Resolution Foundation - Should One In Six Working Age PIP Claimants Lose Cash?

ChrisR777
ChrisR777 Community Member Posts: 2,131 Championing
edited October 15 in Everyday life

Better targeting of support could shave £4.4bn from the PIP bill, and would affect 670,000 working age PIP claimants, who have no extre costs associated with their disability.

«1

Comments

  • Rachel_Scope
    Rachel_Scope Posts: 5,417 Online Community Team

    Better support would be fantastic but I wonder how difficult it would be to implement? Is it even really feasible?

  • ChrisR777
    ChrisR777 Community Member Posts: 2,131 Championing

    The important thing i took from that article, was the Resolution Foundation recognising there is a problem, but proposing better targeted support, rather than just recommending cuts to the number of claimants.

  • Rachel_Scope
    Rachel_Scope Posts: 5,417 Online Community Team

    I guess that's a good first step. It'll be interesting to see what is implemented.

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 6,451 Championing
    edited October 15

    One In Six Working Age PIP Claimants can't 'lose' cash they've never been given!

    Under 25s should not be excluded from disability benefits because they're under 25! Taking it away from existing claimants because they're under 25 should be unthinkable.

    Means-test PIP instead to cut the bill. Child Benefit is now means-tested for household incomes up to £80k (which nobody complains about) and savings could be made there. These kids won't afford the aids and adaptations they need never mind build savings if this goes ahead.

    Ps who really becomes an adult at 18? Some mature more slowly and are no less deserving of additional financial support to make their lives easier just because they are under 25. Where is the uproar about the under 25s when PIP cuts are mentioned? I don't understand it.

  • Anhedonia2
    Anhedonia2 Community Member Posts: 456 Empowering

    I would be very interested in understanding how they decide who has "no extra costs associated with their disability", I can't think of any disability that would not impact how someone lives or costs associated with it.

  • Anhedonia2
    Anhedonia2 Community Member Posts: 456 Empowering

    That's shocking and surely illegal / discriminatory?

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 6,451 Championing

    Surely it is? Originally under consideration for the under 22s, this is now extended to the under 25s.

  • ChrisR777
    ChrisR777 Community Member Posts: 2,131 Championing
    edited October 16

    In my opinion, it would be far better to give targeted support to someone with low level disabilities, rather than simply giving them several hundred pounds, but they remain Isolated at home.

    I will have been in receipt of state benefits for 17 years by next Spring, and it has been absolutely soul destroying. I spent the first 4 years knocking on doors, asking for help; there was none to be found. The DEA at the local job centre, she told me I should just adjust to living on my ESA and DLA as was, they were little more than a signing on point!

    The only 'help' I managed to access, it was simply a supervised job search with one of those private companies the government are so keen on shoveling money at. A complete waste of time.

    I for one hope that real, practical help is coming for NEETS and low level disabled people, although I'm not optimistic, based on past performance.

    I wasn't a wheelchair user at the start of this business, any support for me was required back in 2010, I don't expect any help with my situation now, sadly.

    [Edited to change "MH problems" to "disabilities". It wasn't my intention to single out one particular group]

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 6,451 Championing
    edited October 16

    Denying benefits to someone who needs them is not support. Neither is denying someone benefits because they are under 25 "real, practical help".

  • Rag_793
    Rag_793 Community Member Posts: 834 Empowering

    Wonderful!! I am 43 which is of working age, I have Autism, ASD and ADHD. Yet again we are being targeted, and I have limited capability to work. But if they start telling me that I am to lose my benefits and must return to work, then I will end up in a mental health unit or worse.

  • ChrisR777
    ChrisR777 Community Member Posts: 2,131 Championing

    @Rag_793 - This was only the opinion of a think tank, whose findings might never see the light of day.

  • Rag_793
    Rag_793 Community Member Posts: 834 Empowering

    if it becomes reality I know what course of action I will take…..

  • ChrisR777
    ChrisR777 Community Member Posts: 2,131 Championing

    You aren't at a low level of disability? I certainly don't consider myself as such. A think tank can propose what they like, it might never survive contact with reality going forward.

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 6,451 Championing
    edited October 16

    @Rag_793 you aren't a target for these cuts: you do not have minor disabilities nor do you have minor MH problems.

  • Rosie_Scope
    Rosie_Scope Posts: 9,797 Online Community Team

    Yes, definitely worth keeping in mind that these kinds of articles aren't a reflection of actual government policy yet, just proposals and ideas that may never happen. We're still waiting on the final Timms review for PIP and the Alan Milburn report on young people. Those will give us an indication on the direction things might go, so hopefully we hear more about that soon.

    Proper support might be good for some people, but it needs to be a genuine net positive on their lives. I think that might be difficult to do in practicality, but we will have to see if anything like this comes into fruition!

    These kinds of articles can be so disheartening sometimes @Rag_793, but from the latest PIP report updates, it doesn't sound like they'll be forcing people into work if they're not able to. As others have said, I don't think someone with your level of needs would be a target for these kinds of proposals. It sounds like they are trying to support those with milder needs who might benefit from engaging with other services or having a slightly different approach. From all I've read so far, cash awards are still likely to remain the foundation for PIP, especially for those with complex needs.

  • theme79
    theme79 Scope Member Posts: 56 Empowering

    exactly ! How do you even begin to do that ? And let’s face it individualised and holistic assessments are totally beyond any government or NHS capability at present.

  • theme79
    theme79 Scope Member Posts: 56 Empowering
    edited October 16

    A) PIP isn’t a ‘benefit’ or wasn’t when it was still DLA - it was a compensation allowance in recogntion that society has designed and continues in new and more subtle ways not just ramps, a world that excludes us.

    B) I have mentioned before the DISASTER of removing the words DISABILITY -and- LIVING - ALLOWANCE

    and changing the philosophical and social meaning by using PERSONAL - instead of disabilty we are disabled people a group of citizens and not just individuals - until we have total equal playing field - then it’s NOT an INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT ! Is an alowance for cost of exclusion ! Any idea it should be means tested failed logic unless we think of it as if it were a choice to be severely impaired !

    If society wants to be honest at least call it state charity for ‘cripples’ - and only the deserving ‘cripples’ and not the undeserving. At least that’s honest

  • ChrisR777
    ChrisR777 Community Member Posts: 2,131 Championing
    edited October 16

    If this reporrt is accurate, then not all mildly disabled people have extra costs associated with their condition. Perhaps helping them Into work would be more beneficial to them?

  • Ross1975
    Ross1975 Community Member Posts: 1,662 Championing
    edited October 17

    ChrisR777, I'm interested in your thoughts on something WhatThe said. She's arguing that denying someone PIP isn't support in itself and that being under 25 shouldn't be a reason to take away someone's benefits. How do you think that fits with your idea of replacing financial support with practical help?

  • WhatThe
    WhatThe Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 6,451 Championing
    edited October 17

    Wrong! This is what I wrote:

    Under 25s should not be excluded from disability benefits because they're under 25! Taking it away from existing claimants because they're under 25 should be unthinkable.