Proposed Welfare Changes

My Response and How You Can Have Your Say

The Government recently announced their Green Paper on welfare reform.

Green Papers are consultation documents designed to gather feedback from both Parliament and the public on proposed policies and legislation. I have been carefully reviewing these proposals. Given the complexity and depth of the proposals, I encourage you to read them in full here: https://tinyurl.com/PWTWproposals.

However, I want to address some of the key issues that many of you have raised with me and that have been widely discussed in the media.

Personal Independence Payment (PIP)

In Leeds Central and Headingley, 4,599 constituents currently receive PIP. At the time of the 2021 census, 17,033 people in Leeds Central and Headingley - 16% of my constituency - were classed as disabled. This means that only just over a quarter of disabled people in my constituency are claiming PIP.

In my constituency, the most common reason for claims is psychiatric illnesses, including anxiety and depression. The DWP also includes learning disabilities and autism in this category. Psychiatric illnesses account for 45% of claimants in my constituency, significantly higher than the national average of 38%. 

Ensuring that our welfare system works for everyone who needs it is a top priority for me.

The Prime Minister is right to acknowledge the need for welfare reform, including changes to PIP. However, reform should not begin with cutting billions of pounds in support for society’s most vulnerable. Moving the goalposts for PIP eligibility will not help or encourage people into work.

PIP is a modest but vital payment designed to help with the added costs of living with a disability, covering essential daily activities and mobility. The Government’s proposal to cut PIP funding by £5 billion is not a strategy for employment—it is a direct reduction in support for disabled people, regardless of their ability to work. In fact, restricting financial help may make it even harder for those who can work to do so.

Limiting access to PIP will shift the burden onto already overstretched public services such as the NHS, social care, and local government—services that have already endured 14 years of austerity.

One of the most concerning aspects of the proposals is the plan to change PIP’s eligibility criteria by increasing the threshold. 

Currently, PIP applicants are assessed on two areas: daily living and mobility, with the daily living element covering twelve activities, for example preparing food. To receive the lower rate of PIP, applicants need to score at least eight points in total across any of these activities. This means someone could qualify even if they scored, for example, two points in four of the activities.

Under the Government’s proposals, applicants would need to score at least four points in a single activity to qualify, as well as at least eight points in total across the range of activities. 

Without a corresponding review of the assessment descriptors, this change could exclude many disabled people with significant needs. For instance, individuals who need home dialysis or need help with basic daily tasks such as washing and dressing could lose crucial financial support. A fair and comprehensive reassessment of eligibility criteria is essential. Since being elected I have always maintained that PIP assessments should be completed by someone who knows the person or their specific condition - a GP, Consultant or specialist.

Some aspects of the proposals are more welcome, including:

• The introduction of recorded PIP assessments as standard.

• An overhaul of safeguarding policies to improve training and ensure vulnerable people are protected.

• Collaboration with disabled people and advocacy groups to improve the assessment process.

• Ending repeated reassessments for people with lifelong, severe conditions.

• No changes to the Mobility component 

However, concerns do remain, including the increase in face-to-face assessments, which could place undue stress on claimants. I understand that there are mixed feelings about this, and have spoken to some applicants who feel positively about face-to-face assessments but many who feel it would add barriers to accessing PIP.

The proposals do suggest that we continue to meet the needs of people who are claiming, who may require a different method of assessment, however we must ensure that additional barriers are not created during this process.

The current system is already complex, with lengthy delays, inconsistent decision-making, and widespread distrust. Any reforms must address these systemic issues rather than worsening them.

Universal Credit and Work Capability Assessment

There are several key changes proposed to Universal Credit:

• The standard allowance will be increased above inflation for the first time ever, equating to an annual rise of £775 for claimants by 2029/30.

•  The Work Capability Assessment (WCA), which decides eligibility for incapacity benefits, will be scrapped in 2028. This assessment has long been criticised for forcing people into rigid, binary categories—either “fit to work” or “unable to work”—without considering the complexities of fluctuating health conditions. 

• Instead, disability benefits assessments will rely solely on the PIP system. For those who are eligible for PIP this simplifies the process. However, for those who are not eligible for PIP but who are currently in the LCWRA group of Universal Credit, this means they could lose out on their Universal Credit top up.

• However, the Government is considering how any change of this kind could affect individuals who currently meet limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA) criteria due to conditions that are not expected to be lifelong. For example, those affected by cancer treatment, people with short term conditions that get better, women with a high-risk pregnancy and those currently classed as having substantial risk. 

• The Government is introducing measures to reassure claimants that trying to work will not automatically trigger a reassessment or loss of benefits. This is a key step in reducing the fear many disabled people have about re-entering employment.

• A new premium will be introduced for claimants with severe, lifelong conditions that will not improve.

However, under the new rules, claimants under 22 will no longer be eligible for the incapacity benefit top-up within Universal Credit. This may create a two-tier system of disability support based on age and given that my constituency is one of the youngest in the UK with 41% of constituents in my constituency being aged 18-24, I am particularly concerned about this.

After 14 years of Conservative-led government, trust in the welfare system—particularly disability benefits—has been severely eroded. I understand why these proposals are being met with apprehension, and in some cases, fear. While some of the proposed changes could simplify the system, others risk making life even harder for those who rely on this support.

Have Your Say

I strongly encourage you to participate in the Government’s public consultation and share your views on these proposed changes. I understand there is concern about the limited scope of the questions, but you are able to raise further issues about any of the proposals via the email address provided. 

Furthermore, as your representative, I want to hear directly from you so I have created a survey where you can highlight any specific challenges these changes may pose for you, your loved ones, or those you care for, and I can use this to lobby the Government on your behalf.

Government Consultation: https://tinyurl.com/PWTWconsultation 

My constituency Survey: https://tinyurl.com/alexsobelsurvey

In addition to gathering feedback from constituents, I am actively engaging with benefits advisors, disability rights organisations, and other key stakeholders to understand their perspectives. Your input will be invaluable as I raise concerns with DWP Ministers.

There is no place in the UK for a welfare system that discriminates against the most vulnerable. I will continue to fight for a system that provides fair, compassionate, and effective support.

UPDATE

Local welfare consultation

As a follow up, I recently met with a number of local and national organisations who work to support those using the welfare benefits system.

I wanted to hold a consultation with those who work on the frontline and those who campaign for policy reform, so that I could ensure that I understood their concerns about the proposed changes.

Those in attendance at the two consultations included St Vincent's, Citizens Advice, Carers UK, Carers Leeds, Trussell Trust, Leeds North & West Foodbank, Sense, RETAs, and a number of others.

Moving forward, I will be using concerns raised by them, along with concerns raised by my constituents, to inform my next steps.

Local welfare consultation

National welfare consultation

FURTHER UPDATES - 25/05/25

Further information on the amendment and full list of signatories here: https://labourlist.org/.../welfare-reform-bill-reasoned.../

FURTHER UPDATES - 30/06/25

Last week, I spoke on BBC Newsnight about the Government's proposed concessions.

Additionally, following your responses to my survey on the proposed reforms, please find below a report detailing the findings.

Welfare proposals.pdf

Download PDF • 176KB

This report, along with the below letter, has been sent to Liz Kendall MP, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Letter to Minister.

Download • 251KB

FURTHER UPDATES - 03/07/25

As you know, I have been long concerned about the effect of the changes to PIP for disabled people. Last week I appeared twice on national media and expressed my opposition to the changes that ring fenced PIP for current recipients but created a new higher threshold for future applicants. I was possibly the first politician to describe it as a two tier system on Newsnight last Thursday. 

I undertook a series of roundtables and meetings in the constituency and wrote to Liz Kendall seeking changes to the bill based on those requests from disabled constituents and disability organisations.

This week I met twice with the Chief Whip and also other members of the Government seeking the removal of the two tier system. I welcome the Co-produced review with disabled people and disability organisations on the future of PIP, as we all recognise the many problems with the system which I and my office have been dealing with helping win hundreds of appeals. 

I was very clear that without the removal of PIP changes to the bill and the review being completed and coming back to Parliament I would vote against the Government. The Government told me on Monday and Tuesday that they were looking deeply and strongly at my objections to the bill.

Just to be absolutely clear I had intended to vote against the bill, as I could not support creating a two-tier system for new PIP applicants. However, just 90 minutes before the vote, the bill began to unravel, the Minister in the Chamber announced the Government were doing what I asked and removing the entire PIP clause from the Bill. This is intended to happen in Government amendments next Wednesday when it comes back to Parliament. I was then in a situation where there was no clear legislation, no opportunity to scrutinise the details of the proposals, and no clarity about what MPs were being asked to vote on. 

The one thing we did know was that the Government had made a clear promise that PIP was no longer in this bill, the exact request I had made on national television, with the Chief Whip and other Members of the Government. In these circumstances, I could not, in good faith, vote either for or against.

I am pleased that concessions were secured, including a commitment to proceed with the Co-produced review of the PIP system. So in the end yesterday I abstained.

When amendments are brought forward, I will consider them carefully and work on the same basis.

I know this bill has caused confusion and stress for many disabled people and for MPs. It should never have been presented in this way. The PIP system is already complex and punitive, and it needs to be reviewed properly before MPs are asked to vote on significant changes.

FURTHER UPDATES - 09/07/25

The full list of amendments I have signed are listed below.

Richard Burgon _2(a)

This amendment would continue the level of the Universal Credit health element at £423.27 for all new claimants and not the proposed lower rate.

Nadia Whittome _42 

This amendment makes the commencement of Clause 2 and Schedule 1 conditional on the pre-commencement requirements set out in NC10.

Debbie Abrahams _20

Member's explanatory statement See explanatory statement for Amendment 2(b) to Amendment 2.

Cat Eccles _37

Nadia Whittome _43

This amendment makes the commencement of Clause 5 conditional on the pre-commencement requirements set out in NC10.

Secretary Liz Kendall Gov4 

This amendment leaves out the personal independence payment clause.

Ms Stella Creasy _NC4

“Duty to have due regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

John McDonnell _NC8

Implementation of Timms review

(1) Within one month of the publication of the review into Personal Independence Payment assessment the terms of reference of which were published by the Secretary of State on 30 June 2025 (“the review”), the Secretary of State must publish a draft version of primary legislation setting out proposed measures to give effect to the recommendations of the review.

(2) No power to make regulations under Part 4 of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 may be exercised to give effect to any proposal arising from the review in a way which adversely affects the eligibility for personal independence payment of any person.

Dr Marie Tidball _NC11

This new clause makes provision for co-production of the Timms review and parliamentary and other oversight of subsequent implementation.

Nadia Whittome _NC10 

This new clause provides for most provisions of the Act not to come into force until a human rights analysis has been produced and then only unless the House of Commons does not resolve that they should not come into force.

Debbie Abrahams _21

See explanatory statement for Amendment 2(b) to Amendment 2.

Debbie Abrahams _22 

See explanatory statement for Amendment 2(b) to Amendment 2.

Debbie Abrahams _23

Debbie Abrahams _24 

Debbie Abrahams _25 

Mr Richard Quigley _44 

This amendment ensures that those diagnosed with and receiving treatment for cancer are included within the definition of “severe conditions criteria claimant” and are thereby entitled to the higher rate of LCWRA.

Graeme Downie _17 

This amendment would ensure that whether a person has a fluctuating condition such as Parkinson’s or multiple sclerosis is a factor in assessing whether the person qualifies as a severe conditions criteria claimant.

Debbie Abrahams _26

Debbie Abrahams _27 

Debbie Abrahams _28 

Debbie Abrahams _29

Debbie Abrahams _30 

Debbie Abrahams _7(b)

Debbie Abrahams _7(c) 

List of full amendments here:

Universal Credit and PIP bill amendments.pdf

Download PDF • 260KB