Universal Basic Income: What Would It Mean for Disabled and Long Term Sick?
I’ve been reading up on Universal Basic Income (UBI), as it’s something the Green Party, who seem to be gaining a lot of interest lately, would introduce if they were in power. Their proposal would scrap the basic UC payment and replace it with a flat UBI for every adult.
My understanding is that UBI would replace the basic UC amount, and every adult in the country would receive it regardless of earnings or wealth. It is meant to cover the basics, but it would not include the extra elements that UC currently has for people who are long term sick and unable to work.
PIP would still exist, because it is not an income at all. It is specifically for the extra costs that come with disability. What concerns me is that people who are long term sick could still end up worse off overall if the additional UC elements that currently support those unable to work were removed.
And while the proposal refers to “disabled individuals and single parents”, long term sick people and disabled people are not always the same group. Many people who are too unwell to work do not meet the criteria for disability benefits such as PIP, and their situation is not clearly addressed in the proposals.
The people who are most vulnerable and least able to advocate for themselves are also the ones whose situation is described in the vaguest terms in almost every UBI proposal I have read. That gap in detail matters, and the silence around it is worth paying attention to.
I am genuinely interested in how others see this, especially from a practical point of view rather than a party political one.
Comments
-
So everybody all under one umbrella not that anyone likes the label disabled but does that give you extra protection?? But on the other hand with the rise of AI so many jobs will be gone we are living in times where AI is advancing faster than ever i find the future to be bleak as i see that the world or the leaders dont care for the people so i have little faith in whatever they do and tbh my days of believing left verus right are over so seems a good idea lets see
0 -
It is incorrect to claim that PIP is not an income. It is very much an income - it's not a loan or grant but a regular payment from the welfare budget that must be applied for.
1 -
The Universal Basic Income was in the Greens 2024 Election Manifesto. They also said it would take more than one parliament for it to be introduced.
The present government could be in power until August 2029 and one UK term is five years we are talking quite a long time in the future before this could happen.
The way things are happening in the world at the moment many changes are being forced on us that we have no control over. What the financial state of the UK will be in over eight years time would be difficult to predict.
Could we afford a Universal Basic Income?
While PIP is a benefit not an income at this time, it is very difficult to predict what is with what might be if the Greens came to power.
0 -
In everyday conversation it’s easy to call any regular payment “income,” and yes, it does come from the welfare budget, so I understand why people use the word that way. But within the benefits system that isn’t how PIP is treated.
It was created as a cost based benefit, not an income replacement benefit, and that’s why it isn’t taxed, isn’t means tested, doesn’t reduce UC, and can be paid alongside wages. If it were classed as income, every one of those things would work differently.
PIP exists to recognise the extra costs that come with disability, including the ongoing costs of degenerative or long term illness, costs that people without those conditions simply don’t face. That purpose runs through every part of how it’s assessed and how it interacts with the rest of the system, including HMRC.
0 -
"PIP would still exist, because it is not an income at all." you said.
PIP very much is an income!
Did you mean it's not a taxable income?
0 -
I take your point that in the broadest sense any money coming in could be called "income." But there is a practical difference that matters here. Income is what you live on. It is what pays bills and buys food. That is what UC does, and that is what UBI would replace.
PIP does not do that. PIP exists to cover the extra costs that come with disability, things like equipment, taxis, help with personal care, cleaners, laundry services, gardeners, or private medical appointments and scans. That list is not exhaustive. PIP was never designed to cover basic living costs, and it is not enough to do so.
That is exactly why the system does not treat PIP as income. It is not taxed, it is not means tested, and it is not counted against your UC. If it were income in any meaningful sense, it would be treated like income. It is not, because it serves a completely different purpose.
And that is why PIP cannot plug the gap left by removing LCWRA. You cannot tell someone who is too unwell to work that their disability cost payment is now also their living cost payment. Those are two separate needs, and right now they are met by two separate payments. Under UBI, one of them vanishes.
