Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Reform want to cut PIP

1000 replies

Daygloboo · 16/08/2026 09:15

Reform want to cut benefits for disabled people. They want businesses to pay more towards sickness etc. I find it repulsive that they want to do this. When will people understand that they are a bunch of self interested sharks who want to make a stack of dosh for themselves while in govt and that they font give a damn about anyone in need. Why cant the most vulnerable ppl who vote for them see thus. It's astonishing. It's ac joke. I eish ppl who get what Reform.iscreally about and how it manipulates would make sn extra effort to tslk to.ppl who dont seem to get it.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
GCAcademic · 16/08/2026 10:51

Morethanadecade · 16/08/2026 10:43

But pip is an in-work benefit. I know quite a few people who get it - they are blind or completely deaf - and they all have full-time jobs.

I’m not just talking about PIP. They will cut all benefits, except possibly pensions. If you “send back” all those people with ILR working in jobs that the native population doesn’t want to do, you are going to have to somehow make the remaining people do those jobs.

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:51

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:49

3 x DLA probably is the equivalent of a good full time wage.

In fact I just checked DLA for 3 children would bring in £9,336 every 4 weeks

FirstdatesFred · 16/08/2026 10:51

@Jellycatspyjamas and @x2boys those are good points and I agree it can sometimes add general costs or make it harder to work.
i receive DLA for one of my dc with autism. I have additional costs such as continence products, replacing clothes that she chews through, and household items that she destroys. But truthfully if I’m honest in our particular case what we get (she was awarded middle rate care and lower rate mobility I think), is quite a lot and is more than the costs I incur Id say. I try to remember it’s “hers” and it does mean I can take her to things she might enjoy without worrying about what if we have to leave half way through and have wasted money etc. but it just feels like quite a blunt instrument.

KnittingBasket · 16/08/2026 10:52

Livelovebehappy · 16/08/2026 10:36

Sounds good to me. Too many people climbing on this particular gravy train. And the fact you can claim regardless of whether you earn £150 a week or £150k a week is absolutely obscene. Of course people are going to rant and stamp their feet. Hard to have to give up something so generous when you’re used to getting it. The UK is slowing sinking to the level of a third world country. We need to save money, and in my opinion the first issue to look at is the Welfare bill.

You have never been to a 'third world country' have you.

TheFairyCaravan · 16/08/2026 10:53

Meadowfinch · 16/08/2026 10:27

I spent the last two years working with Motability customers. Changes were made in July so claimants could no longer choose luxury models like BMW, Mercedes, Lexus etc. The lease now covers 10,000 miles a year rather than 20,000. Tyres are limited to six in a three year lease rather than unlimited. Insurance coverage has been tightened. They tried to include a black box style tracker but made such a hash of it, that has been suspended.

Now the scheme offers a more basic car to people who genuinely need one, and fewer people are applying for them because they can't have all the bells and whistles, leather seats and high end marques.

A sensible compromise.

That’s bullshit.

Tyres were never unlimited on Motabitly cars, there was always a restriction. Prior to July 2026 it was 8 over a 3 year period, now it’s 6. Fewer people are applying for them because they’ve massively restricted the mileage and increased a huge fee if you do go over the mileage. It’s got nothing to do with them removing BMWs, Mercedes, Audis and Lexus. The removal of the “luxury” cars was a knee-jerk, shortsighted reaction by Rachel Reeves to what the Right Wing were doing. The Skoda I currently have on Motabitly had a retail price of £18k more than the BMW I had previously but no one kicks off over a Skoda. And if I want another Skoda, exactly the same as I have now, with leather seats and “all the bells and whistles” I can because it’s still on the scheme. And I’m probably going to get one, too.

Reform were always going to do this. They’ve been banging on about PIP and Motability for years. They’re absolutely subhumans who will always go for the people who can fight back the least. It will be another group soon, probably single parents.

probablyamunreasonable · 16/08/2026 10:53

There seems to be a lot of confusion on this thread.

Disability Living Allowance is the payment for eligible children under 16

PIP is the payment for people between 16 and state pension age

Attendance Allowance is for applicants over state pension age.

PillsBox · 16/08/2026 10:53

My ex husband claims PIP after having a cancerous testicle removed two years ago.

He openly says it affects his day to day living not one jot, yet he's still very happy with the extra income.

Daygloboo · 16/08/2026 10:53

Dollymylove · 16/08/2026 10:28

They need to start employing more fraud investigators on surveillance. Weed out all the ones who come out on crutches, get jnto their taxpayer funded motor, park up in the next town and go and do park run

I doubt there are hoards of these types but fraudsters do need to be tackled.

OP posts:
TemperanceWest · 16/08/2026 10:53

Rowgtfc72 · 16/08/2026 10:50

I have two friends who claim Pip, neither have worked a day in their lives, have openly said they dont intend to ever work and go about their everyday lives, gym, holidays, meals out etc.
I also work with people whose illnesses are not severe enough to claim Pip, but their illnesses impact greatly their everyday lives, they come to work in pain and leave in pain.

There has to be some sort of reform - I'm not looking at you Mr Farage - but what we have now is unfair and unsustainable.

I am having fun playing bullshit bingo on this thread 🤣

emuloc · 16/08/2026 10:53

Rowgtfc72 · 16/08/2026 10:50

I have two friends who claim Pip, neither have worked a day in their lives, have openly said they dont intend to ever work and go about their everyday lives, gym, holidays, meals out etc.
I also work with people whose illnesses are not severe enough to claim Pip, but their illnesses impact greatly their everyday lives, they come to work in pain and leave in pain.

There has to be some sort of reform - I'm not looking at you Mr Farage - but what we have now is unfair and unsustainable.

If their illness greatly impacts their lives, and has done so for more than 3 months, and is ongoing, then why would they not be eligible for PIP?

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:53

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:51

In fact I just checked DLA for 3 children would bring in £9,336 every 4 weeks

Sorry correction - £3112 a month for 3 children

SpottyAlpaca · 16/08/2026 10:54

This is Jenrick’s article in today’s Torygraph which sets out Reform’s policy on PIP :

Dumping young people on welfare isn’t compassion, it’s neglect
Reform has a detailed plan to fix the benefits system to save billions and ensure the right help reaches the right people

It is a strange perversion of compassion to tell a young man with anxiety that he is beyond work.
Work – structure, purpose, the company of others – is precisely what recovery from anxiety requires. Yet, in Labour’s first year in office, almost 250 people received benefits for anxiety or mood disorders every single day.
A few weeks ago, I met one of them.
Twenty-three-years-old, he lives on a Newark housing estate in his childhood bedroom.
A little under two years ago, he was struggling frankly with routine and adult responsibility but also his mental health. He was signed off sick from his first proper job. Shortly after, he got a letter confirming he didn’t need to look for another job, and money began arriving. Nobody from the state has telephoned since.
His mental health has grown much worse. In short, he had no plans, no hope, and little thought for the future. I asked whether he was happier when he was working or now? He paused, sighed, and admitted life was much better before.
Like many, he had not chosen this life, not really. But now he was living it; any alternative seemed impossible.
Multiply him by millions, and you have the moral and economic catastrophe we face in our country today.
Some 6.9 million people are now entitled to receive disability benefits – 2.5 million more than 20 years ago. More than 20,000 join the Personal Independence Payment caseload each month, and two-thirds of those who began claiming in 2017 were still claiming five years later.
By 2031, health and disability benefits will cost £110bn a year: £3,600 for every family in the country. This is not an epidemic of broken backs and lost limbs. Since 2002, the share of working-age people claiming for mental and behavioural conditions has tripled.
This is not generosity. It is suicidal empathy.
Nor is it what the welfare state meant to be. William Beveridge, architect of the post-war welfare state, called “idleness” one of the five great giant evils the system was meant to tackle.
And yet, our political class pussyfoots around tackling the problem for fear of the backlash – it’s pure cynicism.
To me it’s a moral crisis. And it needs to change. In the words of Beveridge, this is “a time for revolutions, not for patching”.
And yet, for 10 years, ministers of both parties have patched and patched and patched again. The Government’s own review concedes that PIP no longer works; yet when Labour attempted even modest savings last summer, its backbenchers forced ministers to gut their own bill within days.
The Conservatives, who presided over most of this growth, now propose to trim it at the edges. Their ideas are paper thin, literally – two pages, that could have been written on the back of a fag packet. It’s tragic that this emergency is being neglected in this way.
Nigel Farage and I are not prepared to do that.

Robert Jenrick said he and Nigel Farage will ‘save the welfare state, and we’ll do it by revolutionising it’ Credit: Peter Nicholls
On Monday, Reform will publish Making Welfare Work: a 50-page plan for the most comprehensive redesign of the welfare system’s machinery in a generation.
The scale is enormous.
The Coalition’s welfare savings under Iain Duncan Smith, then regarded as the outer limit of political possibility, totalled £20.5bn. The Conservatives today propose £23bn.
Our changes – which go far beyond disability benefits – are more than double that.
£22bn of our reforms take the form of changes to the disability programme alone.
Each of them has that young man in my constituency in mind.
Under our plan, he would not be on benefits.
Rather, under our Return to Work Cover, he’d still be connected to his employer, who would have a strong economic incentive to return him to work. It is based on the Dutch system, where applications for disability benefits fell by 40 per cent.
If he didn’t return to work within two years, he’d go through a single, rigorous Disability Needs Assessment, which would replace today’s overlapping web of failing tests. Conducted in person, by clinicians, it would screen out vexatious and fraudulent claims.
And, for those with lower-level conditions, rather than a cheque, they’d get help. Cash payments for low-level conditions will end and be replaced with Disability Support Accounts, run by local councils and mayors.
These will cover the verified additional costs of lower-level forms of disability – from equipment and adaptations to transport and personal assistance.
Services can be tailored to local needs. There can be innovation. How services are provided in Herefordshire need not match Haringey.
Meanwhile, Health Security Allowance, a new form of regularly reviewed payment, will continue to support the gravely ill and severely challenged. Let me be very clear, we will never let down those who need it. In fact, these changes secure the system for those who deserve it for decades to come.
I’m not going to sit by and watch
We will not pretend this is painless. Existing claimants will be reassessed over three to four years: we estimate that 2.16 million will keep their present cash entitlement in full, while 2.89 million will see theirs modified or withdrawn, concentrated where recent growth has been most explosive.
And because the objective is recovery rather than warehousing, we will invest an extra £1.85bn a year in talking therapies, physiotherapy and employment support.
The aim? To end the era in which fewer than one in a hundred Universal Credit health claimants now moves into a job each month.
Growing up in Wolverhampton amidst the dislocation and deindustrialisation of the Black Country, I saw why the welfare state matters. Why it’s needed.
Why we owe an obligation to those in desperate need. Why, when hard times hit, the state must be there to support people through it.
But dumping our young people onto welfare isn’t compassion; it’s neglect.
We are not lifting people out of misfortune. We are abandoning them to it, and calling it kindness.
Unlike the other parties, I’m not going to sit by and watch. Now, we stop patching. Britain is broken, but it can be fixed with real change.
We’ll save the welfare state, and we’ll do it by revolutionising it.

Marroon · 16/08/2026 10:54

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:51

In fact I just checked DLA for 3 children would bring in £9,336 every 4 weeks

For 3 children or 30? 😂

LathkillDale · 16/08/2026 10:54

Livelovebehappy · 16/08/2026 10:36

Sounds good to me. Too many people climbing on this particular gravy train. And the fact you can claim regardless of whether you earn £150 a week or £150k a week is absolutely obscene. Of course people are going to rant and stamp their feet. Hard to have to give up something so generous when you’re used to getting it. The UK is slowing sinking to the level of a third world country. We need to save money, and in my opinion the first issue to look at is the Welfare bill.

Meanwhile, people earning £150,000 pa can pay £36,000 into their personal pension and the government pays in another £24,000 for them.

What do you think is the bigger cost to taxpayers - £22.9 billion for the higher rate pensions relief or £21.7 billion for PIP?

Then, there’s the state subsidy of public sector pensions (except local government) costing £55 billion, and building up a liability for future tax payers of over £1 trillion?

Somersetbaker · 16/08/2026 10:54

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:51

In fact I just checked DLA for 3 children would bring in £9,336 every 4 weeks

I'm sure the parents would rather not have 3 disabled children. It's a sad thing if people are actually jealous that others are disabled.

TemperanceWest · 16/08/2026 10:54

PillsBox · 16/08/2026 10:53

My ex husband claims PIP after having a cancerous testicle removed two years ago.

He openly says it affects his day to day living not one jot, yet he's still very happy with the extra income.

What a load of, er, bollocks.

Coconutter24 · 16/08/2026 10:55

Daygloboo · 16/08/2026 09:31

Yeah and we all know what that means. It's just an excuse to pull the rug out from ppl who are struggling. It is such hypocrisy. Ppl allegedly taking millions for themselves in bungs while wishing to stop meagre amounts to support the most vulnerable. And all disguised as sensible fair policies . You must think we all came down in the last rain shower. And I cant imagine any of them wanting to put in the hard yards if they got into office. They'd all be wanting to swan off to other places securing deals that would make life even easier for billionaires while letting everybody else starve. Yuck.

It’s not about pulling the rug out from under people that are struggling. It does need an overhaul because there are so many people on it that have some how managed to get it but actually don’t need it. Those that need it will still get financial support

GiaGia16 · 16/08/2026 10:55

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:51

In fact I just checked DLA for 3 children would bring in £9,336 every 4 weeks

😲

SodOffbacktoaibu · 16/08/2026 10:55

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:32

This is exactly the thing I want to hear from a mainstream government. Cutting benefits is a key issue for me. I am sick of working my ass off for not much return. Meanwhile people claim tax free PIP are swanning around with a better lifestyle than us.

we went on holiday abroad recently and met a family with 3 kids, we got talking to them, they were in low wage occupations so wondered how they could afford the holiday, they then told us that all 3 kids had autism, so the PIP was paying for it no doubt.

Fuck me what a miserable post. So if they have X3 kids who are severely autistic and caring for those kids at home, they are doing a job that otherwise would fall to the state.

I just asked Ai how much they'd get in DLA (PIP is after age 16)... They basically get a slightly higher than minimum wage salary for X3 kids at maximum rate of benefit.

You have no idea how they paid for their holiday. Maybe family members helped them. Fcking hell ... knowing a friend with a child like this, I would happily chip in myself if it meant giving that child and parents some happiness. And I am not on a high salary either!

Don't begrudge that family because you're not happy with your life. How about looking at why the 1% aren't paying more?!

shiningstar2 · 16/08/2026 10:55

So many people are against supportive benefits ...until one day somebody in their own family need them.
People can't seem to see that when we get rid of a benefit today ...because I'm alright Jack ...it won't be there tomorrow when they or a loved one needs it.
Its's the same when people talk about pensions etc ...and this is also controversial. People can't seem to see that if we get rid of measures that protect stste pensions today governments sent going to put them back later when the cost of living has eroded them.
Be careful what we wish for ...we'll all need the pension unless we unfortunately die before we get it. No one knows whether they'll end up disabled and need financial support. I can't understand why, in this uncertain world, when none of us know what's around the corner for us, some of us want to erode what, someday, we might need ourselves.

Cushionseams · 16/08/2026 10:56

Coconutter24 · 16/08/2026 09:22

You haven’t put any information about what they would replace it with, so you’ve given half a story. They would instead have a Health security allowance but only the ‘severe, enduring and high-risk cases’ would receive cash support. So those that absolutely need it will get financial support. Which is how it should be.

They didn't bother to release any information about what they would replace it with.
Probably because they have absolutely not got a fucking clue.

I think they're showing themselves to be what they are. And those who have voted for them might come to their senses.

DancingInPuddles · 16/08/2026 10:56

I find it weird that the “I work really hard and what do I get?” crowd don’t focus their ire on housing prices, energy costs, the rising cost of a weekly shop, the job market, stagnant salaries, huge businesses avoiding tax, the cost of living in general or anything else making life difficult right now and instead think, “well, I’d be fine if disabled people had their benefits cut!”

Coconutter24 · 16/08/2026 10:57

Lomonald · 16/08/2026 09:58

So how would they decide who gets this ?

I am not sure why I responded to you because there is no reasoning with views like yours or theirs.

Edited

My views?

So those that absolutely need it will get financial support. Which is how it should be.

You don’t agree with that?

Marroon · 16/08/2026 10:58

GiaGia16 · 16/08/2026 10:55

😲

It’s shocking because it’s completely and utterly false information.

emuloc · 16/08/2026 10:58

happybug1234 · 16/08/2026 10:53

Sorry correction - £3112 a month for 3 children

You seem to be having a lot of trouble getting your facts right, as is evident from your posts.🙄

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.