Motability cuts are a deeply cynical policy
Disabled customers and their carers will lose out as suitable vehicles and tax reliefs are removed, says Colin Hughes
The Motability changes announced in the budget represent one of the most damaging shifts in disability policy for years (Motability scheme to drop BMW and Mercedes as it aims to buy UK-made cars, 24 November). The government’s removal of “luxury” vehicles may sound reasonable, but these cars account for just 5% of Motability leases and disabled people already pay the extra costs themselves through advance payments.
At the same time, the government is abolishing £300m in Motability tax reliefs – a move that Motability itself says is likely to be passed on to disabled customers. This means higher advance payments, more expensive leases and fewer suitable vehicles available. These cuts will reduce independence, not public spending.
More troubling is the justification. The policy is being sold as supporting UK manufacturing despite the reality that our car industry is diminished and largely foreign-owned. Using disabled people’s mobility as a lever for industrial strategy is deeply cynical.
I say this as someone who knows what is made possible by adapted vehicles. I don’t use Motability today, but I grew up in a family where all four of us children had muscular dystrophy. In the 1990s, my siblings and I relied on large, specially adapted Chrysler Voyagers.
They were never “luxuries”; they were the only vehicles capable of safely carrying power wheelchairs, aids and medical equipment, and the only way we could travel to work, to hospital appointments and to see friends and family.
Motability has long been one of the UK’s quiet social-policy successes. These changes narrow choice and undermine that purpose. For a Labour government to adopt rhetoric that echoes rightwing narratives about “luxury” cars is a disappointing and dangerous step.
Colin Hughes
London