Disabled People's Cabinet Forum: report

6. Key Findings and Insights

Across all breakout discussions, participants described strong, interlinked themes that underline the systemic nature of the barriers disabled people face and the shared priorities for change. While each group explored different topics, there was notable overlap in the underlying issues—particularly the experience of variability in public service delivery across Scotland’s 32 local authority areas and wider local systems. Together, these insights point to the need for coordinated, cross‑government action rooted in co‑production and lived experience.

While local authorities and COSLA were not participants at this Forum, ongoing engagement with delivery partners will be essential to explore these issues in detail and support practical solutions.

6.1 Mental Health and Wellbeing

Participants consistently described how uncertainty, delays, and inconsistent access to services profoundly affect mental health. Long waits, limited availability of appropriate or accessible support, and limited coordination between mental health and social care were said to intensify anxiety and distress, sometimes leading to crisis. The difference between services existing in theory and being genuinely accessible in practice was emphasised. Stigma and hostile public narratives - especially around disability benefits - were also identified as major contributors to poor mental health and wellbeing. Participants spoke of often feeling treated as a “problem to fix,” and of the exhausting toll of repeatedly advocating for basic support.

Disabled people highlighted gaps in disability competence across mental health and social care systems, noting variable understanding of the multiple barriers disabled people face. They emphasised the importance of choice, different forms of advocacy, continuity of care, and high‑quality provision as central to improving wellbeing. Participants also called for greater flexibility in Self‑Directed Support (SDS).

Additional concerns included lengthy pre‑assessment delays for social work support and the instability created by annual funding cycles for organisations supporting disabled people. Several participants called for ring‑fenced funding for Disabled People’s Organisations, potentially through a model similar to the Independent Living Fund.

The Cabinet Secretary for Health outlined ongoing work to improve coordination, data‑sharing and service accessibility, alongside mobility pilots designed to simplify end‑to‑end journeys.

He strongly emphasised the importance of tackling stigma, stating that the Government will continue to rebut harmful narratives that contribute to negative public attitudes toward disability.

6.2 Social Care

Participants described a gap between national ambitions for social care and the lived reality of delivery at local level. They reported variability in local delivery. Social care charges were repeatedly identified as a driver of disability poverty, with a growing gap noted between the cost of support and the level of Adult Disability Payment (ADP). Participants stressed that no other marginalised group is expected to personally finance the removal of barriers to daily life. In some areas, charging policies can result in a substantial share of disposable income being used to meet care costs, without always accounting for wider financial responsibilities or the additional costs associated with disability. Some participants referenced external recommendations such as disregarding at least 50% of ADP in charging assessments as potential steps towards ending social care charges. These reflections also prompted calls for clearer articulation of ADP’s intended purpose in meeting extra disability‑related costs.

Beyond affordability, participants described social care as increasingly feeling crisis‑driven despite longstanding commitments to prevention and early intervention. They reported unmet needs, long waits for health services, and variable access to high‑quality, disability‑competent support. Inaccessible, inconsistent, or delayed services were said to heighten frustration and hopelessness, sometimes with severe consequences for wellbeing. Delegates reminded Ministers that social care is a means to an end supporting human rights, wellbeing, independent living, and participation rather than an end in itself. The First Minister acknowledged the interconnected nature of these challenges and the need for further improvement in both mental health and social care, noting links with wider public service reform.

6.3 Accessible Transport

Transport was described as a major barrier to independent living especially in remote and rural areas affecting access to services, work, and daily life. Issues raised included the accessibility of different transport modes, irregular bus services and lack of return journeys, vehicle size and design, the affordability of taxis, and limited availability of accessible taxis in rural areas. In cities, transport can be assumed to be accessible when it is not in practice (for example, inconsistent boarding support at train stations). Participants also highlighted unintended consequences of well‑intentioned infrastructure changes, such as EV charging points encroaching on disabled parking bays or street redesigns that create hazards.

Disabled people emphasised that accessible travel depends on a whole‑system approach: barriers in city planning, social care, digital access, and affordability compound to restrict mobility. Examples included social care support being essential to leave home, planning journeys around accessible toilets, and digital exclusion limiting the ability to plan travel, access cheaper fares, or use online systems, effectively creating a “travel tax.” Financial barriers further compound this, including the cost of taxis and paying for carers to accompany journeys. Overall, transport accessibility was framed as one piece of an interrelated Independent Living Jigsaw, with each element essential to a full and meaningful life. Transport to health and transport to housing were stressed as priorities.

The Cabinet Secretary for Transport outlined work underway to improve accessibility, including smart mobility pilots and Scotland’s approach to Passenger Assistance at train stations (with associated booking services). She highlighted the role of the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland (MACS) in shaping priorities and informing the successor to the Accessible Travel Framework, and acknowledged challenges linked to digital exclusion and variation in taxi provision and licensing across Scotland.

6.4 Social Security

The transition from Personal Independence Payment (PIP) to Adult Disability Payment (ADP) was viewed positively, reflecting greater dignity and respect. However, harmful narratives at a UK level were said to create fear and uncertainty, with worries about potential cuts and increased scrutiny. Participants also described significant challenges when reserved benefits need to be reclaimed after a job falls through—citing gaps in income and stressful reassessment processes.

Disabled people spoke about a persistent disability poverty gap driven by extra costs of being disabled (for example, social care charges, higher energy costs, taxis, aids, and equipment). Digital exclusion was both a cause and a consequence of poverty. Many reported using benefits for purposes they were not designed for. Calls were made to increase devolved non‑means‑tested disability benefits and mitigate shortfalls arising from UK‑level changes; examples included increasing ADP, expanding eligibility, devolving, and protecting Access to Work, improving public literacy around benefits, and progressing a Minimum Income Guarantee for disabled people.

The Deputy First Minister reaffirmed that safeguarding social security funding is a clear priority. She noted that the Cabinet has not discussed cuts to disability benefits and stressed the importance of stability and reassurance. She also recognised the need to improve public literacy around disability benefits, acknowledging the impact of harmful narratives. The Deputy First Minister further reflected that several aspects of the system remain reserved to the UK Government and cannot be changed unilaterally, and that a Minimum Income Guarantee entails complexity where multiple services, agencies, and entitlements intersect.

6.5 Employment

Participants linked persistent poverty to barriers to gaining and sustaining work and to inadequate pay when in work. Recruitment processes were often experienced as intrusive, requiring disclosure of personal information to secure basic adjustments. Experiences in employment and education were described as limiting outcomes, aspirations, and wellbeing. Participants highlighted the limitations of the UK reserved Access to Work scheme and welcomed the Deputy First Minister’s commitment to expanding support within Scotland’s employability landscape in recent years through Specialist Employability Support.

6.6 Navigating Complex Systems and the Need for Co‑production

Across groups, participants reported difficulty navigating complex, fragmented systems involving multiple agencies and inconsistent processes. A clear ask was for independent support to be available; support to understand rights and services, navigate systems, access peer support, and collective support, and obtain brokerage, advocacy, and independent advocacy. Disabled people‑led organisations were seen as having a vital role. A strong message throughout was the need for more joint working, deeper collaboration between local and national systems, and better coordination across government portfolios.

Importantly, participants called for sustained co‑production, not only at national policy level but also locally within decision‑making structures. The closing reflection from one breakout group captured the spirit of the day: “More co‑working required—let’s do better together.”