Benefit and Pip changes could be 'life or death'
Planned cuts to the benefit system could be a matter of life or death for some people, a claimant has said.The government plans to tighten the eligibility criteria for the Personal Independent Payment (Pip), which is paid to about 3.6m people who have a long-term physical or mental health condition.Chancellor Rachel Reeves set out her plans for the UK economy during her Spring Statement on Wednesday.A government spokesperson said all Pip assessments were conducted "rigorously and professionally".
Assessments for the daily living part of Pip will be tightened, which the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates will affect about 800,000 people.
'Guilty until proved innocent'
Shannon Doulis' life changed after she contracted Covid-19 four years ago, later developing chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia as a result of long Covid.The 28-year-old, who lives in Totton, Hampshire, gets £400 a month in Pip to pay for costs that she has incurred as a result of her illnesses."That £400 a month doesn't sound like much but it's a lifeline for me. It means when I do have to go out, I can pay for a taxi," she said."We're treated as if we're guilty of fraud until we're proven innocent by being allowed our benefits."You can't just say: we're not going to pay you, we think you should be working, so [be] better. It doesn't work like that," she said."I could try [going back to work]. But I know how it's going to end. That is why I lost my last job – because I wasn't well enough, I wasn't reliable enough."I would have to work a day and then have two weeks to recover and then maybe work another day. No one is going to employ me on that basis."
Sophie Brudenall, 24, from Slough, Berkshire, has the eye condition aniridia and has been claiming Pip for her visual impairment and mental health reasons since 2020.The university student said, during the "very difficult" assessments, it was as if the government was trying "to catch you out"."For people with more severe disabilities who are deemed to be not as severe as the government deem they should be [for Pip], it could be life or death," she says."They might not be able to pay for medication; they might not be able to pay for their accessible technology. Technology is not cheap if you're disabled."A Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) spokesperson said: "We support millions of people through our welfare system every year and it is a priority people receive the benefits they are entitled to as quickly as possible."All Pip assessments are conducted rigorously and professionally and are independently audited to ensure claimants are receiving the same high-quality service."
You can follow BBC Berkshire on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
40 minutes ago
- ITV News
Treasury technicalities plus party politics bring more attention for the North East
The Chancellor's big ticket items for the North East came early - which is somewhere between encouraging and disconcerting when we're talking about public transport projects. Around £2.8 billion from the Spending Review was announced last Wednesday for infrastructure in our region, including extending the Tyne and Wear Metro to Washington. By comparison, Rachel Reeves' big speech today was a bit of an anticlimax. In the small print afterwards, we found that areas of Newcastle, Middlesbrough and Stockton that 'have been too easily left behind' are to receive up to £20m over the next decade for things like improving parks and tackling graffiti. The government are calling them 'trailblazer neighbourhoods', which sounds a bit like a spoof initiative from The Thick Of It, and a lot like the Conservative governments' various funding pots for local regeneration schemes. The Tories talked a lot about what they called 'levelling up', with mixed results. Labour have talked less about tackling regional inequalities, but have made a technical tweak that might make a big difference. They've revised the Treasury's 'Green Book', used to judge value-for-money for investment. London and the South East normally deliver bigger bang for your buck, so have often been prioritised for new infrastructure. The government says: no more, wider impacts will be considered, so regions like ours will be able to compete. Despite some government departments having their budgets squeezed when it comes to day-to-day spending, there is money around for investment due to another tweak to government rules, around borrowing. Rachel Reeves made a passing promise today to set out the government's plans for 'Northern Powerhouse Rail' in the coming weeks. Campaigners say it should mean a high speed rail line from Liverpool to Hull, and up to the North East. It's hard not to be sceptical, given it's been talked about in many forms over many years. The Chancellor spoke quite a bit today about the government being focused on ensuring there's economic growth, and people have opportunity, in every part of the country. She also dedicated a fair amount of time to attacking Reform UK, reflecting the threat they pose to Labour, after their local election successes in places like County Durham. The Chancellor has been accused of doom and gloom in her first 11 months in office, focusing on what she claims has been a horrible inheritance from the Conservatives. With this Spending Review she tried to change gear and set out a more positive plan for the years ahead. The North East will hope to play a big part.
Belfast Telegraph
an hour ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Fact check: 2025 spending review claims
On Wednesday Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered the Labour Government's first spending review, outlining its spending plans for the next few years. We've taken a look at some of the key claims. How much is spending increasing by? At the start of her speech Ms Reeves announced that 'total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3% a year in real terms'. That headline figure doesn't tell the full story, however. Firstly, 2.3% is the average annual real-terms growth in total departmental budgets between 2023/24 and 2028/29. That means it includes spending changes that have already been implemented, for both the current (2025/26) and previous (2024/25) financial years. The average annual increase between this year and 2028/29 is 1.5%. Therefore, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said, 'most departments will have larger real-terms budgets at the end of the Parliament than the beginning, but in many cases much of that extra cash will have arrived by April'. Secondly, it's worth noting that the 2.3% figure includes both day-to-day (Resource DEL) and investment (Capital DEL) spending. Capital spending (which funds things like infrastructure projects) is increasing by 3.6% a year on average in real terms between 2023/24 and 2029/30, and by 1.8% between 2025/26 and 2029/30. Day-to-day departmental budgets meanwhile are seeing a smaller average annual real-terms increase – of 1.7% between 2023/24 and 2028/29 and 1.2% between 2025/26 and 2028/29. Which departments are the winners and losers? Ms Reeves touted substantial spending increases in some areas (for example, the 3% rise in day-to-day NHS spending in England), but unsurprisingly her statement did not focus on areas where spending will decrease. Changes to Government spending are not uniform across all departments, and alongside increases in spending on things like the NHS, defence and the justice system, a number of Government departments will see their budgets decrease in real terms. Departments facing real-terms reductions in overall and day-to-day spending include the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (this factors in reductions in aid spending announced earlier this year to offset increased defence spending), the Home Office (although the Government says the Home Office's budget grows in real terms if a planned reduction in asylum spending is excluded) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Did the Conservatives leave a '£22 billion black hole'? Ms Reeves made a claim we've heard a number of times since it first surfaced in July 2024 – that the previous Conservative government left a '£22 billion black hole in the public finances'. That figure comes from a Treasury audit that forecast a £22 billion overspend in departmental day-to-day spending in 2024/25, but the extent to which it was unexpected or inherited is disputed. The IFS said last year that some of the pressures the Government claimed contributed to this so-called 'black hole' could have been anticipated, but others did 'indeed seem to be greater than could be discerned from the outside'. An Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) review of its March 2024 forecast found an estimated £9.5 billion of additional spending pressures were known to the Treasury at that point in time, but were not known to the OBR as it prepared its forecast. It's true that this review didn't confirm the £22 billion figure, but it also did not necessarily prove that it was incorrect, because Labour's figure included pressures which were identified after the OBR prepared its forecast and so were beyond the scope of the OBR's review. We've written more about how the Government reached the figure of £22 billion in our explainer on this topic. How big is the increase in NHS appointments? Ms Reeves took the opportunity to congratulate Health Secretary Wes Streeting for delivering 'three-and-a-half million extra' hospital appointments in England. The Government has previously celebrated this as a 'massive increase', particularly in light of its manifesto pledge to deliver an extra two million appointments a year. Ms Reeves' claim was broadly accurate – data published last month shows there were 3.6 million additional appointments between July 2024 and February 2025 compared to the previous year. But importantly that increase is actually smaller than the 4.2 million rise that happened in the equivalent period the year before, under the Conservative government – as data obtained by Full Fact under the Freedom of Information Act and published last month revealed. What do announcements on asylum hotels, policing, nurseries and more mean for the Government's pledges? Ms Reeves made a number of announcements that appear to directly impact the delivery of several pre-existing Labour pledges, many of which we're already monitoring in our Government Tracker. (We'll be updating the tracker to reflect these announcements in due course, and reviewing how we rate progress on pledges as necessary). The Chancellor announced an average increase in 'police spending power' of 2.3% a year in real terms over the course of the review period, which she said was the equivalent of an additional £2 billion. However, as police budgets comprise a mix of central Government funding and local council tax receipts, some of this extra spending is expected to be funded by increases in council tax precepts. Ms Reeves said this funding would help the Government achieve its commitment of 'putting 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles in England and Wales', a pledge we're monitoring here. The spending review also includes funding of 'almost £370 million across the next four years to support the Government's commitment to deliver school-based nurseries across England', which Ms Reeves said would help the Government deliver its pledge to have 'a record number of children being school-ready'. The Chancellor also committed to ending the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament, with an additional £200 million announced to 'accelerate the transformation of the asylum system'. When we looked last month at progress on the Government's pledge to 'end asylum hotels' we said it appeared off track, as figures showed the number of asylum seekers housed in hotels was higher at the end of March 2025 than it was when Labour came into Government.
Belfast Telegraph
an hour ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Reeves ‘failed' to back English councils in spending review, MPs warn
©Press Association Rachel Reeves has faced warnings that she 'failed' to back English councils in the spending review, including authorities which are effectively bankrupt. Woking MP Will Forster called on the Chancellor to 'justify' a 'lack of investment' into local government, and Tory Lewis Cocking said Labour's spending plans were 'devastating' for the sector.
