Latest news with #benefitsCuts
The Guardian
27-05-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Labour is taking the Pip – and disabled people have had enough
Why have so many deaf, disabled and/or neurodivergent public figures pulled together to launch the campaign #TakingThePIP? Every area of life as a disabled person is difficult – employment, social situations, healthcare, education, transport and by far the most pervasive and arduous: other people's attitudes. Everything is a fight, but this feels like a fight too far. If Labour goes ahead with its proposed benefits cuts to tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payment (Pip) and reduce or lose the health element of universal credit, many people in my community don't know how they will survive. Make no bones about it: this could be a matter of life and death for some people. I am in tears reading the stories of what might happen if these further cuts, after years of austerity, go ahead. People who are currently choosing between using their electricity for breathing equipment or charging their wheelchair will no longer be able to afford either. People who need encouragement to eat will be left alone; people with mental health illnesses will be severely impacted, losing so much of their support alongside those people who are unable to wash or dress their lower body. Overall, households could lose up to 58% of their income, and these are the households already in poverty. Already in the last six years, homelessness among disabled families has risen by 75%. Three-quarters of food bank users have at least one disabled household member. What's going to happen when people can't use their Pip or the health component of their universal credit to top up their rent and bills? These disability benefits are crucial support that help towards the extra costs incurred with a disability or long-term health condition. Today I learned about a young woman with cerebral palsy whose family had been evicted. The temporary accommodation provided to them was not accessible, forcing her to use the toilet at the local bus station as her bathroom. This is the reality before the proposed funding cuts. Accessible housing is already rare; accessible emergency housing is almost nonexistent. Disabled people are routinely left out of planning decisions. We're not considered in everyday policies, let alone in times of crisis. Did you know that the last round of cuts stripped people of their basic right to full care? Many lost vital support, including help simply to use the toilet. In some cases, individuals who are not incontinent have been forced to rely on incontinence pads because there is no longer enough staffing or time allocated to assist them properly. Care packages were reduced to as little as six 15-minute visits a day, barely enough time to support someone with eating, washing or using the bathroom, never mind living their life. Evening and morning care were cut so severely that many adults can no longer choose when they go to bed or get up. Essential support for tasks such as food shopping or cleaning was also removed entirely. The government and the headlines keep focusing on getting disabled people 'back to work', yet the existing scheme to support disabled people in employment is broken. Access to Work already has nearly a year's waiting list for new applicants, and, according to leaks, the support worker element may be cut next. Only last week, the wonderful Jess Thom, the co-artistic director of Touretteshero, had her support cut by 61% by Access To Work. Those of us who can work want to work. Many people use Pip and universal credit to top up expenses that come alongside working. Some disabled people can only work part-time, and the benefits bridge this gap. These proposed cuts won't save money; they'll lead to greater costs from the resulting damage, along with widespread distress and suffering. Did you know that the fraud level for Pip remains less than 1% and that 46% of applications are refused – with a shocking 70% of those refusals that go to appeal being overturned. It's a gruelling system to navigate. There are 16 million disabled people in the UK – not even a quarter of those people currently receive Pip, and the ones who do are the most in need. We as a society need to stand together on this and demand that the government stop taking the Pip. Cherylee Houston MBE played Izzy Armstrong on Coronation Street and Tinsel Girl on BBC Radio 4. She is the founder of TripleC
BBC News
23-05-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Jittery Labour MPs divided over benefits cuts
This week, Sir Keir Starmer and his ministers redoubled their efforts to win over Labour MPs minded to join what could be the biggest rebellion yet against his of Labour MPs have raised concerns about benefits cuts worth £5bn a year by 2030 and their potential impact on disabled reforms to disability benefits have divided the party and left many pondering: what is Labour for, exactly?A "Labour cause" is how Sir Keir described the package of welfare reforms, at a meeting of his MPs on month, those MPs will have to decide whether that's a cause worth getting behind, when the benefits changes are voted on in Parliament for the first ministers come under pressure to water down their welfare plans, Labour MPs with different perspectives told the BBC where they stand. Conflicting values For critics, the prospect of a Labour government taking away social security payments from some sick and disabled people is at best unpalatable and at worst wasn't that long ago that one of the party's main focuses was opposing what it saw as the austerity spending cuts of the Conservative government, when the now-exiled Jeremy Corbyn was Labour Corbyn's leadership is long gone, that strain of thought lives on in the party - and it's in evidence among Labour MPs elected for the first time last Duncan-Jordan, the MP for Poole, is one of those and about 40 other Labour MPs signed a letter warning the welfare changes were "impossible to support" without a "change of direction"."No Labour MP comes into Parliament to make poor people poorer," he concerns him most are proposals to make it harder for disabled people with less severe conditions to claim personal independence payment (Pip).The welfare package as a whole could push an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, into relative poverty, according to the government's impact ministers have stressed the figures do not factor in the government's plans to spend £1bn on helping the long-term sick and disabled back into work, or its efforts to reduce poverty."What I think everyone accepts is that assisting people back to work who can work is a positive thing," Duncan-Jordan said. "But saying that you go to work or we cut your benefit, is not the way to do it and I don't think it's a Labour way either."And yet the "Labour way" is open to interpretation. For Alex Ballinger, who was elected as Labour MP for Halesowen last year, his party is about "increasing opportunities for the most vulnerable people in society"."We're about improving life outcomes and being ambitious for those people who maybe need a bit more encouragement," he said. "I think all those are things that could chime with Labour values."He said the most important aspect of the welfare reforms was the support for disabled people who want to work. It includes giving disabled people the right to try work without the risk of losing their welfare hope these efforts will boost employment among benefits recipients, at a time when 2.8 million people are economically inactive due to long-term nothing changes, the health and disability benefits bill is forecast to reach £70bn a year by the end of the decade, a level of spending the government says is "unsustainable"."The country shouldn't be in a situation where we're paying that much at the same time as having millions of young people out of education and training," Ballinger said. "I think these reforms are a good balance." Although their party is split on welfare, some MPs have something in and Duncan-Jordan are two of 194 Labour MPs who have majorities smaller than the number of Pip claimants in their welfare changes will not affect everyone on Pip and the number of recipients in each constituency could change by the next general disability campaigners have picked up on this and are writing to these MPs urging them to vote against the government's welfare vote is due in June, when the government will try to pass a new law to make changes to welfare payments. Holding firm Given Labour's large majority, the bill is expected to so, there is widespread unease among Labour MPs, with some signing a letter to the chief whip to suggest they would not support the bill in its current disgruntled Labour MPs have said as much in interviews, including Clive Lewis, who railed against the cuts to Pip."We do not cut from the poorest and most vulnerable," he told the BBC. "It's obscene and a Labour government should be tackling that, and punching up, before it punches down."Another Labour MP, Stella Creasy, said it would be "remiss" of the government to ignore the concerns of her colleagues.A government source said ministers had been engaging with MPs in one-to-one meetings and listening to their feedback in recent MPs hope the government can be persuaded to change course, as it did this week, with its U-turn on the controversial decision to cut winter fuel payments for millions of despite sustained backbench pressure, Sir Keir's government has held firm so was demonstrated this week in a speech by Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, who said there was a risk the welfare state "won't be there for people who really need it in future" without interpretation of the Labour response to this problem was a notable theme."There is nothing Labour about accepting the cost of this economic but, above all, social crisis, paid for in people's life chances and living standards," she MPs walk through the voting lobbies next month, their version of Labour's values on welfare will be revealed.
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Will Lawmakers Increase Social Security Taxes? 39% of Workers Worry About It.
Social Security's main source of funding is payroll taxes. The program is facing a revenue shortfall as baby boomers retire in droves. Lawmakers could raise Social Security taxes to prevent benefits cuts, but that has many Americans concerned. The $22,924 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › At this point, you may have heard the rumor that Social Security is on the verge of going broke. But thankfully, that's completely false. Social Security can't go broke because it gets the bulk of its revenue from payroll taxes. So, as long as people continue to hold down jobs and pay into the program, it can continue to get funded. That said, Social Security is facing a serious revenue shortfall as baby boomers stage a mass exodus from the U.S. labor force in the coming years, and an inadequate number of replacement workers come in. Social Security can use the money in its trust funds to keep up with benefit payments as needed. But once those trust funds are emptied, Social Security may have to cut benefits. And it's not like that scenario is decades away. We could be roughly 10 years from seeing Social Security slash benefits broadly if lawmakers don't manage to intervene. Thankfully, lawmakers do have solutions they can employ with the goal of preventing a broad reduction in Social Security benefits. But one popular solution could come with a world of backlash. There are a number of different steps lawmakers could take to boost revenue for Social Security. One is to move full retirement age up by a year or two so that workers have to wait longer to collect their monthly benefits without a reduction. Another option is to raise Social Security taxes. But that's not something workers want. And not surprisingly, they're very concerned about lawmakers going down that road. In a recent survey by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 39% of workers said they're worried about increased taxes for Social Security. That's understandable, given that many Americans feel tax-burdened to begin with. Lawmakers have a couple of choices for raising Social Security taxes. First, they could increase the Social Security tax rate. Or, they could raise the Social Security wage cap. Currently, workers pay a 12.4% tax rate for Social Security purposes. Of that, half comes out of their paychecks, and their employers pay the rest. People who are self-employed, however, must cover the entire 12.4% Social Security tax. It's possible for lawmakers to opt to raise that tax rate to a number that's higher than 12.4%. If so, it would pretty much burden every member of the workforce with heftier taxes. Meanwhile, Social Security's wage cap currently sits at $176,100, which means workers with higher incomes don't pay into the program beyond that earnings threshold. If lawmakers were to raise the wage cap, higher earners would pay Social Security taxes on more of their income. And if lawmakers were to eliminate the wage cap completely, higher earners would pay into Social Security on every dollar they earn. It might seem like raising or getting rid of the wage cap is the better solution, since it would only impact higher earners. But this option introduces a conundrum that lawmakers might struggle to manage. Social Security pays a maximum monthly benefit based on the wage cap. It wouldn't be equitable to raise the wage cap without also increasing the program's maximum benefit. But in that case, it's unclear how much revenue the program would net. Either way, lawmakers do need to do something to prevent Social Security cuts. Whether that means raising Social Security taxes is still up in the air. But it's a change that workers may unfortunately have to brace for. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $22,924 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Will Lawmakers Increase Social Security Taxes? 39% of Workers Worry About It. was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves faces benefits U-turn call from constituency Labour Party
Rachel Reeves is facing demands from her constituency branch of the Labour Party to reverse her planned benefits cuts. The Leeds and West Pudsey Constituency Labour Party (CLP) passed a motion this week to oppose the Chancellor's proposals to bring down the benefits bill. Ms Reeves is also bracing for a rebellion by more than 100 of her party's own MPs against proposals that would cut the welfare budget by almost £5 billion. The reforms would mean only the most disabled adults could claim Personal Independence Payments (PIP), while under-22s would no longer be eligible for Universal Credit. In a motion seen by the PA news agency, the Leeds West and Pudsey CLP said disabled people 'are not responsible for the state of the national finances'. The group added that those currently claiming disability benefits 'should not be made to pay the price for Tory economic mismanagement'. The CLP went on to urge Ms Reeves to 'focus on reducing the taper', the rate at which benefits decrease once somebody has found work, rather than on bringing down personal allowances. It said it would write to both Ms Reeves and Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, in the coming week to articulate its proposed opposition to her cuts. The CLP argued it was particularly concerned about measures that would involve 'reducing rates, implementing higher thresholds, poor quality assessments, or increased conditionality'. Ms Reeves first confirmed the welfare cuts in her Spring Statement in March. Full details will be unveiled in a Bill that is still being drawn up by ministers but is expected to be tabled in the Commons and voted on next month. In a letter that will be sent to Alan Campbell, the Chief Whip, this week, about 130 MPs have said Sir Keir Starmer and Ms Reeves must change course or risk defeat in the Commons. The rebels are demanding concessions that include a full impact assessment before any legislation is published, and an extended consultation over the changes to PIP. Unrest about the cuts is understood to extend to within the Government itself, with a number of Parliamentary Private Secretaries (PPS), the most junior ministerial rank, said to be wavering on the issue. Backbenchers have dismissed Ms Reeves's agenda as an example of 'Treasury capture' and claimed it is unfair on people with long-term disabilities whose conditions are unlikely to improve. Sir Keir, Ms Reeves and Ms Kendall have all defended the 'moral' case for the benefits cuts, which they say are necessary in order to balance the books and help disabled people into work where possible. Speaking at Work and Pensions Questions last week, Ms Kendall insisted groups representing disabled people would form part of the consultation over the benefit cuts. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
17-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves faces benefits U-turn call from constituency Labour Party
Rachel Reeves is facing demands from her constituency branch of the Labour Party to reverse her planned benefits cuts. The Leeds and West Pudsey Constituency Labour Party (CLP) passed a motion this week to oppose the Chancellor's proposals to bring down the benefits bill. Ms Reeves is also bracing for a rebellion by more than 100 of her party's own MPs against proposals that would cut the welfare budget by almost £5 billion. The reforms would mean only the most disabled adults could claim Personal Independence Payments (PIP), while under-22s would no longer be eligible for Universal Credit. In a motion seen by the PA news agency, the Leeds West and Pudsey CLP said disabled people 'are not responsible for the state of the national finances'. The group added that those currently claiming disability benefits 'should not be made to pay the price for Tory economic mismanagement'. The CLP went on to urge Ms Reeves to 'focus on reducing the taper', the rate at which benefits decrease once somebody has found work, rather than on bringing down personal allowances. It said it would write to both Ms Reeves and Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, in the coming week to articulate its proposed opposition to her cuts. The CLP argued it was particularly concerned about measures that would involve 'reducing rates, implementing higher thresholds, poor quality assessments, or increased conditionality'. Ms Reeves first confirmed the welfare cuts in her Spring Statement in March. Full details will be unveiled in a Bill that is still being drawn up by ministers but is expected to be tabled in the Commons and voted on next month. In a letter that will be sent to Alan Campbell, the Chief Whip, this week, about 130 MPs have said Sir Keir Starmer and Ms Reeves must change course or risk defeat in the Commons. The rebels are demanding concessions that include a full impact assessment before any legislation is published, and an extended consultation over the changes to PIP. Unrest within Government itself Unrest about the cuts is understood to extend to within the Government itself, with a number of Parliamentary Private Secretaries (PPS), the most junior ministerial rank, said to be wavering on the issue. Backbenchers have dismissed Ms Reeves's agenda as an example of 'Treasury capture' and claimed it is unfair on people with long-term disabilities whose conditions are unlikely to improve. Sir Keir, Ms Reeves and Ms Kendall have all defended the 'moral' case for the benefits cuts, which they say are necessary in order to balance the books and help disabled people into work where possible. Speaking at Work and Pensions Questions last week, Ms Kendall insisted groups representing disabled people would form part of the consultation over the benefit cuts.
