendations from commission set up after the MP’s death

An elderly woman sits alone in a bedroom


Theresa May cited research saying that 9 million people often or always feel lonely. Photograph: Education Images/UIG/Getty Images/Universal Images Group

Theresa May has appointed one of her ministers to lead on issues connected to loneliness, implementing one of the main recommendations of a report into the subject by the Jo Cox Commission.

Tracey Crouch, the minister for sport and civil society, will head a government-wide group with responsibility for policies connected to loneliness, Downing Street said.

In parallel, the government said it would develop a wider strategy on the issue, gather more evidence and statistics, and provide funding for community groups to start activities which connect people.

The move follows a cross-party report by the commission set up in honour of Cox, the Labour MP murdered by a rightwing extremist in 2016, who had campaigned about loneliness.

May is expected to formally announce the appointment on Wednesday, and to say that she has accepted many of the recommendations from the commission. She will also host a Downing Street reception in honour of Cox’s work.

Citing research saying that 9 million people often or always feel lonely, the prime minister said: “For far too many people, loneliness is the sad reality of modern life.

“I want to confront this challenge for our society and for all of us to take action to address the loneliness endured by the elderly, by carers, by those who have lost loved ones – people who have no one to talk to or share their thoughts and experiences with.”

May paid tribute to Cox’s work, saying she hoped the initiative would aim “to see that, in Jo’s memory, we bring an end to the acceptance of loneliness for good”.

The Jo Cox Commission, which is chaired by the Labour MP Rachel Reeves and Seema Kennedy, a Conservative, has been working for the past year with more than a dozen charities on ideas to approach the problem.

In a joint statement, Reeves and Kennedy said they welcomed the government response, and would work with Crouch and various groups to tackle the issue.

They said: “Jo Cox said that ‘young or old, loneliness doesn’t discriminate’. Throughout 2017 we have heard from new parents, children, disabled people, carers, refugees and older people about their experience of loneliness.”

Crouch said she felt privileged to be taking forward the work begun by Cox: “I am sure that with the support of volunteers, campaigners, businesses and my fellow MPs from all sides of the house, we can make significant progress in defeating loneliness.”

Obesity surgery ‘halves risk of death’ compared with lifestyle changes

Latest study lends support to experts who say more operations should be carried out in UK

Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes.


Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

Obese patients undergoing stomach-shrinking surgery have half the risk of death in the years that follow compared with those tackling their weight through diet and behaviour alone, new research suggests.

Experts say obesity surgery is cost-effective, leads to substantial weight loss and can help tackle type 2 diabetes. But surgeons say not enough of the stomach-shrinking surgeries are carried out in the UK, with figures currently lagging behind other European countries, including France and Belgium – despite the latter having a smaller population.

“We don’t think this [new study] alone is sufficient to conclude that obese patients should push for bariatric surgery, but this additional information certainly seems to provide additional support,” said Philip Greenland, co-author of the latest study from Northwestern University.

Q&A

Share your experiences of obesity surgery

If you have had stomach-shrinking surgery we would like to hear from you. What was your experience like? Did you find the procedure helpful or not?

You can share your story using our encrypted form here. We will feature some of your contributions in our reporting.

In the new study, one of several on obesity surgery published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers sought to explore whether stomach-shrinking operations, known as bariatric surgery, had a long-term impact on the risk of death among obese individuals, compared with non-surgical approaches to weight loss.

In total, more than 33,500 participants were involved in the study – 8,385 of whom had one of three types of bariatric surgery between 2005 and 2014. The majority of participants had a BMI greater than 35; obesity is defined as a BMI of 30 or higher.

The researchers followed up the participants over the years that followed their surgery until death, or the end of the follow-up period in December 2015, comparing the number of deaths and other metrics with those for obese patients who had not had surgery but were given dietary and behavioural help. Each surgery patient was compared to three who did not have surgery, but had similar characteristics such as age and sex, and were also followed until they too had surgery, died or the study ended.

The results reveal that the death rate during the study was 1.3% for those who had any form of bariatric surgery, while among those who had not had surgery it was 2.3%, although the length of follow-up period varied considerably from patient to patient.

Once other factors including age, sex and related diseases were taken into account, the team found those who did not have stomach-shrinking surgery had just over twice the risk of death compared to those who had, with all three types of surgery linked to lower mortality.

