“Why can those with the broadest shoulders not bear a fair cost of recovery – a 2% tax on those with assets over £10m would raise £24bn a year – instead of putting the burden entirely on those who can least afford it.”
Kim Johnson MP’s Letter to the Chancellor
Following the announcement of cuts to disability support in the Spring Statement, Kim Johnson MP has written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer asking that the Government reconsiders the cuts.
Dear Chancellor,
I write to you following a meeting last week with constituency organisations who provide support and advice to people with disabilities, including help with Universal Credit and PIP applications. I don’t disagree we need to review the welfare system – it has become more punitive than supportive, but penalising disabled people is not the way to do it.
They, like myself, are desperately worried about the impact of the welfare changes to PIP and the UC Health element that you announced in last week’s Spring Statement. My Liverpool Riverside constituency is the most deprived in the country, and the impact of the last 14 years of the previous Government’s austerity agenda has increased poverty substantially.
A Citizens Advice worker with 30 years’ experience, stating she has never experienced the levels of poverty and deprivation people are facing today; huge concerns from staff who were unprepared for the level of cuts; worry that the changes in eligibility and the need to score four points in one daily living activity will force thousands of people to lose their benefits. The DWP’s own analysis predicts a further 250,000 people (including 50,000 children) will be forced into poverty under the “Pathways to Work” Green Paper.
In Liverpool Riverside, 16% of PIP recipients are in work – if they fail to meet the new criteria, this will almost certainly impact their ability to work; 72% of LCWRA recipients are in the lowest income band. Meanwhile, energy costs, food costs and council tax are all set to rise on the 1/4/25 reducing what little benefits they do receive.
Many of those in receipt of PIP rely on unpaid carers: if they lose their PIP entitlement, the carers’ allowance also disappears and how will they receive support? They will also, of course, lose their right to legal aid to challenge any re-assessment to their PIP benefits. The increased funding to local authorities is very welcome, in Liverpool this doesn’t make up the £0.5bn cut we experienced over the last decade and a half: the funding isn’t sufficient to provide support to all those facing potential benefit cuts – especially those under 22 who will include disabled young people.
I have a constituent who contacted me, aged 21, who wants to work, is capable and bright, but because he has severe physical disabilities, can’t find an employer willing to make the necessary adjustments. He is worried sick about how he might survive. And, judging by my inbox, he is far from alone.
On the doorsteps last May and June, we promised voters who were struggling to survive to put their trust in Labour – we were the party that would look after their interests, would put more money in their pockets, would make up for 14 years of Tory attacks. The refusal to abolish the two-child benefit cap, the abolition of the Winter Fuel Allowance for those not in receipt of pension credit and now these welfare benefit changes to those in greatest need, constituents in my Liverpool Riverside are telling me how they feel let down and betrayed.
Tax avoiders, those who benefited from COVID contracts they then failed to deliver, billionaires who have seen their wealth grow by 281% since 2009, to a total of £182bn, or £35m daily. Why can those with the broadest shoulders not bear a fair cost of recovery – a 2% tax on those with assets over £10m would raise £24bn a year – instead of putting the burden entirely on those who can least afford it.
I would ask that you reconsider the need to implement these changes for disabled and sick constituents and instead to consider other alternatives to raise the necessary finance to honour our manifesto commitments.
Yours sincerely,
Kim Johnson MP
I have written to the Chancellor urging her to rethink devastating welfare changes that will hit the most vulnerable the hardest.
— Kim Johnson (@KimJohnsonMP) April 1, 2025
Cutting lifeline support like PIP & UC means more poverty, more hardship, and more broken promises. We must do better than this.#WelfareNotWarfare pic.twitter.com/6CO1MnigRo
- Kim Johnson MP is the MP for Liverpool Riverside, you can follow her on Facebook, Twitter/X, Instagram and Tik Tok.
- This letter was sent to Rachel Reeves, The Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 1 April 2025.
Can we see Reeve’s answer please?