The Timms Review has published draft recommendations on Personal Independence Payment reforms
Some disabled people could end up “treated less favourably” if ministers press ahead with proposed changes to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), campaigners have warned. Disability Rights UK has raised fresh concerns after the Timms Review published draft recommendations setting out what a revamped system could look like.
While the charity said there were positives – including a commitment that PIP would remain non-means-tested – it fears the plans could still leave some claimants worse off. At the heart of the warning is language in the review suggesting PIP may no longer be delivered solely as a cash payment. The draft states that “cash will remain the foundation of the award”, but adds that “some awards will also include services and other non-cash support”.
Disability Rights UK says that shift, and how it is applied in practice, could mean some people are offered services or other help instead of receiving the full cash value of their award. Under the proposals, support could be split into “cost categories”, with examples including “equipment and aids; mobility and transport; clothing and bedding”. Disability Rights UK said the wording used across the draft was “vague and ambiguous”, leaving “much room for speculation and interpretation” about whether some disabled people could be treated less favourably than others.
The charity said it is particularly worried about people with conditions that can be less visible or more difficult to assess. It pointed to the forthcoming Fonagy report on ADHD, mental health and invisible impairments, and also highlighted the Government’s recent £3 million plan for community mental health support – arguing it raises questions about whether people who already struggle to qualify for PIP could be hit by any reforms.
Campaigners said: “The problem of vague language and proposals runs throughout the draft recommendations.” They also raised concerns about what they described as “almost complete silence” on a new eligibility framework for any replacement benefit, including whether any new system would apply to existing claimants as well as new applicants.
One idea in the draft is a “light touch” initial assessment. Disability Rights UK fears this could become a “tick-box exercise” that effectively separates impairment groups and pushes people down different application routes.
The review also contains proposals intended to improve the experience of applying for and receiving PIP. These include clearer guidance, more respectful language, improved reasonable adjustments and an advocacy service for people who need support to navigate the system.
There are also suggested reforms to assessments and decision-making, including a new PIP assessment framework aimed at governing how decisions are made and how appeals work. The draft recommends greater transparency and a review of the way supporting evidence is used.
Disability Rights UK said the proposed move to better support people with fluctuating impairments would be welcomed by many. It said the current points-based model “doesn’t capture the needs of people with fluctuating conditions”.
The warning comes amid signs the public may not back reductions in disability benefit spending. The NatCen Social Attitudes Survey, published on September 8, found 49% of people think there should be more spent on disability benefits even if that means higher taxes, while just 7% supported reducing spending. The report said this suggests proposals to cut disability benefit spending “could carry political risks”.
Disability Rights UK said the findings should be a “wake-up call for Government and the media to stop the continued and unfounded attacks on Disabled people and the welfare bill”, and called for a system that is “fair and truly meets our needs”.
The organisation also cited research involving 2,000 PIP recipients, where only 16% said the benefit covered all of their additional costs. Separate research into the so-called Activity Trap found 80% of disabled people were worried about being physically active because they feared losing their benefits – a concern campaigners say can deter people from taking part in everyday activities if they think it could be used as evidence they no longer need support.
Disability Rights UK and the Activity Trap study support the Commission on Social Security’s proposed Additional Costs Disability Payment as an alternative to PIP. They say it should keep a cash payment regardless of employment status, helping to cover extra costs linked to “living in an inaccessible society”. They also want “adversarial, tick-box assessments” replaced with personalised support and independent advocacy, arguing that “proper financial support – paid in cash” should sit within a wider focus on dignity, independent living and full participation in society.
Sophia Kleanthous, Campaigns and Policy Officer at Disability Rights UK, said: “The Government has consistently failed to properly include Disabled People’s Organisation’s in decisions and processes that affect us.” She also criticised the lack of notice given over “significant updates and decisions during the Timms Review process”, and said the Government had failed to “co-produce any part of the Review with DPOs despite promises to do so”.
Next, the draft recommendations will be discussed with disabled people, disabled people’s organisations and charities through a series of round-table sessions.
