Kemi Badenoch’s attack on autism is part of a troubling trend

Never mind that me and my wife have spent tens of thousands on our child’s education and care, writes James Moore – we are still to blame for everything... apparently

Badenoch, the potential leader of the Tory party, has sparked outrage for ‘stigmatising’ autism (PA)

If, like me, you are the parent of an autistic child: congratulations. According to Kemi Badenoch and her friends, we have got it made.

That’s right, a pamphlet the Tory leadership frontrunner wrote the foreword for – aptly titled “Conservatism in Crisis” – details how we are among a select and lucky few who have been handed “economic advantages and protections” that most of Britain doesn’t get.

“If you have a neurodiversity diagnosis (eg anxiety, autism), you are in a category similar to race or biological sex in terms of discrimination law and general attitudes. As a child, you may well get better treatment or equipment at school – even transport to and from home,” it declares, while going on to insinuate that families like mine are to blame for everything from the rise of the “bureaucratic class” to the failure of free market capitalism.

I confess, I had to pinch myself when I read that. Several times.

Because the hard fact is that getting any agency of the state – be that the NHS or local authorities – to lift so much as a finger if you have a child with a “neurodiversity diagnosis” is like drawing blood from a stone. The idea that families like mine get economic benefits, then, is particularly laughable.

Over the years, we have shelled out tens of thousands of pounds to give our child the care and education they need. My wife also had to cut her working hours by 60 per cent, meaning our combined income took a huge hit.

Just getting an autistic child’s needs set out in an Education Health and Care Plan – the “advantages”, I guess, Badenoch’s pamphlet was referring to – plunges parents into a modern-day version of trench warfare. Assessments are routinely refused by local authorities and even if you do make it past the first stage, it can be an arduous, lengthy process.

No, we are not the cause of the rise of the “bureaucratic class”; we are its victims.

But wait – is Badenoch talking about those who are getting the real treats, like cabs to class?

If so, let it be known that those taxis are granted only to those needing to travel outside of their catchment area, to special needs schools that are designed to help neurodiverse pupils. There would be no need for cab rides at all if the real issue – the lack of placements and nearby options – was addressed by the government.

It is also significant that the pamphlet has drawn criticism from Robert Buckland, a top Tory wanting to improve the lives of autistic people, who produced a report on barriers to work that have left 700,000 economically inactive.

He described the section of the document on autism as “muddled” given its cynical conflation of the condition with anxiety. Autistic people often suffer from anxiety, but so do plenty of other people – myself included. Needless to say, it confers no advantages. To the contrary.

Buckland went on to say this section “didn’t seem to me to be based on any evidence,” adding “mixing up autism with mental health is not right”. Preach!

This, however, is not the first time Badenoch has punched down. We can start with her inexplicable attack on maternity pay, which she described as “excessive” in a Times Radio interview – despite the fact that Britain’s maternity offering is one of the stingiest in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). She later backtracked, claiming her views had been “misrepresented”.

We’ve also been told her local cafe closed because it couldn’t afford to pay staff. The minimum wage is too high, you see.

With this, she trashed her own party’s record, one of its achievements in office. There isn’t any evidence to suggest the higher minimum wage has made life impossible for businesses. Their biggest problem is less about paying staff than it is finding enough people. If your outlet is only prepared to offer the minimum when supermarkets are always hiring and pay considerably more, you’re going to run into a brick wall.

Want more? Badenoch would (of course) pull Britain out of the European Convention on Human Rights if efforts to bring down immigration fail.

True, her position on a document that Britain played a key role in drafting with the support of none other than Winston Churchill is more nuanced and less obnoxious than that of her rival Robert Jenrick. But it is nonetheless part of a disturbing tendency to punch down on vulnerable people and the laws protecting them.

The British political system does better, and the country is governed better, when the party in power knows that it is on notice – because there is a viable alternative government in waiting.

Badenoch may well be the pollsters’ and the bookies’ favourite – but I’d hardly argue that the Tory party would be a viable opposition to Labour under her control.