Taxes to rise to fund PIP

[Viviennemary]

I just read this, Don't agree with this at all. PIP needs to be reformed. But not by introducing this two tier system. Sick of Labour already. Might have know they would revert to type. With all the infighting and disagreement so nothing ever gets done except back peddling, increased taxes and prices rises.

Exactly, I worked with a chapped who lost a leg in Afghan, he went onto compete at the para-olympics, he was joking recently he had a PIP assessment where he had to help the assessor up the stairs as they were so unfit. Many disabled people don't need or want handouts. I think some of the most offensive posts here come from people who think just because someone is disabled they aren't able to work and need to have their life managed by the state.

Do people think this is a better system?

Generally I wonder what the view would be

Yep. If wanting the vehicles of motability customers marked so that they can be identified as driving a ‘free’ car isn’t a perfect example of hatred for the disabled l really don’t know what is. And there are many similar opinions peppered through this and other threads.

l think most disabled people people want to see reform of disability benefits because the system of assessment and award has unfairness built into it, which, in many cases works against the most severely disabled because they cost the most to support. But what they want is the root and branch reform promised by this government, in order to make the system fairer, more transparent and less open to abuse. That hasn’t happened. What they got instead was an arbitrary cut designed reduce eligibility for genuinely disabled people in order to save money, with no thought for the consequences to those people.

l can’t stress enough that just because you stop supporting a need, it doesn’t mean that need disappears. In this case the cut for future claimants will see a reduction in support through PIP and carers allowance which will have significant repercussions on the social care system as people turn to that for the support they need. Any savings from the benefit cut will then be lost to a ballooning social care bill. At best it’s the same sticking plaster solution lacking in critical thinking and we’ve seen it all before from successive governments of both colours.

As the Faisal Islam article linked above reveals, expert after expert maintains that this is because of the ‘binary’ nature of the UC Health Element (you either get it or you don’t), and not because of hard-to-get PIP, and also we need to look at the longer-term picture from 2010.

There is also the fact that the NHS treats patients ‘as an inconvenience’ according to Sir Jim Mackey.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/nhs-hospital-gp-appointment-patients-jim-mackey-b2778591.html

This exactly the thing that stops discussion - I’m getting older, I might downsize to a flat in the local town so I can easily get to doctor etc suggest it for disabled people and its giving them no choice -perhaps it would make their lives easier.
l live in the sticks there was a front page local news story -outrage from a local disabled person cos his extra large size wheel chair couldn’t get on the bus - surely he’d be better in the town with a powered wheelchair but no he expects the bus service to change.

Apparently 9 out of 10 pip receivers would not have been affected by the changes proposed.
That is lost in the outrage.

I think some of the most offensive posts here come from people who think just because someone is disabled they aren't able to work and need to have their life managed by the state

Who on here has said any of that? I certainly haven't. PIP, the benefit under discussionon this thread, is paid to disabled people in work or out of work, so your commemt makes little sense really.

A quarter of the population is disabled??

Those aren’t the numbers that were being published by the BBC and the Guardian

That is a lot of people (even if were an accurate figure, which is debateable) and those with physical disabilities would be disproportionately affected by the changes in the scoring system. Especially women with physical disabilities.

Actually you would find that most people with disabilities support proper reform based on tangible consultation and based on medical expertise. Too many people are living without the support that they should be entitled to because the system is too hard, or the DWP assessors know better than the horde of medical professionals working with an individual over years. The problems cut both ways. Nobody is going to deny that a small number of people play the system - it would be stupid to because we do come across them. But balance that against the people who can't and I think you would find that there are more who aren't getting benefits they should be entitled to than getting benefits they shouldn't be entitled to.

But I am going to disagree with you - if it isn't hatred it is hard to find a better word. The vitriol, misinformation and lies about our benefits are excessive, and not seen against anyone else else receiving publically funded benefits such as childcare. Look at all the helpful threads about how desperately someone earning £100,000+ needs childcare money because they managed to give birth. There aren't 3 threads a day just on the unemployed or decrying excessive childcare benefits - it appears that only people with disabilities who are unemployed (when many of us aren't) are the problem. If it were only MN then I'd put it down to simply keyboard warriors, but actually the world might be politer about it, but until you have lived with a disability you really don't get it. At best we are invisible - even when HIGHLY visible. Slam the door in my face because I am too slow, put your bin in the middle of the pavement blocking my scooter, and another thousand obstacles and barriers every single day. If not hatred, it's complete disregard of our existence - which is just as offensive and hurtful. Yes people will know someone with a disability. Most of the people posting vitriol on these boards will. They don't care.

