Until the Government forces bosses to reveal how many disabled people they employ, nothing will change

It was a certain Theresa May who once coined the term “the nasty party” as a description for how the Conservatives, now preparing for their conference in Manchester, were perceived.

There are a lot of disabled people who might respond to that by saying something like “goodness me, Terri actually got something right there”.

But, but, but, says a Government spokesperson, we love disabled people. We really do! Look, we’ve promised to reduce the disability employment gap and everything.

It’s just that ministers really haven’t done very much towards achieving that aim.

A couple of surveys out this week cast a harsh light on the issues that still plague people with disabilities when seeking work.

The first was commissioned by Leonard Cheshire Disability for its Untapped Talent campaign aimed at addressing that gap, which compares rates of employment among people with disabilities and the wider population. It currently stands at 31 per cent.

It found that nearly half (47 per cent) of the disabled people aged 18 to 30 who responded to its poll said they were not encouraged to apply for courses relevant to careers they were interested in while at school. Some 51 per cent felt their teachers may have had lower expectations of them because of their conditions.

Small wonder that by the age of 26 disabled people are nearly four times more likely to be unemployed than their able-bodied peers.

The second set of data came from Scope, which looked at the responses of 2,000 people with disabilities, finding that they typically apply for 60 per cent more jobs than do their able-bodied peers.

While 69 per cent of the latter got interviews for specific posts, the figure falls to 50 per cent when people declare that they have a disability.

This is one instance where honesty is very definitely not the best policy.

Now, the previous Government, led by David Cameron, had set a target of halving the employment gap by 2020.

It will be missed. But it’s since been downgraded to an ambition. So that’s alright then.

Beyond making a bit of a song and dance about its “Disability Confident” scheme, ministers have done precious little towards achieving their stated aim.

The latter is, anyway, viewed in many quarters as little more than a PR stunt, a way to put a smiley face on the Department for Work and Pensions’ nameplate.

I’m told some employers who have attended Disability Confident events have actually got to thinking: with staff shortages a real problem in many industries, why not tap into the sizeable pool of disabled workers? That these people tend to stick with the same employer for longer, while taking fewer sick days, is just a bonus. A few modest adjustments and the recruitment crisis is over. Hooray!

Unfortunately, I’m told when they contacted Government for follow-up support – “next steps” in civil service speak – they didn’t get very far.

But see here, have a Disability Confident sticker. There! Doesn’t that look nice?

Against this depressing backdrop, a group of disability charities have decided that they need to set an example by addressing the issue themselves.

As well as Leonard Cheshire and Scope, they are Action on Hearing Loss, Disability Rights UK, Mencap, Mind, the RNIB and the National Autistic Society – and they have pledged to move to employing disabled people in proportion to their numbers in society.

They really ought to be there already. The fact that they are not is perhaps indicative of the paternalism some parts of the sector have sometimes been guilty of.

It would be unimaginable to have a group of straight people running Stonewall and sitting in meetings asking: “Now how do we help these LGBT people?” It’s a regrettable fact that that, or something like it, does sometimes happen in the disability sector.

However, they have committed to publishing their progress towards their aim, with details of how it will work to be thrashed out next week. So they are at least moving in the right direction.

Publication does seem to have an impact when dealing with issues surrounding equality.

While I criticised Mervyn, now Lord, Davies for a lack of ambition when he set a target of getting the proportion of women on big company boards to 25 per cent, as part of the Government’s sponsored Davies review, he did get the FTSE 100 to that point. In doing so he doubled the proportion of female directors.

PricewaterhouseCoopers managed to narrow the salary gap between male and female employees when it started declaring the number. It has since, to its credit, voluntarily done the same with black and minority ethnic staff, and made a similar commitment there. I’m hoping the firm’s disability employment gap will receive the same treatment.

Knowing that they are going to be held to account when a target is set for them seems to get bosses motivated to address issues like this.

A Government that was serious about tackling disability employment would take note. Forcing firms to publicly state the proportion of staff with disabilites could work wonders to making its “ambition” a reality. Perhaps it could even be upgraded to be a target again. Who knows?

Such a move wouldn’t fix the issue by itself. It would need to go hand in hand with the sort of tailored programmes that Leonard Cheshire is calling for, and for ministers to agree to work hand in hand with the third sector, and to do better when approached for assistance by the private sector (or by public sector employers).

But in meeting their employment pledge, the charities, some of which are quite large organisations, will be able to create a roadmap for others to follow.

There will be still less excuses for the glacial rate of progress that the Government, which has a truly abysmal record when it comes to disability, has achieved to date when that map has been drawn.