UK: Disability benefits (UC, ESA and PIP) - news and updates 2024 and 2025

Peter T said:
I read a couple of times that the Government says people over pension age already in receipt of PIP will not be impacted. It was said that an individual’s award will only be changed when next reviewed and that those already over 66 years will not have their PIP award reviewed.
Click to expand...
Benefits & Work have recently posted this:

DWP disability minister Stephen Timms repeatedly misled parliament by untruthfully claiming that PIP claimants over state pension age “will not be affected by the proposed changes”.

Timms has finally admitted that the DWP currently have no idea how to avoid the proposed 4-point rule affecting pension age PIP reviews.
Click to expand...

I think the reviews are supposed to be the 10-year 'light touch' ones. My last review came up a few months before I reached pension age, and that said the next review would be 10 years unless my circumstances changed.

I'd be surprised if they made major changes to that because it makes economic sense. There's little point in doing frequent reviews for people who already have substantial impairments by their late 60s, as most will tend to become more impaired over time by natural ageing and some will collect additional diagnoses.
 
The Times 20/6/2025 at 9.10pm

'A dozen ministers could quit over Starmer’s disability welfare cuts'

'Government figures say they will oppose reforms to personal independence payments and universal credit, while some believe the vote will have to be pulled'

'As many as a dozen members of government are prepared to resign rather than support Sir Keir Starmer’s controversial welfare reforms, it has been claimed, as backbench critics accused ministers of betraying Labour values.
A senior government figure told The Times that about 12 of their colleagues had privately indicated they would find it impossible to support the measures that are due to be voted on a week on Wednesday.

Another leading opponent said that as many as 80 Labour MPs were “holding firm” in opposition to the plans and believed the government would ultimately have to pull the vote.

“If this goes through this will be our version of tuition fees,” they said. “The optics of taking away money from people who find it difficult to go to the toilet are terrible.”
.
The government has a working majority of 165, meaning that 83 Labour MPs would have to rebel for Starmer to lose a vote.'


Archive Version of the Times Article. Accessible to Everyone.
https://archive.ph/T7cgR

www.thetimes.com

A dozen ministers could quit over Starmer’s disability welfare cuts

Government figures say they will oppose reforms to personal independence payments and universal credit, while some believe the vote will have to be pulled
www.thetimes.com www.thetimes.com
 
Last edited:
My local MP sent this reply.
As I’m in Liverpool, it’s reassuring (but not surprising) to hear that there are MPs standing firm against the proposed cuts.


Thank you for contacting me regarding cuts to welfare benefits.

I appreciate you getting in touch with me regarding this issue. I have received hundreds of emails from constituents like you who have major concerns regarding the impact reforms to welfare benefits will have.

Many have shared stories and experiences with me highlighting the personal impact these cuts will have on them. I know this announcement will have created so much fear and anxiety for disabled people, their loved ones and those who are caring for them.

At the Spring Statement the Chancellor announced that the Government are to go ahead with reforms to the welfare system- cutting £6.4 billion from the budget by 2029/30.

Disability benefits are a vital lifeline for many people, helping them manage the additional costs they face daily. Cuts to Personal Independence Payment and Universal Credit will have a detrimental impact across the country.

Cutting support or reducing eligibility won’t push more people into work - it will only push more people into poverty. The reality is stark: 77% of people claiming Universal Credit and disability benefits have gone without essentials in the last six months.

The independent impact assessment has shown that because of these cuts 250,000 more people will be pushed into poverty- including 50,000 children. These cuts won't just cause hardship, they will cost lives. I will not support any policy that will result in my constituents being left poorer and which will widen inequality.

For 14 years the Tory Government pursued austerity, attacking welfare benefits taking a sledgehammer to the safety net that provided much needed support for those most vulnerable. Now for the Labour Government to pursue policies indistinguishable from the cruelty of Tory austerity goes against the principles and values of our party.

Last year the country voted overwhelmingly for a Labour Government for the first time in 14 years because they wanted our Government to deliver change. Stripping pensioners of their winter fuel allowance, abandoning the WASPI women owed compensation and cutting benefits payments which will plunge those already struggling into absolute poverty is not the change the Government promised.

