UK government set to tighten benefit rules, with 600,000 disabled people facing devastating financial losses

Keir Starmer’s government is moving forward with plans to tighten eligibility for Personal Independence Payments (PIP), a decision that could see over 600,000 disabled people lose an average of £675 per month. Despite intense opposition from disability rights groups, Labour MPs, and even senior cabinet ministers, the government is determined to push through the cuts, which are expected to save up to £6 billion by 2029-30.

The most controversial change will be raising the threshold for PIP eligibility, meaning many claimants who currently qualify may no longer receive support. A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank has warned that 70% of those affected belong to the poorest half of UK households, making this a devastating blow to some of the most vulnerable families.

While plans to freeze PIP payments have reportedly been dropped, other significant cuts remain in place. There is also concern over proposals to freeze or reduce the highest rate of benefits for disabled individuals unable to work, though the government claims this could be balanced by an increase in Universal Credit for those seeking employment.

Many Labour MPs are privately expressing deep unease over the policy, fearing the move targets those least able to cope with financial cuts. Some have warned that their constituents are already in despair, with one MP calling the coming days “the worst week of the Parliament.”

The government argues that the current welfare system creates a financial disincentive to work, with some long-term disability claimants receiving nearly double the income of jobseekers. Ministers insist that welfare should act as a bridge back to employment rather than a permanent financial crutch.

However, critics say this reasoning fails to account for those with severe conditions that prevent them from working at all. Campaigners warn that tightening eligibility could leave thousands without the support they rely on, forcing many into poverty and crisis.

Despite the growing backlash, the scope for change is minimal. The government’s Green Paper on welfare reform will be released on Tuesday, with the Treasury already having locked in these cuts as part of the Spring Statement at the end of March.

The Resolution Foundation has also raised concerns about the overall economic outlook, suggesting that weaker growth, high interest rates, and lower tax revenues have already put pressure on the Treasury. The thinktank’s research director, James Smith, has cautioned that rushing welfare cuts for short-term savings could cause long-term harm.

Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, is expected to present a series of mitigations alongside the cuts, hoping to ease concerns from both Labour MPs and the public. A key proposal will be the introduction of a “right to try” guarantee, allowing disabled claimants to attempt work without losing benefits permanently if they are unable to cope.

The government also plans to retain £1 billion of the projected savings to reinvest in localised back-to-work schemes. These initiatives will include a major overhaul of jobcentre services aimed at supporting disabled people into employment.

Within Labour’s ranks, tensions are running high. Some MPs have made it clear they will not support the proposed changes in a parliamentary vote, particularly as many Labour constituencies have significant numbers of PIP claimants.

Some within the party have pointed the blame at Chancellor Rachel Reeves, arguing that strict fiscal rules prevent the government from raising taxes to address the worsening economic outlook. Treasury sources, however, deny that Reeves is driving the cuts, claiming that the plans have been in motion for over a year—long before Labour took power.

Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, defended the government’s approach but declined to confirm details of the cuts. He argued that the welfare system must be “a springboard back to work”, stating that many people want to contribute but are currently being written off. He urged those concerned to wait for the full details rather than speculate.

With the Spring Statement scheduled for March 26, the final shape of the reforms will soon be revealed. For hundreds of thousands of disabled people, the outcome could mean the difference between financial security and severe hardship.

4 NEWS

The UK government is reconsidering planned cuts to disability benefits, including freezing Personal Independence Payments (PIP), following strong opposition from MPs and advocacy groups. Originally aimed at saving £5 billion, the proposals faced backlash for disproportionately affecting vulnerable individuals. Reports suggest Chancellor Rachel Reeves may abandon the PIP freeze but will still pursue other welfare savings. A green paper detailing the revised reforms is expected soon. Critics argue that even scaled-back cuts could harm those reliant on support, while the government insists on balancing fiscal responsibility with social protection. The situation highlights internal tensions within Labour, as some backbenchers oppose austerity-like measures. The debate continues over whether these changes go far enough to satisfy concerned MPs and the public. Labour’s handling of welfare policy is under intense scrutiny, with political risks if further U-turns or divisions emerge. The revised proposals will determine the government’s approach to welfare in the coming years.

SKY NEWS

Labour’s proposed changes to Personal Independence Payments (PIP) have sparked a major internal row, with backbenchers and figures like Andy Burnham warning the reforms could entrench poverty. Originally, the government planned to freeze PIP, but backlash forced a U-turn. Now, the focus is on tightening eligibility to cut £5bn from the ballooning welfare budget.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces pressure to find savings amid economic struggles, while Health Secretary Wes Streeting argues the current system is unsustainable. Critics, including disability campaigners, warn of devastating consequences for vulnerable individuals. With deep divisions emerging, Labour’s ability to push these reforms through remains uncertain