UK: Disability benefits (UC, ESA and PIP) - news and updates 2026

JellyBabyKid said:
I have just looked up the relevant links for anyone that would like to copy this post and share it:

Are you registered to vote? link here:
www.gov.uk

Register to vote

Register to vote to take part in elections in the UK. Includes how to get on the electoral register and how to update your address on the register.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

Are you registered for a postal vote? link here:
www.gov.uk

Apply for a postal vote

Use this service to apply to vote by post so you can take part in elections in the UK. You must be registered to vote in the UK before you can apply.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

if you cannot go to the polling station in person, you can get someone else to vote on your behalf (a proxy) Link here to register:
www.gov.uk

Apply for a proxy vote

Use this service to apply to vote by proxy in certain elections in the UK. You and your proxy must both be registered to vote in the UK.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk
Click to expand...

My point was more that these options are coming up short for many without help (whether direct, or because their disability makes everything that much harder including work etc. and so things that might drop off busy people's lists who aren't disabled are even more impacted because eg you intend to go to polling station after work but end up too unwell, or the bus being late makes the difference etc).

I can also think of all sorts of situations where unless you have a trusted carer (on votes) to post it (postal) or vote the way you request (proxy) then you'd benefit from there being an interim/mediator in the process to help someone to get the signing up for it and then doing the one or the other actually done.

Although of course the complication is who that mediator/help organisation could be given it is someone's vote. And the concern of accusations that said organisation could be focusing on those that vote their way or not non-partisan, there is a huge risk too as it only takes one offer of help going wrong - even for genuine reasons like a neighbour not getting someone's vote to the station because something cropped up or forgetting, so its fraught I guess with complications.

ie it is a 'bigger issue' that I'm not sure can be quickly fixed and/or needs to be done so carefully probably at a bigger level (general disability charity asking questions?) but it doesn't feel like it would be easy for enough people to actually be in a combined situation where they can access it for all different sorts of disabilities+situaiton combined.


I've just found the following: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/guidance-returning-officers-assistance-voting-disabled-voters

https://www.myvotemyvoice.org.uk/join-us/who-has-joined-my-vote-my-voice/ which includes charities such as mencap

and this from 2022 about funding to increase accessibility for certain groups:

Disability organisations receive funding to ensure everyone can exercise their right to vote - United Response

United Response and Dimensions have partnered up to help end inaccessible voting for underrepresented communities.
www.unitedresponse.org.uk www.unitedresponse.org.uk

there is this research from 2023:
 
Scope has the following on accessible campaigning to disabled candidates:

Accessible election campaigning as a disabled candidate. | Disability charity Scope UK

Scope have launched guidance for candidates on how to make your campaigning accessible during the election. Reflecting on their experience, a disabled person running to be an MP anonymously discusses how the guide can help future MPs shape a more equal future.
www.scope.org.uk www.scope.org.uk

I've found things from RNIB and learning disability.

There is the following: https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/...pbDpWfTMY62Oh5YiJYHA9q66IY05rO7l14vwyordKWDss

which seems to be about campaigning to reinstate the Access to Elected Office Fund

the following confirms in the postal vote section that you can apply for adjustments if you can't sign your name :
www.bromley.gov.uk

Accessibility of elections – London Borough of Bromley

Accessibility of elections
www.bromley.gov.uk www.bromley.gov.uk

But I haven't seen yet any solution to the posting it back part..

I haven't searched for ages yet however.
 
bobbler said:
My point was more that these options are coming up short for many without help
Click to expand...
Ah. I see.

I think there is still significant value in making sure that as many disabled people as possible are registered to vote and signed up for a postal or proxy vote, as a starting point.

bobbler said:
I can also think of all sorts of situations where unless you have a trusted carer (on votes) to post it (postal) or vote the way you request (proxy) then you'd benefit from there being an interim/mediator in the process to help someone to get the signing up for it and then doing the one or the other actually done.
Click to expand...

Yes. This feels like the pressure point that needs focus as the next step; making sure people have a person who can reliably post or proxy vote.

The final and bigger issue would be, as you identified; how to make voting fully accessible to all.

These three issues need very different solutions, and while the first would benefit from an awareness campaign, I am not entirely sure what can be done about the second the third, but definitely need raising with the ME charities, and wider disability charities as this needs them working together.
 
JellyBabyKid said:
Ah. I see.

I think there is still significant value in making sure that as many disabled people as possible are registered to vote and signed up for a postal or proxy vote, as a starting point.



Yes. This feels like the pressure point that needs focus as the next step; making sure people have a person who can reliably post or proxy vote.

The final and bigger issue would be, as you identified; how to make voting fully accessible to all.

These three issues need very different solutions, and while the first would benefit from an awareness campaign, I am not entirely sure what can be done about the second the third, but definitely need raising with the ME charities, and wider disability charities as this needs them working together.
Click to expand...
it seems like other charities have been inputting into funding alternatives/support for example with learning disabilities and RNIB

and/or others have potentially been looking at and inputting into the electoral commission documents for returning officers for example: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/guidance-returning-officers-assistance-voting-disabled-voters

exhaustion gets mentioned as a 'thing' that those in the polling stations needs to be aware of re: reasonable accommodations - and of course some of the areas where some pwme will struggle will be familiar to/consistent with larger groups such as someone who has another illness or is going through a round of treatment like chemo etc.

It just seems a bit mad - what does someone who might be in hospital with eg a cancer operation or had emergency surgery and in traction get offered to make sure they can vote (as you can't easily change your location last minute can you?).. I'm curious.

But yes I don't think these things are sensibly approach as 'just from pwme' but the gaps left covering us, as well as others who fall into those gaps, it does feel like someone needs to be starting to say it is about time those questions are tackled satisfactorily/better. Or maybe it exists but we just aren't aware of it - I haven't exhaustively been looking into it.

They (the charity/org (s) representing wider disability or illness) also might have 'institutional memory' on the 'what could help in the mean time' options as they might have looked into some things we might think of then found and considered the draw backs (it isn't like finding someone to just drop off milk)

Theoretically there isn't an election coming up very soon atm so it seems the right time to prioritise the thing that to do it needs time to go about it the right way - and I mean about chats with those other charities/experts etc - I wouldn't publicise it, just look into what's possible. And it is only useful if it is the right people who are astute to discussing the various complications and complexities as the focus is on what the drawbacks and issues are ie the 'whether' there is a way to do it (as you don't want to do something that would never get anywhere but will draw flak given the current climate).

I thinking the hurdle is in working out what can sensibly be asked for, when and how to go about it as it might be more about 'project' (being able to suggest sensible adjustments and ask why they aren't available, and that back-and-forth) than pressure, given 'accessibility' is technically covered it is just a case of understanding that mandate perhaps.
 

Timms Review sparks fears about the future of PIP | Disability Rights UK

www.disabilityrightsuk.org www.disabilityrightsuk.org

They say:
The Review states, “cash will remain the foundation of the award”, but “some awards will also include services and other non-cash support” and “cost categories” will determine an individual’s award. Examples of cost categories for a future PIP benefit are set out as “equipment and aids; mobility and transport; clothing and bedding.” It is proposed that there is a “light touch” initial assessment, which could create a tick-box exercise to divide impairment groups, who then follow different application pathways.
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't believe that will make the benefits bill cheaper for the tax payers. Quite the opposite as I suspect this would mean private contractors providing those items or vouchers for particular shops.

Also, aren't people supposed to get equipment and aids through occupational health, independently of PIP or eligibility for PIP?

Clothing and bedding... While I appreciate that some people are in a situation where they and their carers don't have the capacity for bedding shopping, I think they should be provided assistants to help them with that and other tasks that need doing, separate to PIP. Social services are already supposed to help with that but I think the current criteria for such support should be more inclusive. Somehow I doubt that out of all things being wrong with PIP, disabled people suggested getting bedding and clothes instead of money.

Disgusting.
 
Last edited:
News of a potentially important PIP survey from Benefits & Work, which they have asked to be shared:

The Timms review held the first of 15 workshops yesterday. We believe these workshops will later be cited as evidence that disabled people co-produced the idea of using disability-related costs to help determine PIP awards.

So, we’re asking you to give your opinion on the proposal before any more workshops are held.

Each of those workshops has a maximum of just 20 disabled people attending. They are unlikely to have met each other before, will have had no chance to share ideas beforehand and will have no control over the proceedings. The review team, on the other hand, will have had weeks to prepare the format and materials.

So, we want our readers to provide their own responses to the suggestion that PIP awards should be based on a fair contribution by the DWP towards the extra costs of disability, with proposed categories including “equipment and aids; mobility and transport; clothing and bedding.”

That way, some of the claimants who attend the workshops will be able to pass on not only their own views, but also the opinions of what we hope will be thousands of respondents to this survey.
Click to expand...

Link to the survey.

Edited to add a reference to PIP, as it's specifically about that benefit.
 
Last edited:
bobbler said:
it seems like other charities have been inputting into funding alternatives/support for example with learning disabilities and RNIB

and/or others have potentially been looking at and inputting into the electoral commission documents for returning officers for example: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/guidance-returning-officers-assistance-voting-disabled-voters

exhaustion gets mentioned as a 'thing' that those in the polling stations needs to be aware of re: reasonable accommodations - and of course some of the areas where some pwme will struggle will be familiar to/consistent with larger groups such as someone who has another illness or is going through a round of treatment like chemo etc.

It just seems a bit mad - what does someone who might be in hospital with eg a cancer operation or had emergency surgery and in traction get offered to make sure they can vote (as you can't easily change your location last minute can you?).. I'm curious.

But yes I don't think these things are sensibly approach as 'just from pwme' but the gaps left covering us, as well as others who fall into those gaps, it does feel like someone needs to be starting to say it is about time those questions are tackled satisfactorily/better. Or maybe it exists but we just aren't aware of it - I haven't exhaustively been looking into it.

They (the charity/org (s) representing wider disability or illness) also might have 'institutional memory' on the 'what could help in the mean time' options as they might have looked into some things we might think of then found and considered the draw backs (it isn't like finding someone to just drop off milk)

Theoretically there isn't an election coming up very soon atm so it seems the right time to prioritise the thing that to do it needs time to go about it the right way - and I mean about chats with those other charities/experts etc - I wouldn't publicise it, just look into what's possible. And it is only useful if it is the right people who are astute to discussing the various complications and complexities as the focus is on what the drawbacks and issues are ie the 'whether' there is a way to do it (as you don't want to do something that would never get anywhere but will draw flak given the current climate).

I thinking the hurdle is in working out what can sensibly be asked for, when and how to go about it as it might be more about 'project' (being able to suggest sensible adjustments and ask why they aren't available, and that back-and-forth) than pressure, given 'accessibility' is technically covered it is just a case of understanding that mandate perhaps.
Click to expand...
They’ve been looking at online voting for at least 10 years AFAIK it’s always being pushed but it hasn’t come to pass.

Good thing with postal votes is you get a lot longer to eceive and send it back, I recommend everyone does it to be honest.

I used to do it because I was busy on polling day doing polling stuff!
 
Kitty said:
News of a potentially important PIP survey from Benefits & Work, which they have asked to be shared:



Link to the survey.

Edited to add a reference to PIP, as it's specifically about that benefit.
Click to expand...
Sorry but I don’t understand the question (or maybe I don’t understand how to avoid the answer being misused?)

“Timms review survey

This survey is completely anonymous, but we may publish your comments if you make any, so please don’t share any details you would not be happy to see online.

* 1. The Timms review is suggesting that individual PIP awards could be based on a fair contribution towards costs, including:
  • equipment and aids
  • mobility and transport
  • clothing and bedding

What best sums up your reaction to this idea?

- support
- don't support
- don’t know”


Eh?
Should PIP awards be based on a “fair contribution” to costs? (Where costs contain things like bedding, aids etc)

Are they asking whether pip awards should be based on a contribution to costs

Are they asking whether pip awards should be based on a contribution to costs for things they specify including bedding etc

What if you think PIP awards should be based on some other thing like ensuring people receive benefits + salary which is no less than minimum wage for 36hrs per week?

Isnt pip already based on a “fair contribution” to the additional costs of being disabled?
 
MrMagoo said:
Are they asking whether pip awards should be based on a contribution to costs
Click to expand...

That's one of the questions, but they're really inviting people to explain things like the fact that the additional costs of disability are incredibly difficult to quantify. Partly because they change, depending on what specific things / help the person needs at that time.

Also to say that it's a privacy issue (no one else has to explain what they spend their money on), a dignity issue, etc. If you visit their website, they're keeping an updated page of the comments they've received so far.

Link to the live results
 
Kitty said:
That's one of the questions, but they're really inviting people to explain things like the fact that the additional costs of disability are incredibly difficult to quantify. Partly because they change, depending on what specific things / help the person needs at that time.

Also to say that it's a privacy issue (no one else has to explain what they spend their money on), a dignity issue, etc. If you visit their website, they're keeping an updated page of the comments they've received so far.

Link to the live results
Click to expand...
Yes but the question seems loaded.

Do you think it should be a fair contribution based on X Y Z?

Yes I do.

Disabled people agreed we should give x amount to spend in Y and Z.

No I don’t

Disabled people don’t want a fair contribution so we won’t give them one.

Pip exists because of the additional living costs of having a disability. It already exists as a fair contribution to the costs of clothes and transport and bedding etc
 
Last edited:
MrMagoo said:
Yes but the question seems loaded.
Click to expand...

It absolutely is. It's one of the questions the Timms Reviews is asking, though, not Benefits & Work.

They (B&W) are trying to get a wide range of perspectives to assist the small groups of disabled representatives who're allowed to take part in the review sessions. Obviously 20 individuals can't have first-hand knowledge of all the conditions affecting PIP claimants, so B&W are trying collect some of their experiences to pass on to them.
 
Kitty said:
It absolutely is. It's one of the questions the Timms Reviews is asking, though, not Benefits & Work.

They (B&W) are trying to get a wide range of perspectives to assist the small groups of disabled representatives who're allowed to take part in the review sessions. Obviously 20 individuals can't have first-hand knowledge of all the conditions affecting PIP claimants, so B&W are trying collect some of their experiences to pass on to them.
Click to expand...
I understand that, which makes it more confusing B&W haven’t put any qualification with the question!
 
Wits_End said:
In case anyone's interested, there's a petition here https://the.organise.network/campaigns/6712 asking that PIP reform not be decided by budget, but by need.
Click to expand...
Sorrr but I don’t think it’s clearly enough worded - I don’t get what it’s asking for as the words don’t make sense getting across what it wants , what’s ’by budget not need’? What do they mean by this?

I had to click thru to find out what they mean by ‘not by budget but need’ and I still don’t know and I definitely think those who aren’t disabled or are disabled but do g have to worry about these things much won’t get what it means or is asking for. I think it needs to take a look at its wording and better them so people signing know that those they are handing it to will read the same thing they assumed it said from it.

Eg There is ‘the budget’ but that term can mean something in the general (not in my budget) for each individual but also each society and a person ina job might have ‘a budget’ it’s not making sense . I think this just makes it worse until the one-liner is tightened up to get something across ie have words that are clear. What do they mean by ‘needs’

I’m part of the audience I can tell yet think they are talking to in these familiar terms and if doesn’t mean anything to me and is ambiguous the worst thing is if presented with that people eontv’get’ the issue they think they are trying to rail about , but they will be able to choose what it means based on what works for them which is what you don’t want from something people have signed.
 
Last edited:
I hate this rhetoric.

As if the treasury tells the Government what to do. The posts held by the Prime Minister include First Lord of the Treasury. Pretty sure it’s cast in metal on the letterbox of 10 Downing St.

Trying to frame it as the treasury gives X amount for PiP so all you disableds need to decide the best way of allocating it. If more of you turn up wanting PIP then each person will get less. Spend it however you want, but there’s only X amount between you all. We won’t tell you what to do, but there’s only x amount of money, treasury says so.
 
It’s very paternalistic.
Reminds me of being told “no, you can’t just invite Mary to your birthday party. We told you if you wanted a party at Super Bowl Alley it would be expensive and you can only invite four friends. If you wanted to start inviting more people, then it will have to be a party at home with a buffet and video, no bowling”.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom