Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Welfare spending to rise by £73.2bn to £406.2bn

1000 replies

topicalaffair · 23/01/2026 14:25

Over the next five years, the OBR is forecasting that UK welfare spending will rise by £73.2bn to £406.2bn.

How does everyone feel about this? I’m livid because I pay lots of tax. I don’t mind paying tax to maintain a civilised society - but this? This is surely taking the piss and will result in weaker and weaker services as the amount of £ available reduces day by day.

YANBU - it’s totally deranged. The every growing uk population can’t function effectively on such a benefits for all basis.

YABU - this welfare spending bill is truly representative of need.

Welfare spending to rise by £73.2bn to £406.2bn
OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
DotAndCarryOne2 · 24/01/2026 13:42

OonaStubbs · 24/01/2026 13:31

Why should he get extra money because he was addicted to drugs? People who never did drugs who do the same job won't be getting that extra money. That's not right.

He doesn’t get extra money for being addicted to drugs. Drug addiction is not a disability. If he’s claiming PIP, then it’s been awarded on the basis of having a separate disability or one caused by the drug addiction. PIP is not awarded to addicts just because they are addicts, and if he has a legitimate disability, then the payments are justified.

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:44

Honestly I see a lot of people every week claiming PIP and a lot of those ‘disabilities’ do not prevent them engaging in virtually everything apart from work (where they are unemployed).

District66 · 24/01/2026 13:50

KeepOnCleaning · 24/01/2026 13:38

My dh has lived here since he was 25. Now 52. He has worked all these years, earns over £100k so makes significant contributions, won't have a pension from his home country because he's never worked there as an adult to contribute. He also has a significant private pension here from employment contributions. You don't think he deserves his state pension here?

No, because this is the problem. Nobody is entitled to a state pension.
It’s a gamble if he’d lost both his legs the second week that he was in the country he would’ve benefited from all of the infrastructure that would’ve allowed him to survive. Maybe work.
Maybe not
You don’t pay into the part to receive something at the end. It’s just not how national insurance works. The clue is in the word Insurance.

DotAndCarryOne2 · 24/01/2026 13:51

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:44

Honestly I see a lot of people every week claiming PIP and a lot of those ‘disabilities’ do not prevent them engaging in virtually everything apart from work (where they are unemployed).

PIP doesn’t assess for work, it assesses the extent to which a claimants condition stops them from participating in ordinary life. The aim of the benefit actually to allow disabled people to engage in things they wouldn’t be able to do without the extra funds. Everything costs more when you’re disabled.

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:56

DotAndCarryOne2 · 24/01/2026 13:51

PIP doesn’t assess for work, it assesses the extent to which a claimants condition stops them from participating in ordinary life. The aim of the benefit actually to allow disabled people to engage in things they wouldn’t be able to do without the extra funds. Everything costs more when you’re disabled.

I know that, that’s why I specified ‘where they’re unemployed’.

Genevieva · 24/01/2026 13:56

Europe is 12% of the world’s population, 25% of the world’s GDP and 60% of the world’s welfare spending. The UK is fairly average within Europe, but we are all impoverishing future generations to pay for welfare spending now. It is causing investment to flee. The founder of Revolut moved to Dubai recently. His tax receipts in the UK were the equivalent of 400,000 average workers. A lot of moderately well off people are leaving too. Those of us left behind are not rich enough to pick up the bill caused by the lost tax revenue and job opportunities. It look like state funded welfare, along with the economies of European countries in general, is speeding towards an almighty crash.

Cappuccinodelight · 24/01/2026 13:57

EligibleTern · 24/01/2026 13:06

If I could do something radical, I'd make it illegal to privately rent out a home. Huge upfront investment from the government/councils to buy every single rental property (the owners wouldn't be forced to sell them, but they couldn't rent them out), and then all of them become council-administered, with transparent, consistent rent bands and maintenance standards. It shouldn't be possible for people and companies to profit from other people's need for housing in the way that has taken hold in the UK over the past few decades.

Let's say your wish is granted and there are no more private landlords. Are all the tenants going to purchase their property? I think a fair few landlords woukd be happy with this outcome. Nothing stopping the tenants buying now I fact.

if they dont buy where will they live? Councils cant have compulsory purchase orders on all these ex private landlord properties. The landlord would just put a family member in the property.

Where are councils getting the additional money, to house prople? The rich are leaving the country and higher tate tax payers are retiring early reducing their tax bill.

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:58

FreyasCats · 24/01/2026 08:12

What solution would work, do you think, for the old, disabled, the chronically poor? Starve us to death? Leave us on an isolated hillside somewhere in a snowstorm?

No matter how fortunate you are right now, or how immune you think you are, anyone can find themselves in a situation where they need help, especially after COVID. Many of those who gave their all to keep the population alive have had conditions triggered by either the disease or the vaccines and are now living with chronic consequences.

There's a nurse in my family who will never work again. Should we kick her out on the street and leave her to rot.

Ok but what happens when so many people are ‘disabled’ and elderly that there simply isn’t the tax revenue or rigorous economy to provide those benefits any more?

This isn’t a moral question, it’s a financial one. Nobody ever answers it

Allseeingallknowing · 24/01/2026 14:00

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:44

Honestly I see a lot of people every week claiming PIP and a lot of those ‘disabilities’ do not prevent them engaging in virtually everything apart from work (where they are unemployed).

Exactly!

DotAndCarryOne2 · 24/01/2026 14:01

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:58

Ok but what happens when so many people are ‘disabled’ and elderly that there simply isn’t the tax revenue or rigorous economy to provide those benefits any more?

This isn’t a moral question, it’s a financial one. Nobody ever answers it

The answer is you stop making disability benefits available to everyone with a health condition and take it right back to its original meaning - to help those with permanent and substantial disability. The scope has been widened much too far and as a result those for whom the benefit was originally intended will lose out when the funds are exhausted.

Allseeingallknowing · 24/01/2026 14:02

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:36

65% of people claiming UC do not work.

And if they do, it’s only 16 hours, so they don’t lose benefits

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 14:02

The fact is we need more people to work and only those with verifiable expenses to receive PIP and DLA. There are people using the money for ‘rainy day savings’, ISAs, holidays… we can no longer afford these luxuries. If your disability is costly you should have no problem producing receipts and an amount should be agreed from there.

I’m disabled, don’t claim PIP but could easily produce receipts and hard evidence of what I spend if needed. It isn’t at all degrading or insulting to suggest people should only claim money they actually need. Not just some kind of stipend because ‘you have a condition and therefore just deserve an extra something’.

Allseeingallknowing · 24/01/2026 14:04

Perhaps something like Remploy could be reintroduced?

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 14:04

Allseeingallknowing · 24/01/2026 14:02

And if they do, it’s only 16 hours, so they don’t lose benefits

Yep. I see this endlessly - ‘anyone know if any jobs 16 hours or will affect UC’

There was a group moan on Facebook recently as they had the audacity to ask a woman to start job hunting as her youngest was nearly school age ‘but I want to be there for my kids before/after school, not dump them in clubs’. This person has had 4 kids with gaps of several years so she hasn’t worked in something like 12 years, benefits galore!

District66 · 24/01/2026 14:06

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:58

Ok but what happens when so many people are ‘disabled’ and elderly that there simply isn’t the tax revenue or rigorous economy to provide those benefits any more?

This isn’t a moral question, it’s a financial one. Nobody ever answers it

They can always find the money for a war

Julen7 · 24/01/2026 14:06

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 14:04

Yep. I see this endlessly - ‘anyone know if any jobs 16 hours or will affect UC’

There was a group moan on Facebook recently as they had the audacity to ask a woman to start job hunting as her youngest was nearly school age ‘but I want to be there for my kids before/after school, not dump them in clubs’. This person has had 4 kids with gaps of several years so she hasn’t worked in something like 12 years, benefits galore!

She’ll carry on too, will probably get herself on LCWRA next.

YesSirICanNameChange · 24/01/2026 14:07

Maybe we could force companies to give disabled people trying to get back into the workplace priority over career changers who already have jobs.

If this is really about getting disabled people back into jobs, why can I be viewed less favourably compared to an equally qualified candidate because my last work experience was two years ago?

EligibleTern · 24/01/2026 14:14

Cappuccinodelight · 24/01/2026 13:57

Let's say your wish is granted and there are no more private landlords. Are all the tenants going to purchase their property? I think a fair few landlords woukd be happy with this outcome. Nothing stopping the tenants buying now I fact.

if they dont buy where will they live? Councils cant have compulsory purchase orders on all these ex private landlord properties. The landlord would just put a family member in the property.

Where are councils getting the additional money, to house prople? The rich are leaving the country and higher tate tax payers are retiring early reducing their tax bill.

I explained in the post - the properties would be bought by the government (they would have to borrow to do this, and it would be an enormous investment, but I think over time it would more than pay for itself financially and in societal wellbeing). If people don't want to sell their property then they're fine to put a family member in, but they can't rent it out for money. The councils would collect rent on the properties, like they do now with council housing, and so their income would massively increase. More money would go back into the state rather than into e.g. overseas investment companies.

Cappuccinodelight · 24/01/2026 14:17

EligibleTern · 24/01/2026 14:14

I explained in the post - the properties would be bought by the government (they would have to borrow to do this, and it would be an enormous investment, but I think over time it would more than pay for itself financially and in societal wellbeing). If people don't want to sell their property then they're fine to put a family member in, but they can't rent it out for money. The councils would collect rent on the properties, like they do now with council housing, and so their income would massively increase. More money would go back into the state rather than into e.g. overseas investment companies.

Basically Councils would go bankrupt?

District66 · 24/01/2026 14:20

Cappuccinodelight · 24/01/2026 14:17

Basically Councils would go bankrupt?

Councils could buy outright at least 80 properties in my locality per year just with the interest that they generate on the money that they have in their account accounts if they didn’t have them in the Natwest current account. Which I believe they are required to do due to regulator restrictions
But there’s no other organisation that allows several million pounds to sit in a literal basic current account

Roboxed · 24/01/2026 14:21

DotAndCarryOne2 · 24/01/2026 14:01

The answer is you stop making disability benefits available to everyone with a health condition and take it right back to its original meaning - to help those with permanent and substantial disability. The scope has been widened much too far and as a result those for whom the benefit was originally intended will lose out when the funds are exhausted.

I thought that’s where we were now? Disability benefits aren’t available to everyone with a health condition are they? I thought many who were entitled also lost out as they didn’t have the capacity to apply or appeal.

EligibleTern · 24/01/2026 14:24

Cappuccinodelight · 24/01/2026 14:17

Basically Councils would go bankrupt?

Do you think council housing is provided for free?

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 14:28

District66 · 24/01/2026 14:06

They can always find the money for a war

🥱

District66 · 24/01/2026 14:30

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 14:28

🥱

I know peoples livelihood and existence and survival is just so fucking boring isn’t it?

Penelope23145 · 24/01/2026 14:30

Playingvideogames · 24/01/2026 13:44

Honestly I see a lot of people every week claiming PIP and a lot of those ‘disabilities’ do not prevent them engaging in virtually everything apart from work (where they are unemployed).

PIP is not an out of work benefit but I absolutely get what you're saying. The PIP system needs serious reform.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.