DWP sparks outcry as disabled people face end to cash benefits: ‘This won’t solve the UK’s problems’

Reports suggest that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is considering replacing regular personal independence payments (PIP) with lump-sum grants for certain individuals.

The recent alterations made by the government to the disability benefits have faced criticism for proposing to replace regular personal independence payments (PIP) with one-time grants. This new development has been strongly condemned, with many labelling it as a harmful and hasty attack on individuals with disabilities.

The DWP is starting a discussion to improve our system of disability benefits in a way that meets the needs of our changing world.

The work and pensions secretary, Mel Stride, has declared that our welfare system is based on fairness and compassion. To reflect this, we intend to modernize the approach of the Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which currently assumes that all individuals have identical requirements. It's important to recognize that people's needs differ significantly, and we want to start reflecting that when assessing PIP claims. A part of this modernization effort includes exploring the possibility of removing PIP assessments altogether for individuals with specific disabilities or medical conditions.

I am committed to ensuring that people with disabilities and health conditions receive appropriate assistance. Therefore, we will examine the most effective methods employed globally and determine whether certain claimants will benefit more from treatment, medical care, and support as opposed to just receiving money.

As per reports from media outlets that have been pre-briefed about the Modernising Support green paper to be published today (29 April), the reforms entail discontinuing periodic PIP payments and introducing one-time grants or vouchers for expenses such as home modifications and costly equipment.

According to the authorities, the expenses related to benefits are increasing at a rate that cannot be maintained because the quantity of individuals requesting aid for psychological health problems has drastically increased.

The executive director of strategy at Scope, James Taylor, expressed his doubt that the current consultation is truly aimed at achieving anything other than reducing the costs of providing benefits, regardless of the potential consequences.

Disabled individuals, including those with mental health ailments, face higher expenses in life. Stripping away the small financial assistance provided by PIP will not resolve the challenges faced by the nation.

According to the organization Scope, households with at least one person who has a disability require an extra £975 each month to have a comparable quality of life as households without disabilities, on average.

The PIP program supports individuals in covering additional expenses associated with long-term physical or mental health conditions or disabilities. It also assists those who struggle with routine activities or mobility due to their conditions.

The amount of money one can receive from PIP assessment can vary from a minimum of £29 a week to a maximum of £184 a week, depending on the outcome.

Taylor stated that the prime minister's concerns are primarily caused by the deteriorating public services, inadequate employment opportunities, and escalating poverty rates. It is erroneous to place blame on a purported 'mental health culture' that has gone too far. Instead of curbing disabled individuals recklessly, the government should concentrate on addressing the actual root causes.

A petition has been launched by Scope, with support from charities such as Macmillan Cancer Support and Sense. The aim is to urge the government to stop stigmatising individuals who are unable to work, offer assistance to those who wish to find employment and create a welfare system that is compassionate towards people.

Government statistics for January 2024 revealed that approximately 3.3 million individuals were receiving PIP in England and Wales. However, it is important to note that in Scotland, PIP has been replaced by the adult disability payment, therefore it is not expected to affect claimants in that area.

Reducing PIP payments for those who will claim it in the future will have a significant impact on their standard of living. Typically, PIP accounts for approximately one-fifth (21%) of the total income for households where an individual benefits from it. This percentage increases to one-third for individuals who earn the lowest incomes.

According to Iain Porter, a policy advisor for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, the government has a chance to display strength with this decision. However, this decision will negatively impact individuals who are already struggling financially and with their health.

In actuality, the majority of those who receive PIP cannot work. Within these PIP recipients, over one-third of them are living in homes that are not being heated properly and more than 40% of them are struggling with food insecurity. These levels are worse than other workless households and are a direct result of the government's flawed benefits system.

Most PIP claimants (88%) don't have employment. Out of that group, approximately 35% also have difficulties in keeping their homes warm, and about 70% confront material deprivation. This figure is three times higher than the rate among all households within working age.

Porter stated that the number of people suffering from extreme poverty, which has increased to almost four million individuals, mostly includes persons with long-standing health problems and disabilities. It is unfair to exploit their situation for political purposes. Even if these alterations are unlikely to occur before the election, the language being used creates anxiety, confusion, and shame among individuals who are already in precarious circumstances.

In the past, there have been attempts to change disability benefits but they did not succeed. It would be more beneficial for the government to address the root of the problem which includes poor health conditions caused by extreme poverty. Millions of individuals are forced to go without basic necessities required for their health and well-being. Immediate action is needed to alleviate this suffering instead of hearing empty promises from politicians.

It is quite challenging to obtain PIP. Only 41% of individuals who file PIP claims for the first time end up being granted it. However, the success rate of those who dispute PIP decisions during the appeals process is roughly 70%. As previously mentioned in a report by The Big Issue, the appeals process can be a grueling and overwhelming experience, taking a lot of time and deterring people from trying to contest their decision.

There are certain individuals who allege that they have undergone such distress that it have harmed their mental wellbeing, causing them to contemplate taking their own lives.

Last year, the Big Issue retrieved information through freedom of information requests revealing that the DWP has paid out over £350m in staff expenses over the past decade while trying to maintain rulings on personal independence payments (PIP).

This can sufficiently provide funding for the maximum amount of PIP payments for around 39,000 individuals for an entire year.

The UK government was criticized by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities for not doing enough to address serious and ongoing human rights violations against individuals with disabilities. The government has also not made enough effort to eliminate the underlying causes of discrimination and inequality. This criticism comes just a few days before the current news.

The group discovered infringements on the rights of persons with disabilities. These issues were seen in the social assistance program – which was based on a belief that individuals with disabilities were unworthy and purposely avoiding work ("skiving off"), and cheating the system. As a result, this has led to "hate speech" and "negative attitudes" towards individuals with disabilities.

According to Ali Gunn, who holds the position of head of public affairs and policy at United Response, a national disability charity, using people's well-being as a means to gain political advantage is unacceptable. She emphasized that any unfavorable alterations made on welfare policies will ultimately affect the people for an extended period even after the election season. Ali Gunn urges politicians to start prioritizing solutions to actual problems that cause lengthy waiting lists in the NHS, unemployment, and homelessness instead of shifting blame.

Approximately a quarter of people with disabilities experience hunger, a rate that is thrice as high compared to those without disabilities. Moreover, seven out of ten individuals who receive aid from a food bank are disabled.

The Trussell Trust maintains that due to extreme financial difficulties, individuals are becoming increasingly unwell and unable to participate in work or other pursuits.

According to Helen Barnard, who works as the policy director for the Trussell Trust, the current proposals put forth by the UK government regarding disabled social security support seem to be focused more on cutting costs and using fancy language instead of offering genuine policy solutions.

Unstable and low-paying jobs that create financial uncertainty on a weekly basis do not benefit anyone. What we require is a compassionate structure that acknowledges the detrimental effects of impoverishment and distress on physical and mental well-being. It has been evident for a long time that individuals who are struggling financially are less likely to bounce back from health issues.

We possess the means to address this issue, but it is important that policymakers take it seriously. We require specific and optional assistance with employment. Access to mental health assistance must be accelerated. Any modifications to PIP should be carried out more quickly, aptly, and empathetically. Most importantly, we must establish an essentials guarantee to guarantee a basic income for individuals receiving universal credit and other benefits, which will at least cover the cost of fundamental requirements.

Do you possess a tale to narrate or viewpoints to express regarding this matter? We are eager to receive your inputs. Contact us and elaborate further.