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

[MrMagoo]

I don't think Kirsty Blackman was impressed by what Timms said or thinks we should be relieved. But he did open up a gap whether it's a concession or he just hasn't a clue what's in the Bill. It isn't anything that should change anyone's vote, but I think Blackman was thinking about legal action in the future.

It’s probably going to pass so that is useful.

 

[Lou B Lou]

Lurgee Liz 5.07 pm:

'Cat Eccles: Nobody supports this bill...not even the UN. It doesn't have to be this way. Amendment 37: stop outsourcing health assessments to 5 private profit making companies, 7 in 10 are going to mandatory reconsideration & tribunal. All at DWP expense.'

 

[tornandfrayed]

I've been asleep and missed quite a bit.Timms is now saying symptoms don't have to be present all the time but fulfilling the descriptors does. That doesn't make any sense and doesn't help.

 

[Lou B Lou]

Lurgee Liz at 5.42 pm

'Nadia Whittome: Govt. amendments do not alleviate all concerns Bill will still take £3,000 pa from new claims. Benefit cuts trap women experiencing domestic abuse, make children grow up in poverty & even cost lives. NC10 requires Human Rights memorandum before Bill can be enacted'

 

[Kitty]

Timms is now saying symptoms don't have to be present all the time but fulfilling the descriptors does. That doesn't make any sense and doesn't help.

Might it help, though, if the descriptors don't require symptoms to be constant? Just present for more than 50% of the time, and the standard repeatedly, reliably, safely, as often as is needed rules apply?

I haven't watched all of it and I have to go out now, so forgive me if I've missed something—but on the face of it, that could potentially be useful.

 

[Kitty]

Transcript of Stephen Timms's comments, courtesy of Benefits & Work:

"The severe conditions criteria in the bill exactly reflects how the functional tests are applied at present. That is in guidance. It’s being moved in this bill into legislation. It does take account of Parkinson’s. It does take account of MS. Because people need to meet the descriptors reliably, safely, repeatedly and in a reasonable time frame. And so I can give a very firm assurance to those who are concerned about how the severe conditions criteria will work for those on fluctuating conditions.

"The word constantly here refers, as I said in my intervention earlier, to the functional criteria needing to apply at all times, not to somebody’s symptoms."

 

[Lou B Lou]

But the language of the Bill uses the word "Constant". People having to do mandatory reconsideration or appeals can refer to Timms words in the debate/parliament, but the word "constant" will be interpreted by DWP decision makers as they want to. So could result in a great many unnecessary stressful MRs and Appeals.

 

[Kitty]

But the language of the Bill uses the word "Constant". People having to do mandatory reconsideration or appeals can refer to Timms words in the debate/parliament, but the word "constant" will be interpreted by DWP decision makers as they want to. So could result in a great many unnecessary stressful MRs and Appeals.

I agree, I don't think it's going to be straightforward. Those words will have been carefully chosen, and there might be a specific gap that I'm too foggy to have spotted yet.

Much will depend on what actually passes into law. I don't think the money bill question has been settled yet (I admit I haven't looked very hard, it's Day 1 of the Lord's Test), but if it is certified as such, the text voted on last night will likely pass as it stands.

 

[MrMagoo]

Transcript of Stephen Timms's comments, courtesy of Benefits & Work:

“Constantly applies to the functional criteria”
What does that actually mean?

 

[Kitty]

What does that actually mean?

I'd say it should mean the criteria apply at all times.

E.g, I'm always unable to mobilise more than 20 metres—even when I'm mobilising more than 20 metres—because I can't do it as often as I need to, and I can't do it without pain, reducing my capacity to do other essential activities, and risking a fall.

Whether it will mean that is another question of course.

 

[MrMagoo]

I'd say it should mean the criteria apply at all times.

E.g, I'm always unable to mobilise more than 20 metres—even when I'm mobilising more than 20 metres—because I can't do it as often as I need to, and I can't do it without pain, reducing my capacity to do other essential activities, and risking a fall.

Whether it will mean that is another question of course.

Something fluctuating won’t “constantly apply” to functional criteria though, will it? Horrible wording.

 

[Kitty]

Something fluctuating won’t “constantly apply” to functional criteria though, will it?

No, but if an illness or disability is always present because it can't be relieved with treatment, the criteria would apply constantly. They allow for fluctuations in symptoms and also for incomplete impairment, e.g. my walking example.

The same would apply to engaging with others if someone could only do it for an hour before they started to risk meltdown. They don't need to be in meltdown constantly; it's the condition that causes them to go into meltdown that's present constantly.

Horrible wording.

Yeah, innit.