What’s more, the group which had surgery showed a greater reduction in BMI, lower rates of new diabetes diagnoses, improved blood pressure, and a greater proportion of diabetic individuals going into remission.

But the team add that a small proportion of surgery patients required further surgery, while they note the study was observational so cannot prove bariatric surgery itself reduced the risk of death since patients were not randomised, meaning it is possible that those who did not have surgery were in poorer health.

A second, smaller study in the same journal also highlighted benefits of bariatric surgery, comparing diabetes-related markers in obese adults who had lived with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes for an average of nine years. Participants either received two years of intensive diet, exercise and medical management or, in addition, had bariatric surgery.

The results from 113 participants reveal that complications were more common among those who had had bariatric surgery, but that one year after the study began they had lost more weight on average, with a greater proportion having reached the combined targets for cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a marker of glucose.

While this proportion fell for both groups after five years – at which point 98 patients were still providing data – those who had had bariatric surgery maintained the edge, with 23% reaching the combined targets, compared to just 4% of those offered lifestyle and medical interventions alone.

Francesco Rubino, professor of metabolic and bariatric surgery at King’s College London, who was not involved in the studies, said misunderstandings and stigma were holding back greater use of such operations in the UK. While Rubino noted that surgery is not for everyone, he added “This is a conversation GPs and doctors should have with patients more often.”

Obesity surgery ‘halves risk of death’ compared with lifestyle changes

Latest study lends support to experts who say more operations should be carried out in UK

Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes.


Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

Obese patients undergoing stomach-shrinking surgery have half the risk of death in the years that follow compared with those tackling their weight through diet and behaviour alone, new research suggests.

Experts say obesity surgery is cost-effective, leads to substantial weight loss and can help tackle type 2 diabetes. But surgeons say not enough of the stomach-shrinking surgeries are carried out in the UK, with figures currently lagging behind other European countries, including France and Belgium – despite the latter having a smaller population.

“We don’t think this [new study] alone is sufficient to conclude that obese patients should push for bariatric surgery, but this additional information certainly seems to provide additional support,” said Philip Greenland, co-author of the latest study from Northwestern University.

Q&A

Share your experiences of obesity surgery

If you have had stomach-shrinking surgery we would like to hear from you. What was your experience like? Did you find the procedure helpful or not?

You can share your story using our encrypted form here. We will feature some of your contributions in our reporting.

In the new study, one of several on obesity surgery published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers sought to explore whether stomach-shrinking operations, known as bariatric surgery, had a long-term impact on the risk of death among obese individuals, compared with non-surgical approaches to weight loss.

In total, more than 33,500 participants were involved in the study – 8,385 of whom had one of three types of bariatric surgery between 2005 and 2014. The majority of participants had a BMI greater than 35; obesity is defined as a BMI of 30 or higher.

The researchers followed up the participants over the years that followed their surgery until death, or the end of the follow-up period in December 2015, comparing the number of deaths and other metrics with those for obese patients who had not had surgery but were given dietary and behavioural help. Each surgery patient was compared to three who did not have surgery, but had similar characteristics such as age and sex, and were also followed until they too had surgery, died or the study ended.

The results reveal that the death rate during the study was 1.3% for those who had any form of bariatric surgery, while among those who had not had surgery it was 2.3%, although the length of follow-up period varied considerably from patient to patient.

Once other factors including age, sex and related diseases were taken into account, the team found those who did not have stomach-shrinking surgery had just over twice the risk of death compared to those who had, with all three types of surgery linked to lower mortality.

What’s more, the group which had surgery showed a greater reduction in BMI, lower rates of new diabetes diagnoses, improved blood pressure, and a greater proportion of diabetic individuals going into remission.

But the team add that a small proportion of surgery patients required further surgery, while they note the study was observational so cannot prove bariatric surgery itself reduced the risk of death since patients were not randomised, meaning it is possible that those who did not have surgery were in poorer health.

A second, smaller study in the same journal also highlighted benefits of bariatric surgery, comparing diabetes-related markers in obese adults who had lived with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes for an average of nine years. Participants either received two years of intensive diet, exercise and medical management or, in addition, had bariatric surgery.

