“There is concern that any forthcoming examination on how a new assessment could help people to find work will result in PIP becoming another route for cuts.”
By Barry Rodin
Provoking anger and anxiety
The 2025 Pathways to Work Green Paper triggered much anger and anxiety among disabled and vulnerable people and supporting disability organisations. The Government did make a partial U-turn, including a commitment to a 2026 consultation on Personal Independence Payments (PIP), led by Sir Stephen Timms. But conflating benefits reform with ‘getting Britain working’ contributed to Labour’s precipitous fall in support among traditional and disabled supporters. Recent benefits cuts include eliminating the Universal Credit ‘health element’ for new claimants and planned restrictions on Motability leases, including reducing the mileage allowance.
Quoting one disabled activist among many who’ve resigned from the Labour Party: “I no longer want to be associated with what I consider to be a cruel, callous party when it comes to disability issues. I can’t begin to tell you how desperately let down I feel. I feel foolish for believing that the Labour Party would look after disabled people.”
Reform needs investment
Two important related papers predated the Government’s 2026 PIP consultation: the public response to the Pathways to Work consultation (48,000 participated) and the Commission on Social Security’s alternative to PIP.
Many in the Pathways to Work consultation called for increased NHS investment, particularly in mental health support, and for reforming the PIP assessment process. There was support for a ‘Right to Try work’, including the importance of safety nets, and for flexibility within the benefits system.
But respondents stressed that support should be holistic and delivered by appropriately skilled staff. However, work assistance should not be compulsory in order to receive benefits. Access to work programmes must include personalised grants, employer support and training, and assistance with transport.
Last Autumn, in a report based on 5,000 contributions, the Commission on Social Security (a group with lived experience of the social security system), recommended a new benefit to replace PIP, an ‘Additional Costs Disability Payment’ (ACDP) to cover the real additional costs of disability and long-term health conditions. ACDP would replace stressful points-based assessments with a process aligned with the ‘Social Model of Disability’ which states that people are disabled by social barriers rather than physical or hidden impairments. The Commission also recommended that decisions are made with disabled people, not imposed on them, with advocacy and assistance given throughout the process.
Key issues for those with lived experience
The current Timm’s Consultation is led by a steering group of 12 (recruited from 340 applications) that will “bring together lived experience, professional expertise, and diversity of perspectives”. The steering group will not work in isolation, being part of a wider programme of engagement with disabled people, including supporting organisations. Recommendations will be published in Autumn 2026, and key issues include the following:
- The future role of PIP in enabling disabled people and those with long-term conditions to live independently and to fully participate in society.
- A review of assessors’ medical qualifications and knowledge of specific impairments.
- To reconsider the frequency of assessments and whether the current criteria and points system effectively captures the impact of long-term health conditions and disability, including the most severe conditions and those which are variable in their impact on daily living and mobility
- Ensuring availability of all medical evidence and information relating to an individual’s personal circumstances and environment.
- The role the assessment should play in unlocking wider support to improve wellbeing and give greater independence.
For example, the disability group I participated in submitted that the benefits system must allow disabled people to live with dignity. In particular, PIP must provide cash to be spent on products and services which enable greater independence and financial security. This is regardless of the nature of impairment, either physical or hidden, and whether or not the claimant is employed.
Not an excuse for cuts
Disability organisations have requested timely publication of steering group interim and final evaluation reports. The interim report published in July affirmed that PIP is not fit for purpose and is “dehumanising” for disabled people, in particular the assessment stage including the points system. However, there is concern that any forthcoming examination on how a new assessment could help people to find work will result in PIP becoming another route for cuts.
CLPD’s 2026 AGM reaffirmed support for disabled people and against benefits cuts. In particular, CLPD will continue to prioritise promoting democratic equality structures and building broad alliances with disability groups.
- Barry Rodin is Orpington CLP Disability Officer and a member of the CLPD Executive.
- This article is from CLPD’s annual briefing, which you can read here.
- If you support Labour Outlook’s work amplifying the voices of left movements and struggles here and internationally, please donate here or become a supporter on Patreon.