But you know what? I have worked all my life, retiring last year. I have paid huge amounts of tax and still pay tax. I also worked in public service, with the most disadvantaged and vulnerable in society across the world. For the latter part of that time, after being injured in the line of duty, I have continued to work due to the PIP and a supportive employer. I am not wealthy, and my PIP enables me to have a life. My car enables me to get out and have some social life despite that being very restricted now. It enables me to also have a mobility scooter. And to have the heating on in winter. It's small potatoes for the daily pain I have, which there is nothing doctors can now do about it; or for the fact that my legs won't support me after a few minutes standing due to spinal damage. I now volunteer using my skills and experience to support the vulnerable and make a positive contribution to society. I can volunteer because I have PIP!

Despite all this, I no longer care. My PIP is now safe. So is that of the majority of people trying to explain to you all just what living with disability is like - whether or not you are able to work. I would wish for a fairer and better system, but I'll be damned if I am going to do anything about that now. You know why? Because it isn't going to happen, and the people who will be getting exactly what they want - disabled people living in poverty - will actually be the people that get what they want, literally. What people seem to have missed is that it isn't just us fighting for us. We were also fighting for you. For those not currently disabled. Because over the next years many of you will be the ones depending on the benefits that you are rubbishing. These are not nuanced debates - they are attacks. The message is clear - pay for childcare, pay for tax cuts, pay for what "I want", and to hell with people who are disabled. One day, the chances are that the disabled person will be all of you, and there will be no support, no benefits and nobody left to fight for you.

To be fair many posters are conflating PIP with out of work benefits. It’s had to be pointed out several times that PIP is there to support with the extra cost of disability and not because recipient are too disabled to work.

Read the thread. There are plenty of people saying it's better to give disabled people who are out of work money than encourage them into work. Some would make getting that money easier so that they have even less incentive to work, because they equate disability with inability.

The Tories consulted on it but the overwhelming consensus was that you can’t provide a ‘catalogue’ for needs in the UK like extra heating, extra fuel, extra hot water, extra transport, special diets for bowel disease, etc without losing the flexibility that a country with a shit NHS needs.

People are asking for root and branch reform - yeah right. A bit like thinking pensioners should get a bit less and then see the outrage over wfa.

We need to cut the cost of the benefit system ie give people less money - no one who loses out will be in favour of that

24 million people claimed some combination of DWP benefits at August 2024 (
Gov statistics -including state pension

You are confusing UC Health with PIP.

Like Starmer is deliberately doing.

And there are many more who are suggesting that if you remove PIP it will incentivise more people into work - regardless of whether or not they are actually physically able to work. PIP supports the extra cost of cost of disability, it doesn’t assess the ability to work. Removing it isn’t the route to getting more disabled people into work.

And that is where we disagree. It is ok to disagree. We won't know the answer until a government comes along with the balls to try and solve this countries problems.

You’ve just revealed to everyone on the thread that you know nothing about the way PIP is assessed or awarded. Disabled people and their representative organisations and charities have been lobbying for years for root and branch reform of PIP because the system is unfair and subjective. Disabled people have responded in droves to every consultation on proposed reform, so your suggestion that disabled people are happy with the status quo when it suits them doesn’t stand up when evidence points to the contrary

This means a higher cost still though

Everything costs. I don't understand why we need to punish the poor and reduce our welfare state yet have money for bombs and defence, we are not at war. I am a proud product of the welfare state. I was able to get a grant and leave a dead end clerical job to do A levels, working nights and weekends. I got a grant to go to a top university and have a lot of academic awards. I feel I have given back by working in social services at a much lower pay than I could have earned in other jobs. My parents left school at age 14, no qualifications. My dad was skilled but the industry was dying. My Mother believed women should stay at home after marriage. I'm retired now, living standards ok not great. We own our home and we both volunteer. Currently we are.trying to help people with their Pip claims. You take and receive and give back. Just stop buying more weapons of mass destruction.

PIP helps people into work, without motability cars or WAVs they wouldnt be able to get to work (ever tried to get on a bus with a wheelchair? Most drive past in favour of having buggies in the wheelchair places!)
PIP allows people to work hours that they can do, it allows them to buy tools/aids they need for their disabilities to help them work. Some people on here clearly do not understand and really shouldnt be joining in this conversation.

@EasternStandard No, it means a fairer and more objective assessment which would hopefully bring costs down as the quality of decision making improves and the need for expensive appeals reduces. Currently a high proportion of denied claims are successful at tribunal, indicating a problem with the quality of assessment and decision making processes. It costs the tax payer a fortune. A fairer and more transparent assessment system that reduces the need for appeals would significantly reduce costs.

I'm not sure your getting it
They don't just hand out PIP because someone says they are disabled
They require proof of the disability and how it impacts the peersin
And again just becsuse someone has a disability doesn't meant they are automatically entitled to PIP .

An empty vessel makes much noise, comes to my mind, with some of these posts. The authors of them, have no understanding, and it clearly shows, yet even when their ignorance is pointed out to them, they still don't listen.