The results from 113 participants reveal that complications were more common among those who had had bariatric surgery, but that one year after the study began they had lost more weight on average, with a greater proportion having reached the combined targets for cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a marker of glucose.

While this proportion fell for both groups after five years – at which point 98 patients were still providing data – those who had had bariatric surgery maintained the edge, with 23% reaching the combined targets, compared to just 4% of those offered lifestyle and medical interventions alone.

Francesco Rubino, professor of metabolic and bariatric surgery at King’s College London, who was not involved in the studies, said misunderstandings and stigma were holding back greater use of such operations in the UK. While Rubino noted that surgery is not for everyone, he added “This is a conversation GPs and doctors should have with patients more often.”

Obesity surgery ‘halves risk of death’ compared with lifestyle changes

Latest study lends support to experts who say more operations should be carried out in UK

Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes.


Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

Obese patients undergoing stomach-shrinking surgery have half the risk of death in the years that follow compared with those tackling their weight through diet and behaviour alone, new research suggests.

Experts say obesity surgery is cost-effective, leads to substantial weight loss and can help tackle type 2 diabetes. But surgeons say not enough of the stomach-shrinking surgeries are carried out in the UK, with figures currently lagging behind other European countries, including France and Belgium – despite the latter having a smaller population.

“We don’t think this [new study] alone is sufficient to conclude that obese patients should push for bariatric surgery, but this additional information certainly seems to provide additional support,” said Philip Greenland, co-author of the latest study from Northwestern University.

Q&A

Share your experiences of obesity surgery

If you have had stomach-shrinking surgery we would like to hear from you. What was your experience like? Did you find the procedure helpful or not?

You can share your story using our encrypted form here. We will feature some of your contributions in our reporting.

In the new study, one of several on obesity surgery published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers sought to explore whether stomach-shrinking operations, known as bariatric surgery, had a long-term impact on the risk of death among obese individuals, compared with non-surgical approaches to weight loss.

In total, more than 33,500 participants were involved in the study – 8,385 of whom had one of three types of bariatric surgery between 2005 and 2014. The majority of participants had a BMI greater than 35; obesity is defined as a BMI of 30 or higher.

The researchers followed up the participants over the years that followed their surgery until death, or the end of the follow-up period in December 2015, comparing the number of deaths and other metrics with those for obese patients who had not had surgery but were given dietary and behavioural help. Each surgery patient was compared to three who did not have surgery, but had similar characteristics such as age and sex, and were also followed until they too had surgery, died or the study ended.

The results reveal that the death rate during the study was 1.3% for those who had any form of bariatric surgery, while among those who had not had surgery it was 2.3%, although the length of follow-up period varied considerably from patient to patient.

Once other factors including age, sex and related diseases were taken into account, the team found those who did not have stomach-shrinking surgery had just over twice the risk of death compared to those who had, with all three types of surgery linked to lower mortality.

What’s more, the group which had surgery showed a greater reduction in BMI, lower rates of new diabetes diagnoses, improved blood pressure, and a greater proportion of diabetic individuals going into remission.

But the team add that a small proportion of surgery patients required further surgery, while they note the study was observational so cannot prove bariatric surgery itself reduced the risk of death since patients were not randomised, meaning it is possible that those who did not have surgery were in poorer health.

A second, smaller study in the same journal also highlighted benefits of bariatric surgery, comparing diabetes-related markers in obese adults who had lived with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes for an average of nine years. Participants either received two years of intensive diet, exercise and medical management or, in addition, had bariatric surgery.

The results from 113 participants reveal that complications were more common among those who had had bariatric surgery, but that one year after the study began they had lost more weight on average, with a greater proportion having reached the combined targets for cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a marker of glucose.

While this proportion fell for both groups after five years – at which point 98 patients were still providing data – those who had had bariatric surgery maintained the edge, with 23% reaching the combined targets, compared to just 4% of those offered lifestyle and medical interventions alone.

Francesco Rubino, professor of metabolic and bariatric surgery at King’s College London, who was not involved in the studies, said misunderstandings and stigma were holding back greater use of such operations in the UK. While Rubino noted that surgery is not for everyone, he added “This is a conversation GPs and doctors should have with patients more often.”

Obesity surgery ‘halves risk of death’ compared to lifestyle changes alone

Latest study of long-term impact of bariatric surgery lends support to experts who say more operations should be carried out in UK

Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes.


Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

Obese patients undergoing stomach-shrinking surgery have half the risk of death in the years that follow compared with those tackling their weight through diet and behaviour alone, new research suggests.

Experts say obesity surgery is cost-effective, leads to substantial weight loss and can help tackle type 2 diabetes. But surgeons say not enough of the stomach-shrinking surgeries are carried out in the UK, with figures currently lagging behind other European countries, including France and Belgium – despite the latter having a smaller population.

“We don’t think this [new study] alone is sufficient to conclude that obese patients should push for bariatric surgery, but this additional information certainly seems to provide additional support,” said Philip Greenland, co-author of the latest study from Northwestern University.

Q&A

Share your experiences of obesity surgery

If you have had stomach-shrinking surgery we would like to hear from you. What was your experience like? Did you find the procedure helpful or not?

You can share your story using our encrypted form here. We will feature some of your contributions in our reporting.

In the new study, one of several on obesity surgery published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers sought to explore whether stomach-shrinking operations, known as bariatric surgery, had a long-term impact on the risk of death among obese individuals, compared with non-surgical approaches to weight loss.

In total, more than 33,500 participants were involved in the study – 8,385 of whom had one of three types of bariatric surgery between 2005 and 2014. The majority of participants had a BMI greater than 35; obesity is defined as a BMI of 30 or higher.

The researchers followed up the participants over the years that followed their surgery until death, or the end of the follow-up period in December 2015, comparing the number of deaths and other metrics with those for obese patients who had not had surgery but were given dietary and behavioural help. Each surgery patient was compared to three who did not have surgery, but had similar characteristics such as age and sex, and were also followed until they too had surgery, died or the study ended.

The results reveal that the death rate during the study was 1.3% for those who had any form of bariatric surgery, while among those who had not had surgery it was 2.3%, although the length of follow-up period varied considerably from patient to patient.

Once other factors including age, sex and related diseases were taken into account, the team found those who did not have stomach-shrinking surgery had just over twice the risk of death compared to those who had, with all three types of surgery linked to lower mortality.

What’s more, the group which had surgery showed a greater reduction in BMI, lower rates of new diabetes diagnoses, improved blood pressure, and a greater proportion of diabetic individuals going into remission.

But the team add that a small proportion of surgery patients required further surgery, while they note the study was observational so cannot prove bariatric surgery itself reduced the risk of death since patients were not randomised, meaning it is possible that those who did not have surgery were in poorer health.

A second, smaller study in the same journal also highlighted benefits of bariatric surgery, comparing diabetes-related markers in obese adults who had lived with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes for an average of nine years. Participants either received two years of intensive diet, exercise and medical management or, in addition, had bariatric surgery.

The results from 113 participants reveal that complications were more common among those who had had bariatric surgery, but that one year after the study began they had lost more weight on average, with a greater proportion having reached the combined targets for cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a marker of glucose.

While this proportion fell for both groups after five years – at which point 98 patients were still providing data – those who had had bariatric surgery maintained the edge, with 23% reaching the combined targets, compared to just 4% of those offered lifestyle and medical interventions alone.

Francesco Rubino, professor of metabolic and bariatric surgery at King’s College London, who was not involved in the studies, said misunderstandings and stigma were holding back greater use of such operations in the UK. While Rubino noted that surgery is not for everyone, he added “This is a conversation GPs and doctors should have with patients more often.”

Obesity surgery ‘halves risk of death’ compared to lifestyle changes alone

Latest study of long-term impact of bariatric surgery lends support to experts who say more operations should be carried out in UK

Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes.


Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

Obese patients undergoing stomach-shrinking surgery have half the risk of death in the years that follow compared with those tackling their weight through diet and behaviour alone, new research suggests.

Experts say obesity surgery is cost-effective, leads to substantial weight loss and can help tackle type 2 diabetes. But surgeons say not enough of the stomach-shrinking surgeries are carried out in the UK, with figures currently lagging behind other European countries, including France and Belgium – despite the latter having a smaller population.

“We don’t think this [new study] alone is sufficient to conclude that obese patients should push for bariatric surgery, but this additional information certainly seems to provide additional support,” said Philip Greenland, co-author of the latest study from Northwestern University.

