Taxes to rise to fund PIP 2

[Viviennemary]

I saw the other thread was full. Still I look forward to the vote which is on Tuesday. Sky news called him two Tier Keir. Most unfair thing ever if this passes.

Of course evidence is needed. I've been visibly physically disabled my whole life, but total disaster struck a decade and a half ago forcing me to later claim PIP if I wanted to continue working, now from a wheelchair and with a second layer of brain damage to work around. I'm seriously affected, but also very active and put myself through hell to get to there, but can't do half of it without a carer.

My PIP evidence is X-rays, MRI's, large amounts of hospitalization, and NHS consultants: neurosurgeon, cognitive neuroscientist, cardiologist, and gastroenterologist, and the specialist NHS hospitals I'm under. I've a collection of diagnoses relating to a wonky and damaged body and (NT) brain systematically failing. You can tell quite a bit from the collection of tubes and wires, and visibly misshapen bits from overuse of what works, and atrophy of what doesn't.

None of it means a dam thing though when I'm being 'assessed' by a large angry, aggressive, misogynistic, sports therapist standing over me covering me in spittle, shouting that the "consultants are wrong", I'm "misdiagnosed", and "even if not" it "doesn't affect" me much, as my GP doesn't believe in pain killers or sleeping tablets, and this man has no idea (or interest) what the rest of the medications are for.

He can see that in hospital I'm automatically on morphine and zopiclone from day 1 every time because of the level of pain I'm in and the difficulty of treating me when I'm self managing it.
He used it to say if the GP won't prescribe them, then it "proves" I'm "not in pain and unable to sleep unless hospitalized", and if I was in pain, I "wouldn't be able to work", and if I wasn't in receipt of an 'Access To Work' grant I "clearly didn't need help". (was actually in the very long queue before that also collapsed)
He "knows" because he's a "trained sports physiotherapist!"
That's the qualification good enough for the DWP to counter and dismiss all those highly trained consultants and their scans etc!

And just like that he struck me off from multiple high needs points, to insufficient points for any disability help to allow me to work.
(reinstated following formal complaint and importantly an illicit tape recording of his aggressive bullying.)

It really isn't about evidence, though when you have good evidence you tend to think it's why you've been awarded. Then you discover really it's it's about assessors, bell curves, and private companies making money from the DWP, and often good and bad luck in who you get, when.

Also regarding diagnosis:
Some time after I lost a year in hospital and was facing loosing my home through being unable to cover my rent and CT (no help available when in hospital) an incredible neuroscientist at the peak of his career, was hit by a car riding home from work.

Amongst other things, he was a Royal Society professor with a RS grant to develop his long term research program over ten years, and had family.
Part of his work was with 'neglect patients' and how others perceptions of them shaped neurological function.
He believed in people being able to reach their full potential regardless, and was making really important discoveries in the neuroscience world.
Absolutely not someone shirking or wanting to not work.

He suffered a complex dislocation of the knee, and after two bouts of failed surgery on it, was left permanently disabled with continuous excruciating neuropathic pain, and unable to hide it, or be able to work through it.

He went from the top of his game and a hugely useful member of society, to suddenly being seen through the lens of potential liar, scrounger, potential drug seeking patient, and a potential 'burden' because of a few seconds of (allegedly) someone else's carelessness.

Despite who he was, and who he knew, he didn't have any actual diagnosis beyond depression, insomnia, and PTSD.

I can see what the viccious'n'mean would have had to say about what those diagnosis's mean, and his right to 'tax payer' assistance to be able to manage a future life.

Sadly he jumped from a 60ft bridge rather than go through more, knowing from his patients exactly what the future held for him, and his fears about his employability and his fall from grace to becoming 'publicly distrusted' and a potential "burden" on those he loved.

He was someone very conscientious, admired, and respected.
"Consigned to an existence of permanent disability" and "subsequent mental anguish" and "ill prepared for societies judgement" where terms used by his peers.
Disability can happen to absolutely anyone, how people are treated when it does, counts hugely.

I said part of the reason, why people get more sick etc. No conflation going on, they are linked. If you want to talk about personal responsibility, be my guest.

