The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has confirmed three groups of conditions most at risk from Personal Independence Payment (PIP) changes following the interim Timms Review. The review, led by Labour cabinet member Sir Stephen Timms, found that PIP "creates barriers to participating fully in work, social and community life," particularly for individuals with fluctuating conditions, less visible conditions, or multiple conditions.
Key Findings from the Timms Review
The interim report draws on over 38,000 responses to a Call for Evidence, describing an assessment process that fails to reflect real-life impacts, especially for those with multiple or fluctuating conditions. The DWP stated on Thursday: "The Review must consider how PIP can remain sustainable within fixed financial limits and support future generations."
Negative Experiences Reported
Sharon Brennan, co-chair of the Review, said: "Improving trust in the system – both from the public and those going through the system – is vital if PIP is to be fit and fair for the future. Of those that responded to the steering group’s Call for Evidence, over 90% described negative experiences of the process of claiming PIP, with concerns raised around all aspects of the process from application through to assessment and appeals."
She added: "We are immensely grateful to the tens of thousands of people who have taken the time to share their lived experience and make a valuable contribution to this Review. We’ve heard loud and clear: PIP is highly valued as a benefit but is not fit for purpose. We are committed to making changes so that PIP can fulfil its purpose."
Need for a Fair and Humane System
Dr Clenton Farquharson CBE, co-chair of the Review, said: "PIP should contribute to disabled people meeting the extra costs of disability and participate in everyday life. What we have heard through this Review is that, while PIP is a lifeline for many people, the system too often fails to understand the reality of people’s lives. Disabled people have told us about a process that can feel stressful, dehumanising and hard to navigate, especially for people with fluctuating conditions, less visible or multiple conditions. That matters, because a system that does not feel fair or humane will not command trust from disabled people or from the wider public."
He continued: "This Review is significant because disabled people, Disabled People’s Organisations and experts are helping and supporting to shape the work from the inside, not simply being consulted from the outside. As we move towards final recommendations, we need to be bold in our ambition, practical in our proposals, and focused on making PIP fair, trusted and fit for the future."