Q&A

Share your experiences of obesity surgery

If you have had stomach-shrinking surgery we would like to hear from you. What was your experience like? Did you find the procedure helpful or not?

You can share your story using our encrypted form here. We will feature some of your contributions in our reporting.

In the new study, one of several on obesity surgery published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers sought to explore whether stomach-shrinking operations, known as bariatric surgery, had a long-term impact on the risk of death among obese individuals, compared with non-surgical approaches to weight loss.

In total, more than 33,500 participants were involved in the study – 8,385 of whom had one of three types of bariatric surgery between 2005 and 2014. The majority of participants had a BMI greater than 35; obesity is defined as a BMI of 30 or higher.

The researchers followed up the participants over the years that followed their surgery until death, or the end of the follow-up period in December 2015, comparing the number of deaths and other metrics with those for obese patients who had not had surgery but were given dietary and behavioural help. Each surgery patient was compared to three who did not have surgery, but had similar characteristics such as age and sex, and were also followed until they too had surgery, died or the study ended.

The results reveal that the death rate during the study was 1.3% for those who had any form of bariatric surgery, while among those who had not had surgery it was 2.3%, although the length of follow-up period varied considerably from patient to patient.

Once other factors including age, sex and related diseases were taken into account, the team found those who did not have stomach-shrinking surgery had just over twice the risk of death compared to those who had, with all three types of surgery linked to lower mortality.

What’s more, the group which had surgery showed a greater reduction in BMI, lower rates of new diabetes diagnoses, improved blood pressure, and a greater proportion of diabetic individuals going into remission.

But the team add that a small proportion of surgery patients required further surgery, while they note the study was observational so cannot prove bariatric surgery itself reduced the risk of death since patients were not randomised, meaning it is possible that those who did not have surgery were in poorer health.

A second, smaller study in the same journal also highlighted benefits of bariatric surgery, comparing diabetes-related markers in obese adults who had lived with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes for an average of nine years. Participants either received two years of intensive diet, exercise and medical management or, in addition, had bariatric surgery.

The results from 113 participants reveal that complications were more common among those who had had bariatric surgery, but that one year after the study began they had lost more weight on average, with a greater proportion having reached the combined targets for cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a marker of glucose.

While this proportion fell for both groups after five years – at which point 98 patients were still providing data – those who had had bariatric surgery maintained the edge, with 23% reaching the combined targets, compared to just 4% of those offered lifestyle and medical interventions alone.

Francesco Rubino, professor of metabolic and bariatric surgery at King’s College London, who was not involved in the studies, said misunderstandings and stigma were holding back greater use of such operations in the UK. While Rubino noted that surgery is not for everyone, he added “This is a conversation GPs and doctors should have with patients more often.”

Obesity surgery ‘halves risk of death’ compared to lifestyle changes alone

Latest study of long-term impact of bariatric surgery lends support to experts who say more operations should be carried out in UK

Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes.


Bariatric surgery reduces the size of the patient’s stomach. It is cost-effective and leads to substantial weight-loss as well as helping to tackle type 2 diabetes. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian

Obese patients undergoing stomach-shrinking surgery have half the risk of death in the years that follow compared with those tackling their weight through diet and behaviour alone, new research suggests.

Experts say obesity surgery is cost-effective, leads to substantial weight loss and can help tackle type 2 diabetes. But surgeons say not enough of the stomach-shrinking surgeries are carried out in the UK, with figures currently lagging behind other European countries, including France and Belgium – despite the latter having a smaller population.

“We don’t think this [new study] alone is sufficient to conclude that obese patients should push for bariatric surgery, but this additional information certainly seems to provide additional support,” said Philip Greenland, co-author of the latest study from Northwestern University.

In the new study, one of several on obesity surgery published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers sought to explore whether stomach-shrinking operations, known as bariatric surgery, had a long-term impact on the risk of death among obese individuals, compared with non-surgical approaches to weight loss.

In total, more than 33,500 participants were involved in the study – 8,385 of whom had one of three types of bariatric surgery between 2005 and 2014. The majority of participants had a BMI greater than 35; obesity is defined as a BMI of 30 or higher.

