13-week PIP transition period due to be confirmed
Details about how recipients will be transitioned to the new criteria for PIP is slowly being revealed
An MP has shed light on the government's Green Paper proposals for Welfare Reform, with the Department for Work and Pensions poised to unveil further details about the Welfare Reform Bill, including a "transitional period". This interim phase is designed to for people set to lose their Personal Independence Payments due to the reforms.
Dr Simon Opher, a GP and the MP for Stroud, disclosed on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, as reported by Daily Record, that a transitional phase will be introduced, allowing recipients to continue receiving payments for 13 weeks before their benefit is terminated.
This means that those affected by the benefit cuts will still receive their entitlements for 13 weeks beyond the initial cut-off date, offering them time to prepare and budget for the end of their benefits.
Carers, who are at risk of losing their Carer's Allowance when the person they care for loses PIP, will also continue to receive their allowance throughout the 13-week transition, until the PIP award ends.
Dr Opher expressed his intention "to rebel" against these proposals in an imminent vote, marking the first occasion he plans to oppose the Government. He indicated that several of his colleagues are contemplating similar actions.
He acknowledged that the proposed transitional period has been extended from an initial four weeks. But he remains critical of the planned changes, describing it as nothing more than "a slight delay in the disability cuts".
Explaining further, he added "It doesn't change the basic fact that they're planning to cut disability payments to quite a lot of people really. So not terribly impressed, but it's something at least."
Since Liz Kendall confirmed the reform in March, there's been widespread outcry from MPs, disability charities, and PIP recipients against the upcoming changes set for November 2026.
The Green Paper has launched a consultation period, urging the public to contribute their opinions on the undecided aspects of these reforms, pivotal among them being how benefits will be transitionally protected for those affected. In a bid to reduce costs while maintaining support through PIP for future claimants, the Government aims to save £5 billion each year by the end of this decade.
Government impact assessments have indicated that approximately 250,000 people, 50,000 of whom are children throughout England, Scotland, and Wales, are at risk of slipping into relative poverty after housing expenses as a result of these policy shifts.
This reformation will influence new applicants and current recipients undergoing reassessment for the daily living component of PIP. Under the new rules, claimants need to accumulate four points in any one of the categories to qualify during the assessment process.
The assessments comprise ten categories with scoring based on the type of help, supervision, or equipment individuals necessitate to perform activities promptly, effectively, and safely.
For instance, being able to prepare and cook a simple meal unaided is worth no points. But if you cannot prepare or cook food at all you could score up to eight points in that category.
The reform proposes several other changes including:.
Ending reassessments for disabled individuals who will never be able to work
Abolishing the Work Capability Assessment
Offering improved employment support to eliminate the barriers preventing disabled people from working
Introducing legislation to protect those on health and disability benefits from reassessment or losing their payments if they take a chance on work
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
17 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Government recognises financial challenge in mitigating two-child cap
Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said applications will open for mitigation of the welfare policy on March 2, with payments being made 'as soon as possible' afterwards – meaning it will likely take place just ahead of the Scottish Parliament election. She said the move will lift 20,000 children out of relative poverty, according to Scottish Government estimates. However the minister also told MSPs she is 'deeply disappointed' that Scotland's interim child poverty targets have not been met, saying there is no single reason for them being missed. Plans to mitigate the two-child cap were first announced last year but First Minister John Swinney said his Government needed time to set up the system. Introduced under the Conservatives, the two-child cap limits benefits in most cases to the first two children born after April 2017. Labour has cited fiscal constraints for keeping the cap, but in May the Prime Minister said he will be 'looking at all options' to tackle child poverty. Ms Somerville said Scotland cannot wait for a decision at Westminster and implementing it in March – 15 months after the initial announcement – will be the fastest a new social security has even been introduced in Scotland. Following an announcement on Tuesday morning, Ms Somerville addressed MSPs on the Government's 'tackling child poverty delivery plan'. She said it is 'deeply disappointing' that interim child poverty targets have not been met, but rates are nevertheless coming down, and she pledged to 'build on that progress' ahead of 2030 targets. Conservative MSP Liz Smith pressed the minister on how the mitigation policy will be funded, saying the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) has noted a 'widening gap' between the Scottish Government's welfare spending and its funding. She said: 'Can I ask where the other cuts will be made to pay for that mitigation?' Ms Somerville said her Government is 'resolute' in tackling economic inactivity, saying people should not be punished for having children. Decisions from the UK Government have pushed more people into poverty, she claimed. Discussing the SFC's forecasts, she said: 'Those are choices that we have taken – to ensure that we are protecting disabled people and children. 'Because we need to protect them from the effects of poverty. 'Those are decisions which will obviously be set out in the work that is being taken forward by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance as we look to the sustainability of our finances. 'We recognise that challenge.' She said the 'easiest way to deal with that challenge' would be for the UK Government to scrap the two-child cap and proposals to cut disabled benefits. Scottish Labour's Paul O'Kane said: 'For all the rhetoric we've had from the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary after 18 years in office, relative child poverty after housing costs has only fallen by 1%. 'When the Cabinet Secretary says rates are broadly stable, what she means is that the dial hasn't shifted.' The Scottish Fiscal Commission said the mitigation will cost around £150 million next year, before rising to nearly £200 million by the end of the decade. Ms Somerville said around 43,000 children would benefit initially, rising to 50,000 by the end of the decade. In March, the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned the policy could harm incentives to work because some of the lowest-paid workers could earn more on welfare than in employment. The move has been welcomed by anti-poverty charities, who have urged the UK Government to scrap the cap, with the Child Poverty Action Group saying the move would lift 350,000 children across the UK out of poverty.
Cambrian News
31 minutes ago
- Cambrian News
'Startling' waiting times for children's community healthcare
The RCPCH has called on the Welsh Government to deliver on its long-standing ambition of care closer to home by investing in early years support and ensuring adequate staffing across disciplines like community paediatrics, speech and language therapy, and mental health.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Salary secrets: pay transparency is great – until you hear what your slacker colleague earns
Name: Pay transparency. Age: Merely a twinkle in government ministers' eyes. Appearance: Potentially a bit can of worms-y. You can't have a problem with pay transparency. It's a good thing! It is! It highlights and helps tackle gender, ethnicity, age and disability pay gaps for a start, which is why the UK government is looking at ways to promote more openness around what people earn. They should make nonsensically vague salary info in job ads illegal for starters. Don't tell me it's 'competitive' – tell me if I'll be able to afford to eat. You're in luck – one suggestion is making employers include salary bracket or specific salary in job ads. Others include banning asking candidates about their pay history and making the provision of clear information on pay structures and career progression mandatory. Didn't the EU do something similar recently? Yes, the EU Pay Transparency Directive, which comes into force next year, introduces similar measures – it also bans pay secrecy clauses, which stop employees from discussing their salaries with colleagues. Good stuff. So what is the problem? Well, speaking of discussing what you earn, one of the other measures the UK is considering is 'providing employees with information on their pay level and how their pay compares with those doing the same role or work of equal value'. So? That sounds positive. You know your colleague, Darren? The wastrel who moseys in at five to 10, scrolls through his socials for an hour then disappears to the gents until 12, takes two hours for lunch and leaves at four? Yep, that Darren. Well, imagine finding out he's earning 20 grand more than you? Is he????? I don't know. But what if, under these new proposed rules, you found out that he was? I would go full Godzilla, ripping through the open space screaming, tearing out cables and kicking over bins. You see the problem. There's a certain potential for, let's say, tension, if people find out they're earning less than their colleagues (especially crap ones). But, come on, how likely is it that employers will be forced, or choose, to reveal specific individualised information on who earns exactly what? Admittedly, very unlikely – this is all still theoretical. But look what happened when the BBC published pay bracket information on presenters? All hell broke loose! You mean a scandalous gender pay gap was exposed and addressed? I see your point. But we're funny about money – a 2021 poll found 36% of British people don't even tell their spouses what they earn. Pay transparency provisions are definitely a good thing, but this could get messy. Do say: 'So how much do you earn?' Don't say: '£7,840 more than you and I'm worth every penny, Darren.'
