But that's the issue. Someone can get PIP based on "........ how someone is affected by their disability or condition."
If you have a physical disability, then it is more or less clear to demonstrate and prove how their disability affects them.
However, if someone has a mental health issue, then unless you have severe autism and are non verbal, are seriously mentally disabled and need constant care, or have been sectioned numerous times and are a danger to themselves or others, then often the affect of the condition is always going to be self reported, subjective. It can be self reported to GPs, hospital consultants and they may agree, based on observations of them, but primarily on what the patient tells them.
So, when there are multiple sources of information on the internet about the affect of certain conditions, when there are numerous tutorials on-line about how to fill in the forms to achieve a successful PIP claim or other benefits, then surprise, surprise, we have a rocketing welfare bill.
Many people do qualify for and need benefits, but equally there are many people who have no qualms about exaggerating or inventing a condition, if it means they can get more money, or don't have to work.
And those that say, fraud within the PIP scheme is negligible, well when there are so few checks after getting PIP and other benefits, they will show that the numbers are low. Unless you do enough inestigations, they will never establish the true scale of the matter.
So many conditions can improve, with better social intereactions, better resilience building, better support. But as is the case with many benefits, once commenced, claimants won't say that they are better and no longer entitled to it, because like us all, if we have a specific income coming in we live up to it and then can't adjust to having less money.
However, an exponentially increasing welfare bill is unsustainable and will ultimately harm the life chances of future generations as well as bankrupting the country.
The Labour MPs who rebelled are forgetting who their core voters are supposed to be. The people that labour. The people that work for a living, that pay their taxes and in the main are responsible hard working citizens. They willingly support welfare to those in temporary need and to those who can never work due to severe life impacting physical and mental disabilities who need constant care from others.
However, there is an expectation of fairness in the country's social contract with each other. It's not always achievable, but in respect of workers and adult age non-workers who can work but choose not to work or say they will only do so if specific conditions of x, y and z are met (pensioners aside), the pendulum has swung too far and it needs rebalancing.
Welfare reform is vital and shouldn't be avoided. Also, some things can't be consulted on. Will the charities supporting disabled people and those with conditions really say, oh we don't need this and that? Of course not. It's like Turkeys voting for Christmas. It doesn't happen.