The researchers followed up the participants over the years that followed their surgery until death, or the end of the follow-up period in December 2015, comparing the number of deaths and other metrics with those for obese patients who had not had surgery but were given dietary and behavioural help. Each surgery patient was compared to three who did not have surgery, but had similar characteristics such as age and sex, and were also followed until they too had surgery, died or the study ended.

The results reveal that the death rate during the study was 1.3% for those who had any form of bariatric surgery, while among those who had not had surgery it was 2.3%, although the length of follow-up period varied considerably from patient to patient.

Once other factors including age, sex and related diseases were taken into account, the team found those who did not have stomach-shrinking surgery had just over twice the risk of death compared to those who had, with all three types of surgery linked to lower mortality.

What’s more, the group which had surgery showed a greater reduction in BMI, lower rates of new diabetes diagnoses, improved blood pressure, and a greater proportion of diabetic individuals going into remission.

But the team add that a small proportion of surgery patients required further surgery, while they note the study was observational so cannot prove bariatric surgery itself reduced the risk of death since patients were not randomised, meaning it is possible that those who did not have surgery were in poorer health.

A second, smaller study in the same journal also highlighted benefits of bariatric surgery, comparing diabetes-related markers in obese adults who had lived with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes for an average of nine years. Participants either received two years of intensive diet, exercise and medical management or, in addition, had bariatric surgery.

The results from 113 participants reveal that complications were more common among those who had had bariatric surgery, but that one year after the study began they had lost more weight on average, with a greater proportion having reached the combined targets for cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a marker of glucose.

While this proportion fell for both groups after five years – at which point 98 patients were still providing data – those who had had bariatric surgery maintained the edge, with 23% reaching the combined targets, compared to just 4% of those offered lifestyle and medical interventions alone.

Francesco Rubino, professor of metabolic and bariatric surgery at King’s College London, who was not involved in the studies, said misunderstandings and stigma were holding back greater use of such operations in the UK. While Rubino noted that surgery is not for everyone, he added “This is a conversation GPs and doctors should have with patients more often.”

The new work and pensions secretary is an insult to disabled people

As backlashes go, the days following Esther McVey’s appointment as the new work and pensions secretary have seen intense criticism. Between 2012 and 2013, as minister for disabled people and later employment minister, McVey was famed for defending the indefensible, saying it was “right” that people were having to use food banks and claiming that benefit sanctions “teach” jobseekers to take looking for work seriously – going as far as comparing unemployed people to naughty schoolchildren being punished by a teacher – despite the destitution and death that sanctions have since caused. 

Yet this is about more than soundbites. From giving misleading information about the bedroom tax’s impact on disabled people to her decision to close the Independent Living Fund, McVey appeared to relish removing disability support, with campaigners accusing her of distorting the facts to help make that a reality. Worse, she was central in helping the rightwing press stoke up suspicion towards disabled people on benefits – most blatantly as David Cameron’s government began to abolish disability living allowance (DLA) and replace it with personal independence payments (PIP). As the Daily Mail put it at the time, McVey was on a mission to “pursue vast numbers of bogus disabled who carry on claiming the DLA long after they have ‘healed’.” That PIP is now wrongly withdrawing benefits from severely ill and disabled people – with 65% of decisions overturned on appeal – makes this all the more sickening.

The Department for Work and Pensions’ problems do not begin or end with McVey – she is the fifth person to hold the title since 2016 – but for Theresa May to (even reluctantly) promote someone with her track record is emblematic of the Conservatives’ disregard for disabled people.

I’ve spoken to many disabled people who are frightened by McVey’s appointment. That might be hard to understand if you are healthy or on a comfortable wage, but when you rely on social security to eat and pay rent, the DWP minister has power over you. For the families at the sharp end of austerity, McVey represents skipping dinner to pay the bedroom tax or becoming suicidal after losing benefits.

This year, the DWP will continue to oversee major social security changes, including more traumatic transfers from DLA to PIP and the ongoing rollout of the flawed universal credit, which is causing misery and hardship to thousands of families. In her previous ministerial roles, McVey showed herself to be a politician who never cared about the impact of such policies. But DWP decisions affect millions of people’s lives. Largely, for those who are already struggling with poverty and illness. That McVey is now in charge is an insult to them all.

