Council leaders are to push ahead with consultation over controversial savings proposals which would affect people with disabilities, despite a multi-million-pound boost from the government.
Local government secretary Michael Gove announced last week that councils would get an extra £500m to deal with pressures on adult social care and children's services budgets.
While Conservative-controlled County Hall will not find out what it will get for another week or so, there have been calls for the authority to row back on some of the £52m of savings it had proposed to plug a budget gap.
Those proposals include contentious changes to care costs for people with disabilities.
The council says it can save £1.2m each year, by reducing the minimum income guarantee (MIG).
The MIG is an amount of their income disabled people aged 18 to 64 can keep for everyday expenses after the cost of council-arranged home care is taken into account - reducing it effectively making people pay more for their care.
Campaigners have criticised that move, which comes after a similar proposal in 2019 was challenged in the High Court - and the council lost.
At a recent meeting of the council's cabinet, Nick Taylor, from Buxton, whose son has Down's syndrome, said the authority should defer a decision until it becomes clear how much extra cash is heading to County Hall.
Steve Morphew, leader of the Labour group, said: "Stopping this cruel cut right now would be welcome and I urge you to do it."
But Andrew Jamieson, deputy leader of the council, said the government cash would be a one-off and the council needed to identify recurrent savings.
He said: "There's a need for this council to make sustainable, long-term savings. We are having to consider some difficult decisions as part of this year's budget.
"I cannot give any commitment about these proposals at this point."
Consultation over the proposal will begin on Monday, February 19 and will last for 12 weeks, during which process the council's budget will be set.
That means a subsequent decision on whether to lower the MIG will need to be made by cabinet at a later date.
If a decision were taken not to lower it, then savings would have to be found elsewhere.
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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