No hard data - just supposition on your part.

I doubt that the growth in PIP awards I mentioned in a PP, can reasonably be laid squarely at the feet of the NHS.

An honest conversation is urgently required on the wider welfare bill - we clearly cannot continue like this. Just listen to what reasonable people are saying.

I agree with lots of points in your post@Elleherd. The way PIP assessments are carried out, sure needs a lot of improvement.

That is the number of both new and re assessments. A little missleading unfortunately. There are also around 100k outstanding PIP appeals in the system. You do not 'sign up' for PIP.

Yeah my re assessment is somewhere sitting on somebody's desk probably for a good year or more

Sounds about right, which in itself is a disgrace. The system is in chaos.

I really hope this bill fails to be passed. It's the most unfair thing ever. Somebody on another thread said Tories are voting against it. So somebody more disabled could get less or nothing at all because they became disabled too late so come under the new rules. Absolutely shocking.

This Labour Government are evidently hell-bent on making one mistake after another, and will not accept being told when they are wrong. The problem is, these errors have real-world consequences for many of us - look no further than the posts on MN.

Starmer’s Government has, to date, attacked welfare claimants, pensioners, savers, SME owners, non-doms, and private education…

The unionised and some public sector workers have been the sole beneficiaries.

Meanwhile -
Ww have the highest tax burden post-WW2.
UK disposable income has fallen at its fastest rate since 2023.
They have so far failed to ‘smash the gangs’ (2,083 illegal immigrants arrived last week alone, for example). 44,000 arrived in Q1 alone (up 14% YoY).
The NHS budget is the size of Portugal’s GDP, and yet it has largely failed.
Crime (theft) is up 13%.

All this within 12 months - Labour have proven an unmitigated disaster, and its going to get a lot worse.

@MyNameIsX

The unionised and some public sector workers have been the sole beneficiaries.

The Labour party are funded and controlled by the unions, so it's no surprise they look after them first and sod everyone else!

What I don't understand about this attitude is the resentment against paying more tax if you are a high earner in order to fund people who have nothing or are unable through no fault of their own to provide adequately for themselves. If you are a high earner then by definition you have enough. Why do you need or want to amass and keep more except for greed and/or selfishness?

Possibly because these high earners are taxed to the hilt already.

That is true. I agree 110%

This is correct. And it’ll get worse maybe even for the public sector as the money won’t be there and high borrowing means debt servicing eats into taxes.

Another problem with these responses is the division between working class poor and disabled/people who don't/can't work. There is this assumption that it's inherently unjust for a non-working person to receive more in welfare than a working person. But why should this be the case? I'm not saying the working person is not being shafted - of course they absolutely are - by the capitalist class who are employing them and underpaying them so they can reap larger profits for themselves. But why is the default assumption that disabled people who can't work deserve to be the least well off in society? Is that really fair? I didn't choose to be incapable of working full-time I was born with a disability. If I wasn't, I can imagine getting a good career and being a relatively high earner. Unfortunately that isn't an option for me. I'm already losing. Both the disabled and the working poor are the vulnerable and most exploited in society. We need to unite against the system that is exploiting us all (including the middle classes, in fact), not engage in this divisive fighting amongst who is getting more or less, with the assumption being that it must be the fault of one or the other.

Even the highest rate pip is well below minimum wage and its only 37% of people on that some people on pip are only getting £29.50 a week

People have watched previous generations of their families work hard and scrimp and save to have a little bit of money. Now anything that people have managed to accumulate is under threat eg the little savings they may have in an ISA. It seems that there is nothing to be gained by trying to improve yourself.

@EasternStandard All of this is why there need to be tighter controls on benefits. PiP isn’t means tested. It should be. Temporary issues surrounding mh in younger people far exceeds the numbers seen in other countries. The young have worked out how best to get benefits. It’s not acceptable to tax the hard working families more for young person benefits. We have millions not working. Not all can but many could. They have no resilience and we need to get tougher. No other country is like us.