The new work and pensions secretary is an insult to disabled people

As backlashes go, the days following Esther McVey’s appointment as the new work and pensions secretary have seen intense criticism. Between 2012 and 2013, as minister for disabled people and later employment minister, McVey was famed for defending the indefensible, saying it was “right” that people were having to use food banks and claiming that benefit sanctions “teach” jobseekers to take looking for work seriously – going as far as comparing unemployed people to naughty schoolchildren being punished by a teacher – despite the destitution and death that sanctions have since caused. 

Yet this is about more than soundbites. From giving misleading information about the bedroom tax’s impact on disabled people to her decision to close the Independent Living Fund, McVey appeared to relish removing disability support, with campaigners accusing her of distorting the facts to help make that a reality. Worse, she was central in helping the rightwing press stoke up suspicion towards disabled people on benefits – most blatantly as David Cameron’s government began to abolish disability living allowance (DLA) and replace it with personal independence payments (PIP). As the Daily Mail put it at the time, McVey was on a mission to “pursue vast numbers of bogus disabled who carry on claiming the DLA long after they have ‘healed’.” That PIP is now wrongly withdrawing benefits from severely ill and disabled people – with 65% of decisions overturned on appeal – makes this all the more sickening.

The Department for Work and Pensions’ problems do not begin or end with McVey – she is the fifth person to hold the title since 2016 – but for Theresa May to (even reluctantly) promote someone with her track record is emblematic of the Conservatives’ disregard for disabled people.

I’ve spoken to many disabled people who are frightened by McVey’s appointment. That might be hard to understand if you are healthy or on a comfortable wage, but when you rely on social security to eat and pay rent, the DWP minister has power over you. For the families at the sharp end of austerity, McVey represents skipping dinner to pay the bedroom tax or becoming suicidal after losing benefits.

This year, the DWP will continue to oversee major social security changes, including more traumatic transfers from DLA to PIP and the ongoing rollout of the flawed universal credit, which is causing misery and hardship to thousands of families. In her previous ministerial roles, McVey showed herself to be a politician who never cared about the impact of such policies. But DWP decisions affect millions of people’s lives. Largely, for those who are already struggling with poverty and illness. That McVey is now in charge is an insult to them all.

The new work and pensions secretary is an insult to disabled people

As backlashes go, the days following Esther McVey’s appointment as the new work and pensions secretary have seen intense criticism. Between 2012 and 2013, as minister for disabled people and later employment minister, McVey was famed for defending the indefensible, saying it was “right” that people were having to use food banks and claiming that benefit sanctions “teach” jobseekers to take looking for work seriously – going as far as comparing unemployed people to naughty schoolchildren being punished by a teacher – despite the destitution and death that sanctions have since caused. 

Yet this is about more than soundbites. From giving misleading information about the bedroom tax’s impact on disabled people to her decision to close the Independent Living Fund, McVey appeared to relish removing disability support, with campaigners accusing her of distorting the facts to help make that a reality. Worse, she was central in helping the rightwing press stoke up suspicion towards disabled people on benefits – most blatantly as David Cameron’s government began to abolish disability living allowance (DLA) and replace it with personal independence payments (PIP). As the Daily Mail put it at the time, McVey was on a mission to “pursue vast numbers of bogus disabled who carry on claiming the DLA long after they have ‘healed’.” That PIP is now wrongly withdrawing benefits from severely ill and disabled people – with 65% of decisions overturned on appeal – makes this all the more sickening.

The Department for Work and Pensions’ problems do not begin or end with McVey – she is the fifth person to hold the title since 2016 – but for Theresa May to (even reluctantly) promote someone with her track record is emblematic of the Conservatives’ disregard for disabled people.

I’ve spoken to many disabled people who are frightened by McVey’s appointment. That might be hard to understand if you are healthy or on a comfortable wage, but when you rely on social security to eat and pay rent, the DWP minister has power over you. For the families at the sharp end of austerity, McVey represents skipping dinner to pay the bedroom tax or becoming suicidal after losing benefits.

This year, the DWP will continue to oversee major social security changes, including more traumatic transfers from DLA to PIP and the ongoing rollout of the flawed universal credit, which is causing misery and hardship to thousands of families. In her previous ministerial roles, McVey showed herself to be a politician who never cared about the impact of such policies. But DWP decisions affect millions of people’s lives. Largely, for those who are already struggling with poverty and illness. That McVey is now in charge is an insult to them all.