7.4 million people claim some form of disability or incapacity benefits

[MidnightPatrol]

Given the various back and forth of discussion on the reduction in disability and incapacity benefits, not much data on the debate has been shared - it’s a mainly emotional debate.

So for context, the figures:

• 7.4 million people claim sickness benefits of some kind
• The total number of claimants has increased by a third in five years (up 1.8 million)
• 1 in 10 working age adults claims, and 1 in 12 school aged children
• 1.2 million people aged under 25 claim sickness benefits, a rise of two thirds in 5 years - 1 in 15 claiming something
• 4 million adults claim sickness benefit of some kind, up from 2.8 million in 2019. Two thirds of that increase is people under 50.
• 2.5 million people claim UC health benefits, up 500k people this year alone - in 2019 less than 500k people claimed this
• 1.8 million have no requirement to look for work
• Sickness benefits for working age adults are expected to cost £70b by 2030 - a third of the cost of the NHS

to whom are you addressing this comment @JohnTheRevelator

How do they know pip fraud is zero?

Read it again. I'm not saying 'arbitrary entitlement'. I'm saying 'need.' If someone needs care but can't afford it, for example, it doesn't take away the need. That's why the criteria is that the claimant 'needs' the care, not that the claimant 'receives' the care.

Whilst there are many who I believe are unable to work and do need benefits there are many who abuse the system. The more who are claiming benefits the higher the burden on those who are working and this is now becoming unsustainable. The system needs to be overhauled.

They don’t. It would be far to expensive to pay private investigators to basically tail people for a week or two to prove they where “faking” it.

So unless a report has slam dunk evidence (photos, videos, social media posts) proving it’s a lie basically nothing is done might as well be filed in the bin.

Don't you think reusable nappies for babies, especially before weaning is slightly different to older children who are incontinent?

It can also still be expensive. 1 reusable swimming nappy big enough to fit my son was £40 alone.

It’s adult women and teens can use reusable pads for menstruation and reusable panty liners and incontinent pants I don’t see the issue.

It would be more beneficial and environmentally friendly even if the nhs supplied a few reusable products.

We can’t any of us just expect to use millions or throw away products constantly it’s no good regardless. Often these products are actually comfier and better at wicking away moisture.

We all live in a very disposable world that is also harming people and the planet possibly leading to more health issues.

Look at today's news. It's pretty shocking. Also indefinite leave to remain kicks in soon.

It's pretty newsworthy at the moment so have a look.

People have to consider finances too, not to mention availability. If they were cheaper, maybe more parents would consider them. NHS funding some would help too.

I think it’s time for people to redevelop a social conscience. If people are genuinely disabled, they need and deserve help, I’m sure we can all agree on that. But we are all a bit sad and a bit time poor and skint and ragged round the edges at the moment. Modern life is hard. If you know you are capable of working, if you know you earn enough to support yourself and don’t need to claim PIP to get by, if your child has ADHD but your household income is high and your blue badge is a bonus rather than an absolute need, it’s time to stop focusing on victimising your family and thinking yourself a martyr for “fighting” school and the NHS and everyone else and instead work out the positive contributions your family can make to society and work towards those.

Some families have never worked and never will. I have worked in these areas. The councils and housing associations will put them in touch with benefits advocacy services who will help them fill out the required forms in the required way to get the result they need i.e. the rent / arrears / bedroom tax / service charges will be covered by someone because these people cannot or will not take responsibility for themselves and their families and are impossible to deal with and the people working for these organisations are also human. They are slogging their guts out for rubbish money while being called all the names under the sun while also dealing with the same issues in trying to take care of their own families and they are tired too.

At some point as a country we have to start saying no, we can’t afford this. If you are lucky enough to be able to provide for your family, it should be a point of pride to do so. If you genuinely can’t, I’m more than happy for my family to pay tax towards helping yours.

I know what you said. But if they are awarded money for help with cooking, then choose to live off of crisps, then they didn't actually "need" the money. If they did, in fact, need it, they would spend it as intended.

My own view as a taxpayer who never has any spare cash, who runs their own small business and is nailed down for tax right to the bone by HMRC, whose husband is highly stressed due to working all hours that I have no objection to benefits being paid as a safety net but I do object to benefits being claimed as a lifestyle choice by people who can work instead. I'm not saying every benefit claimant is like that but some are. So that needs sorting.

I also find it utterly tragic that young people face a lifetime on the dole and fall into the benefits trap. This will be exacerbated by the increase in Employers NI which will reduce the number of starter jobs for kids to build experience..I'd like taxes invested in helping them into work too please.

I think there are a few highly entitled rude people on this thread who accuse people of being Nazis or uneducated if posters question looking at reducing the burden on taxpayers. No one owes anyone anything and we are all bloody lucky to live in a country where people give a shit at all.

The problem is that the conversation basically revolves around:

Too many people are on benefits
Lots of people on benefits are scroungers who don't want to work
Lots of the claimed disabilities are exaggerated or fictitious
I have medical problems and I still work
Why should benefit claimants get more than me when I work

None of that actually solves the problem. It's just a constant cycle of bitterness, accusations, and vitriol.

How does an employer manage an employee who has a fluctuating condition? Today they could work five hours, tomorrow none, maybe Wednesday just an hour..... How do people with conditions like this get employment? Because there's no possible way to employ people who are so unreliable. And that's a very big problem.