Do you think only people who have no savings become disabled? Say you’re in your thirties and have a life changing accident or in your forties and get long covid? How long do you think savings would last just for normal bills alone? There are plenty who have gone from being a high earner with savings to being unable to work, and unless you have serious wealth behind you, how long do you think that money lasts?

@cornishcoasting
@ByAquaBee

The posts in this thread have been really thought-provoking. They’ve made me reflect on how easy it is to fall into the “hardworking vs non-working” mindset without realizing how fragile life can be. One illness, accident, or major life change can quickly upend even the most financially secure person’s situation.
The point about savings not lasting long when faced with chronic illness or disability really struck a chord. Most people simply don’t have the resources to sustain themselves for years without work.
It’s understandable to feel frustrated when you’re working hard, paying taxes, and still struggling, but turning against those who genuinely can’t work doesn’t seem like the solution. It feels like society is encouraging us to blame one another rather than addressing why so many people, regardless of their work status, are being pushed to the edge. That’s the bigger issue here.
This isn’t about “who deserves more”—no one should have to live in poverty, whether they’re working full-time, part-time, retired, or unable to work. A fair, compassionate system that supports people when life goes wrong benefits everyone, because none of us are invincible.
While I understand the need to fund services, overly burdening those who aren’t reliant on the state seems counterproductive. It’s like squeezing resources dry without addressing the real problems.

@TizerorFizz

It’s completely reasonable to want a benefits system that’s strong, fair, and not easily exploited. Nobody wants a situation where people who can work choose not to, especially when others are struggling with taxes, multiple jobs, childcare, and just staying afloat. That frustration is valid.
The truth is, the system is incredibly complex, and many people are repeatedly denied the support they genuinely need. There are even shocking stories of cancer patients or individuals with lifelong conditions being deemed “fit for work.”
Regarding PIP, it’s not means-tested because it’s designed to address the additional costs that come with disabilities or health needs, not income levels. You can still be working and require help with those expenses. While the system isn’t perfect, the principle behind it makes sense.
No country gets this entirely right, but I’d rather live somewhere that prioritizes helping vulnerable people, even if it means stricter processes, than somewhere that leaves people in crisis because they don’t meet the criteria.

Did you know that there are some websites cheerfully offering to help would-be claimants.

Here’s an excerpt from one:

The overall average success rate for PIP claims is 51.63%, but this varies widely depending on your main disabling condition.

For example, PIP claims for Rheumatoid Arthritis have a success rate of 72.19%, whilst those for Type 1 Diabetes are as low as 27.03%.

The DWP record every successful PIP claim under one of over 500 different health conditions, depending on which one they think is your main source of points. The table below (not included) shows what percentage of claims for each condition are successful

Be warned though, the DWP use some fairly odd and unpredictable terms. So, for example, if you are looking for epilepsy, you'll need to search for seizures. And there's no depression - it's depressive disorders.

I have learned something new.

I have nothing against paying more tax for people who genuinely can't work or need extra support with transport etc to be able to work. I do have a problem with people claiming PIP for ADHD, certain kinds of mental health etc that all either be treated or no extra money is needed to help with their condition.

What does an adult with ADHD need extra money for (whether they work or not)? It doesn't make sense to me, people who actually need it should get a decent amount but I think they need to put a stop to people claiming it when there is no need for them too.

Someone I went to school woth has never held down a job, has 3 kids on UC (3 of which all live with their dads as a court ruled the mother was incapable). I know through her social media updates she is now getting PIP for autism and ADHD as she paid privately to get diagnosed so she could claim it!

Adults diagnosed later in life with ADHD often spend all their life up to then thinking they have other MH conditions, and their life can sometimes be chaotic. They get medicated for things they never had. Same for late diagnosed autism.
No one gets diagnosed with ADHD or autism, and suddenly is eligible for PIP. Their struggles will have been affecting them long before they even sought assessment.
No one pays for a private diagnosis. You pay for an assessment.

And the person you went to school with... if she has had her children removed, that is a pretty big indicator that she has significant struggles.

ADHD 49%
Autism 72%

Success rates.

And for context:

Bedwetting 35% (genuinely)

How else will it be funded?