Now is the time for the Government to opt for a wealth tax, as I and many of my colleagues have been calling for. A 2% tax on assets worth over £10 million would raise £24billion a year. This would impact only the very wealthiest people in the country- those who have either inherited their wealth or have benefitted most from the structure of our economy.

There are ways in which revenues can be raised fairly, rebalancing the scales of power and making those with the broadest shoulders pay their fair share. The alternative is to penalise those with the least, continuing the broken system of taxing workers instead of wealth.

Politics is about choices and to pursue policies which will make life harder for the poorest people whilst leaving the profits of millionaires and billionaires untouched is inexcusable.

I urge my colleagues to take a different course of action, I have written to the Chancellor urging her to rethink these cuts. I joined the Labour Party to fight for social and economic justice for our class, to bring fairness and equality to our society. In this regard, I am simply unable to support cuts to welfare benefits and will vote against any legislation to enact these changes.

I am committed to fighting for a society that prioritises welfare not warfare, and where no one is left behind.

Thank you once again for taking the time to write to me. I hope this response has made my position clear.

Yours sincerely,
 
Good.

It's appalling that a government is seeking to make the poorest and least able in society shoulder a financial burden that only even exists as a forecast, but it's even worse than that.

Labour's trajectory is robbing people who support the mainstream left of representation, just as the last Conservative government's actions made those who favour the mainstream right politically homeless. All this is being carefully engineered, and practically nobody in Whitehall seems willing to admit that it's an effing crisis. They just don their rictus grins and keep playing the game.
 
Number of Labour rebels passes 120 & Sir Sadiq Khan has come out in support.

www.theguardian.com

Starmer stands firm on welfare bill as number of Labour rebels passes 120

Party big-hitters including Sadiq Khan urge PM to pause legislation as ministers and whips fail to contain rebellion
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

I don't think Starmer is helping himself by insisting there is a moral case for cuts, when his MPs are pointing out people won't be provided help to wash or use the toilet.

Edit: word order
 
www.theguardian.com

Sadiq Khan joins growing Labour rebellion against disability benefit cuts

Exclusive: London mayor is most senior party figure to call for plans to be dropped, as Starmer vows to press ahead
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

“There is a clear moral case, which is: the current system doesn’t help those who want to get into work,” Starmer said. “It traps people. I think it’s 1,000 people a day going on to Pip."
Click to expand...

As usual, the journalist does not provide the basic factual context that PIP is not an out-of-work benefit.
 
MrMagoo said:
I don’t think we are allowed to discuss politics, but it looks like in order to vote this through Labour will need Conservative backing despite having a majority.
Click to expand...

I think we're allowed to do it with care if it directly affects people with ME/CFS.

I wonder if the government would go ahead with the bill if most of those opposing it don't back down? The optics of any party needing substantial numbers of opposition votes to support a major policy decision are terrible.

They've already made it clear they're open to determined pressure, as they gave way on the winter fuel allowance for the lowest income households.


[Word 'government' added for clarity]
 
Last edited:
Kitty said:
They've already made it clear they're open to determined pressure, as they gave way on the winter fuel allowance
Click to expand...

Which is why they are so determined to stick to their guns on this? Plus they have already spent the savings, apparently. Which won't be as big as they think, given they are just moving the costs around, including to local government emergency funds.

The longer goes on, the more it becomes apparent they have no idea how the benefits system works.

They want to allow more time for people to "transition to other support". What support? This is the support and you are cutting it.

And it is apparently so complex I heard a radio presenter being completely baffled by it yesterday. No one understands it, unless they have been through it, so they can get away with blatant nonsense as no one understands the consequences.
 
I saw a clip on social media of Martin Lewis questioning an older MP about the proposal (the guy called benefits “social security” not heard that for years) Martin asked the key question “why are you saying PIP stops people working, it’s not an out-of-work benefit?”
He got a rambling answer, but good to see someone cut right through the nonsense “what are you on about?”
News reporting that if the backbench rebels sink this bill, it may trigger a “no confidence in leadership” challenge to Starmer. Politically, the stakes are very high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom