For some obscure reason, the Secretary for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall, decided that targeting the sick and disabled is a legitimate way of cutting welfare expenditure by £5bn. But the DWP added that there will be an extra £1bn investment to help those affected by the cuts to get into work. The pushback by Labour’s own backbenchers has been so overwhelming, it looks as if No 10 has agreed to some concessions to the proposed bill.
Personal Independence Payments (PIPs) have never been work-related. In the government’s own words:
“Personal Independence Payment (PIP) can help with extra living costs if you have both:
- a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability;
- difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of your condition.
“You can get PIP even if you’re working, have savings or are getting most other benefits.”
Independence
The Department for Work and Pensions claims that 3.7 million people receive PIP, but proposed revisions to the assessment process means that many who currently receive the daily living component of the benefit will no longer be eligible. If during the assessment the claimant doesn’t receive four points for a single activity they will no longer be able to claim this component. Currently an applicant has to have a score of eight points across all activities.
You might get the daily living part of PIP if you need help with:
- preparing food
- eating and drinking
- managing your medicines or treatments
- washing and bathing
- using the toilet
- dressing and undressing
- reading
- managing your money
- socialising and being around other people
- talking, listening and understanding
The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates 1.5 million claimants could lose their PIP daily living component. For those on the higher level of benefit, this equates to a drop in income of £5,280 pa. Many fear deeper poverty, and those who work will face hardship actually getting to work and being able to live their lives with some degree of independence. The Labour party said in its manifesto that it intended to: “plan to tackle our health and mental health challenges to get people back to work.” Cutting off support for the sick and disabled was never mentioned.
PIPs provides essential support
East Anglia Bylines talked to two working recipients of PIP, and neither understands why they’re being targeted by the government. One has Functional Neurological Disorder, Fibromyalgia, and Diffuse Pain Syndrome. They use their PIPs to pay for “additional expensive supplements and over the counter meds, the additional parking costs as you have to drive and this isn’t always free … added water and heating costs when you cannot get cold”. They added, “when you live alone as a disabled person, it [PIP] is invaluable.”
The other person we talked to has epilepsy, COPD, a heart murmur, liver disease, mental health difficulties and leg ulcers – yet they still work. PIPs in their case helps with the additional heating costs, nutritious food, trips to both the doctor and hospital and over-the-counter medicines.
“If I lose this huge amount of money, I’ll find it very difficult to get to work – I currently spend £100 per week on taxis as my epilepsy means that I become very disoriented when using public transport on my own, and my mental health will really suffer. At the moment everything is under control, the meds are working, but I’ll never stop having epilepsy and my COPD is life-limiting.”
The idea that the government will allow the benefit to continue for an additional 13 weeks if the daily living component is axed caused both to laugh. “And then what are we supposed to do?”
The DWP states, “the 13-week additional protection will give people who will be affected by the changes time to adapt, access new, tailored employment support, and plan for their future once they are reassessed and their entitlement ends.”
MPs rebel
At the time of writing over 120 Labour MPs have signed an amendment against the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill and this number is set to increase. Tabled by Dame Meg Hillier, the amendment proposes not to giver the bill a second reading because:
- its provisions have not been subject to a formal consultation with disabled people, or co-produced with them, or their carers;
- because the Office for Budget Responsibility is not due to publish its analysis of the employment impact of these reforms until the autumn of 2025;
- because the majority of the additional employment support funding will not be in place until the end of the decade;
- because the Government’s own impact assessment estimates that 250,000 people will be pushed into poverty as a result of these provisions, including 50,000 children;
- because the Government has not published an assessment of the impact of these reforms on health or care needs.
The vote is planned for Tuesday 1 July. Up to now, Sir Keir Starmer remained shortsightedly resolute: “We have got to get the reforms through, and I have been clear about that from start to finish.”
But the legions of angry MPs may have finally been listened to. On Thursday evening, the BBC reported their sources suggested a behind-the-scenes government climbdown was underway. Later, The Guardian confirmed Keir Starmer “is offering concessions to rebel Labour MPs to get his welfare bill over the line.” While the details are as yet unknown, it’s likely the concession will mean existing PIP claimants will continue to receive what they currently get, as will recipients of the health element of Universal Credit.
It’s unbelievable that it had to get this far. There was little risk assessment for this ill-conceived piece of legislation, and the bill’s architects never stopped to consider the current difficulties faced by those with disability or mental or physical health conditions on a daily basis. The ‘I’ in PIPs stands for independence, yet very many would have found it impossible to retain their dignity and independence if the bill had gone through without amendment. This was a fight that should never have been necessary – but for now, at least, disabled people have secured a vital, if fragile, reprieve.