I actually really like the proposal for people being able to try out working without being penalised. Fear of not being able to manage is a very real factor - if you've never dealt with benefits advisors/the system, it's hard to appreciate just how inflexible it can be. I think this is one of the only positive suggestions that Labour are putting forward.

"Clamping down" on disability benefits doesn't actually solve any problems, nor suggest a solution. It just leaves vulnerable people in dire financial difficulty - but no one really seems to give a shit about that, just as long as the "numbers are down".

Worth pointing out that I am self employed full-time, and don't claim disability benefits myself. However, I have two autistic DC who probably won't even be able to live independently as they have associated learning disabilities too. My 15 old DS is still in nappies - I'm not going to even tell you how much we spend just on that, plus the constant bed cleaning. The NHS don't have any nappies that fit him (very, very skinny) so it's all bought privately.

The spewing of venom towards anyone who needs to claim, without simultaneously suggesting any solutions, is just horrible.

Yes agreed..no one in a argument on any side needs to spew venom or call people names. It's very tiresome and adds nothing, just winds people up rather than converts them to a cause.

Agree with your name, btw. They are total shitheads!

An urban myth! Local authorities tend to turn down the first request for assessment for an EHC plan unless the child’s needs are very obvious like learning disabilities.

Some parents know the main way to get their child’s needs assessed is to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. Parents success rates are around 90%?

Then when the EHC plan is issued, it’s likely not to be worth the paper it’s written on. It will be vague and woolly, with no provisions specified - full of weasel words, which make it legally unenforceable.

Some parents know in order to get all the needs and matching provisions specified, they need to get independent professional reports, detailing those needs and provisions to meet them, usually written by people with medico-legal training and experience.

If I recall correctly, the average professional report costs between £1,000 and £1,500. It costs about the same again to have each professional give oral evidence to the hearing.

Anybody who thinks, parents can get the best education they want, shows no understanding whatsoever of how courts in this country work - on evidence! No tribunal is going to pay any attention to what parents want or what they think the needs are, or how they should be met. Apart from mainstream, any parents only get to choose a special/specialist school; IF the professional reports make it clear that type of school or a specific school are the only one(s), that can meet the needs. If it’s a specialist school, they must have done a detailed assessment of the child, and explained how they are going to meet each need, with the offer of a place.

It’s like believing any of us can go to the NHS and have every test and treatment we feel like!

Whichever way you look at it - it’s not sustainable. When you look at the facts and figures. Not enough people paying in or paying in enough. Higher earners are heavily taxed and changed their behaviour - or ‘fucked off’ as told to on here. The non dom stuff had to be watered down as RR discovered it cost more than it raised - as wealth left. Same with the NI and other increases on employers - it’s killed growth and led to redundancies and hiring freezes.

Whilst Labour voters were patting themselves on the back - with the grown ups in charge. Anyone with half a brain cell could see the Tories were bad but Labour were even worse. It was clear as day what they were going to do. Distract with the politics of envy, private school fees, tax the rich, etc. All the while, mentioning welfare and how it needs to be cut. People couldn’t hear it because they were distracted about the ‘grown ups in charge’ going for ‘the rich.’

However, they didn’t connect the dots. Lose money from the private sector, state spending has to be next. That’s state jobs and welfare on the firing line and here we are. Anyone who blindly voted Labour and didn’t think it through - has themselves to blame to be honest. Now people who really need support will be caught up in the crossfire.

Issue is now, Labour HAS to do what the Tories daren’t - as they are actively killing off the private sector with policy. All the while - there will be zero opposition to any of it. The worst of both worlds.

Who on here has spewed venom on claimants ??!
I think you’ll find it’s quite the other way round. As a pp noted someone called anyone questioning the welfare cost as Nazism

How do you help what you can’t help Either.

How do you even continue to find increasing funds for say the type of situations which are likely to increase where people cannot help
themselves at all.

If you say pick Sen for example. Transport costs, costs if they need a private specialist space. Even just pick transport. No parent wants their child to be disabled but also how can we realistically continue to fund an ever increasing cost of transporting people to school? A lot of the parents will
have mobility cars could it not be more expected that as the parent with the mobility car as their career is actually expected to drive them if it’s genuinely within their city boundaries. Would a small petrol fund not still
be cheaper than paying again often
private taxis and mini bus services after all the car is for the disabled person for their needs.

Absolutely agree
Its no coincidence Labour went for the traditionally popular savings and taxes first
They've played it well

And my employer is just going to automatically accept my new much reduced hours are they? And our family just live with the reduced income? Or would I end up jobless and need universal credit instead?

I was going to say and then the complaints would start that those parents aren't working if they'd have to transport their child to/from school.

Sounds like parents of disabled children can't win no matter what they do.

You’re forgetting lots of peoples employers have to put up with parents getting their kids to school.

Your dilemma is in no way unique.

It obviously wouldn’t work for everyone but if we as a whole are meant to try and make things work where we don’t end up taxed more than people can afford or stopping help for those who need it suggestions are not a bad thing.

If you are a couple rather than a single parent you could try and get it where like in a lot of relationships regardless of sen one parent drops off and one picks up. Normal give and take. You could to use one Mumsnet normally
loves move house who knows not every situation would be identical but lots of parents do move to be closer to schools, change jobs to find more workable hours.

If we are all in it together that’s all of us not just those who do need the extra help. Give and take.

Exactly