I know that the next general election is still a few years away, but when I read the Greens proposal I wondered what other members thought about a single flat UBI replacing all the additional support. That is why I raised it today.
1 -
No, you haven't taken my point that PIP is income.
It's a statement of fact to correct yours. It's really simple.
0 -
When the DWP, HMRC, the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and the Universal Credit Regulations 2013 all agree that PIP is not classified as income, I am inclined to go with that definition.
However, putting that to one side, the point I was trying to raise was about the hypothetical UBI proposals from the Greens. I was wondering how members would feel about a system in which UC is abolished, nobody has assessments, the UBI is never means tested, everyone receives the same flat payment, and the current extra support for people who are too unwell to work may no longer exist.
1 -
Personal Independence PAYMENT = income
0 -
UBI will not replace Universal Credit and the Green Party won't get into power. It's a non-starter.
1 -
As I said in my first post, I was interested in what people think of the concept of UBI from a practical point of view rather than a party‑political one.
Once a policy idea enters public discussion, it can quickly be taken up or adapted by other parties, so I was genuinely interested in people’s views on the principle of UBI, rather than the electoral prospects of any particular party in an election that is still several years away.
0 -
PIP is money you receive, but it’s not treated as income in the same way as wages or means-tested benefits. It’s there to help cover the extra costs of disability, which is why it’s usually ignored in benefit calculations.
0 -
Exactly this you can be a millionaire and claim pip
1 -
It is what it is
1 -
A ubi that effectively reduces poverty is not affordable whilst a ubi that is affordable would not effectively reduce poverty
2 -
It's not means tested. so in theory, if I'd bought a Lottery for tonight, and checked it tomorrow morning and it was good for a few Million, my PIP wouldn't be affected.
0 -
My original post was about UBI replacing the basic UC amount and removing the extra elements that support people who are too unwell to work. The line about PIP was taken out of context.
I said PIP is not classed as income, which is correct. The DWP do not treat it as income in their calculations. It is ignored for UC purposes, and changes to UC do not affect PIP as it is not an income.
It is called Personal Independence Payment for a reason. In this context, “payment” simply means a benefit paid to someone, it does not mean income replacement. The key word is independence. PIP is paid to help with the extra costs that arise from disability so that people can maintain independence. It is not designed to replace wages or cover ordinary living costs.
The real issue is this. There is a large group of people who cannot work but do not qualify for PIP. LCWRA is what supports them now. Under a flat UBI model, that support disappears unless something replaces it.
That is why PIP cannot fill the gap left by removing LCWRA, and that gap is what I was asking members about in a hypothetical situation where UBI was ever introduced. The terminology debate doesn’t change the policy gap I’m asking about.
2 -
The idea is purely to ensure that nobody is under the breadline - but the breadline itself is going to be artificially raised because everybody will be over that limit - and how will this extra money be funded ?
It's almost like saying that nobody will be earning minimum pay - but someone HAS to less than the rest of society - unless everybody has an identical income from shop workers to surgeons !
What about those who already get workplace pensions - how do you deal with those ?
UBI unfortunately just doesn't work !
1 -
Of course those things are income. The point is more that PIP is treated differently from earnings or benefits like ESA. It’s not means-tested and is usually ignored in benefit calculations, which is why it's not classed as income in the usual sense.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.9K Start here and say hello!
- 7.6K Coffee lounge
- 107 Games den
- 1.8K People power
- 161 Announcements and information
- 25.3K Talk about life
- 6.2K Everyday life
- 504 Current affairs
- 2.5K Families and carers
- 874 Education and skills
- 2K Work
- 585 Money and bills
- 3.7K Housing and independent living
- 1.2K Transport and travel
- 643 Relationships
- 1.6K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.5K Talk about your impairment
- 883 Rare, invisible, & undiagnosed conditions
- 942 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.3K Autism and neurodiversity
- 40.9K Talk about your benefits
- 6.1K Employment & Support Allowance (ESA)
- 20.3K PIP, DLA, ADP & AA
- 9.1K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.3K Benefits and income