A GENERAL Election candidate told The National “you can see why there aren’t more MPs with disabilities” after being denied funds for her campaign.
Professor Kirstein Rummery teaches at Stirling University, has advised the Scottish and UK governments, sits on the board of feminist charity Engender and is a fellow at the Centre on Constitutional Change.
Despite having both chronic pain and short-term memory issues, she manages all of these roles with assistants who look after diary and aid travel.
When she was selected to become the only Women’s Equality (WE) Party candidate in the country, Rummery applied for campaign support from the Scottish Government’s Access to Elected Office fund. The initiative provides finance to overcome the additional costs faced by prospective politicians with a range of disabilities.
It funded 39 people at the recent local authority elections, with 15 becoming councillors.
However, Rummery’s bid was rejected because the UK ballot is outwith Holyrood’s remit.
And because Westminster’s own pilot scheme, established by the coal-ition government in 2012, was put on pause after the 2015 General Election, Rummery and other disabled candidates aiming for the House of Commons have nowhere to turn for help with extra travel and other costs.
Yesterday, Rummery, who is running in Stirling, said this has put her “at a disadvantage against the able-bodied candidates” who can “travel around without the barriers”.
She said: “When you go out on the campaign trail, you can see exactly why we don’t get many disabled candidates, and why we don’t have more MPs with disabilities.”
Describing the issues she faces, Rummery said: “I can turn up at a campaign meeting or lecture and give a fantastic address, but I wouldn’t be able to find the building because I won’t remember the instructions.
“In my job, I have somebody who organises my diary and helps me carry things. Campaigning involves a lot of physical activity and you need that same kind of help to carry things and get between places. If someone wasn’t able to drive me to hustings, it would mean a lot of taxis, which would be incredibly expensive.
“It’s not about giving any advantage, it’s about levelling the playing field. Support should apply to all candidates. Westminster should reinstate its fund.”
Rummery’s call came a day after Social Security Minister Jeane Freeman revealed a review on extending the Access to Elected Office fund to cover other forms of public service will report back this autumn.
She said: “Time and again, I hear from disabled people across the country about how they want to contribute and play their part in society.”
However, Holyrood’s hands are tied. A Scottish Government spokesman said: “All aspects of election to the House of Commons are reserved, which means Scottish Ministers cannot extend the scope of the Scottish Access to Elected Office Fund to disabled candidates who wish to stand in the General Election.”
While candidates with disabilities were in the minority at the council election, there are even fewer self-identified disabled hopefuls standing at the General Election. Labour’s Pam Duncan-Glancy, a founder member of the One in Five Campaign, is fighting Glasgow North.
In England, Ben Fletcher, who will stand for the Green Party in Putney, Roehampton and Southfields, is thought to be the first deaf-blind person to run for Parliament.
He said he was motivated by the closure of the UK’s Access to Elected Office fund, which offered up to £40,000 for successful applicants. In January last year, Green leader Caroline Lucas orchestrated a cross-party appeal for its reinstatement.
At the time, the government said it was “evaluating” the scheme, adding: “We also look to political parties themselves to help make further progress as they’re best placed to drive opportunities for disabled people in political life.”
However, Rummery, who has limited support from WE, said: “If you don’t have big party machinery behind you, you don’t have that.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel