A minister has signalled that disability benefits will not be increased for Londoners despite the capital's higher cost of living, as he prepares to publish a major review of the welfare system.Disability minister Sir Stephen Timms appeared to rule out introducing a London weighting for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which is claimed by nearly half a million people across the capital.That is despite the Trust for London calculating that a couple with children living in inner London needs £370 more per week to cover rent, compared to the same sized family living in other UK cities. It costs £260 more in parts of Greater London.Sir Stephen, MP for East Ham, has been reviewing whether the current Pip system is fit for purpose. His findings are due to be published this month, with an interim report published in the summer finding that disability benefits were “no longer fit for purpose”.More than four million people currently claim the non-means-tested benefit, which is worth up to £843 a month. This includes almost 500,000 Londoners.Sir Stephen Timms is due to publish his Pip review this monthPA ArchiveA London weighting, or London allowance, is applied by employers in the capital to salaries to reflect higher living costs.Asked about the prospect of a recommendation for a “London weighting” to Pip appearing in his review, Sir Stephen said: “We issued a call for evidence in March and had 38,000 responses – actually, London weighting hasn’t been a big theme of the evidence that we’ve gathered, and it’s not something we’ve really talked much about in the group.”The Labour politician said the review was likely to instead offer ideas for reforming the assessment process.“The concerns in the group are about accessibility of the benefit,” he said. “A huge number of people said that the assessment for Pip is dehumanising, because it requires you to run through lots of things you cannot do, and it’s a pretty horrible experience.“What I think we’re going to be setting out in my report is ideas for a different kind of assessment which is not dehumanising. Read More“I don’t think it’s necessary to have such a horrible process in order to apply for disability benefits. We’ve got to come up with an assessment that does a better job of assessing what the additional costs are that people have, and how those should be supported.”The Pip review is looking at whether the current system for disabled people is fit for purposeLabour MPs, including five representing London constituencies, rebelled last year after Sir Keir Starmer’s government proposed restricting disabled people's eligibility for Pip in a move that was designed to cut the welfare bill by £5 billion.Following the revolt, Sir Stephen was tasked with reviewing the Pip system. Some backbenchers fear his findings could lead to another fallout, according to The Sun.One backbencher said: “I think it’s going to be a lot meatier than people realise.”In a potential warning sign for Sir Keir’s successor, Prime Minister Andy Burnham, MPs told the newspaper they fear some claimants could lose out in any proposed reforms.Sir Stephen also suggested that the Government could devolve further powers to London’s Mayor, Lord Sadiq Khan, to boost employment for disabled Londoners.There are currently 1.16m disabled Londoners, of whom around 650,000 – 55% – are in employment, according to the latest figures from the Department for Work and Pensions.This is far below the non-disabled employment rate in London of 79% – an increase of 1.1 points since 2023/24.Sir Stephen said the disparity would only be solved through a “devolved approach”.“We’re doing a lot of work at the moment talking to the mayors – Sadiq and others – and let’s see where we where we get to,” he said.The minister made the comments on a visit to Auticon, a firm which hires autistic adults to work as consultants, in London Bridge.
Disability minister pours cold water on calls for London PIP boost
Full Article
Original Source
Read the full article at Standard →KhanList aggregates and links to publicly available news content. We do not host full articles from third-party sources. Always verify important information with original sources.