Disabilities, difficulties and discrimination...

Also it would now appear that he also opposes the national minimum wage.  So his comments suggesting that employers pay people with disabilities less than the minimum wage because they are, "by definition", less "productive" than those without disabilities could be seen as contrarian attention seeking.  For that reason, it's tempting to write his comments off.  However, we should not do so.  For Davies is an elected member of parliament and a member of the party that rules this country and is responsible for its citizens, disabled and otherwise.

Mr Davies cares!  He spoke to users of Mind services.  He said, "They were absolutely upfront with me and they said that when they went for a job and they came across a situation where there were other people who had applied for that job, they've got mental health problems, other people haven't, they said to me 'Who would you take on?'.

"Because they were quite accepting of the fact it was inevitable that the employer would take on the person who hasn't got any mental health problems given that they were both going to be having to be paid the same rate."

He suggests that the employer should be allowed to pay the person with the disability less to cover the, "risk", so that disabled people could, "prove themselves" and prove that they weren't going to be, "trouble". It's fairly startling.  In practice, it would be tantamount to blackmail.  "Ah, Miss Jones, your CV looks excellent but I see you have a personality disorder.  We could take you on, but of course, I would need to protect myself from the additional risk you'd pose to this business.  So would you be willing to work for less than the minimum wage and less than your colleagues?  No? NEXT!"

Almost as irritating as Davies constantly conflating learning difficulties and mental health problems (which are entirely different things, as I'm sure you know) is the veil of concern he draws across his comments.  He wants what's best for us, for us to be able to get our, "foot in the door".  This it where people are having the issue in the argument, "Ah, it's a bit stupid, but his heart's in the right place".  Don't be fooled.  No person who says, "Given that some of those people with a learning disability clearly, by definition, can't be as productive in their work as somebody who hasn't got a disability of that nature", has their heart in the right place.  What he does have is, to him, a sympathetic tool to use in his argument against the minimum wage.  That's all.

In his eyes, the way to redress this balance is not to tackle discrimination and stigma against people who have mental health problems, but to change legislation so that they literally have a price on their heads, and one that is less than people without a disability. And for all the froth and outrage his comments sparked, the sentiment is one that you could argue is already entrenched in government anyway, as the gradual withdrawal of financial and social support from those with disabilities suggests.  So are you really surprised?