Pip reform: banning ADHD and autism claims would not bring big savings, says Resolution Foundation
The Resolution Foundation has warned that proposals to stop people with ADHD, autism or anxiety claiming Pip would not deliver major savings and could make it harder for claimants to work and take part in society.
Pip reform: banning ADHD and autism claims would not bring big savings, says Resolution Foundation
The Resolution Foundation has warned that banning people with anxiety, ADHD or autism from claiming disability benefits would not deliver major financial savings. The thinktank said such condition-based exclusions would probably make it harder for claimants to get or stay in a job and participate in society.
Why the thinktank calls condition bans 'crude'
The foundation described proposals to make certain mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions ineligible for Pip as "crude changes" aimed at hitting unrealistic savings targets. It added that linking awards to particular diagnoses is simplistic and impractical, because most claimants report multiple conditions rather than a single one.
Lindsay Judge, the foundation's research director, said Pip remains a vital benefit that enables disabled people to participate in society and live fuller and more active lives, but that claimants do not trust the current system, awards do not reflect disability as it is today, and spending is rising unsustainably.
Pip is a vital benefit for disabled people that enables them to participate in society and live fuller and more active lives
Judge said a reformed Pip system should focus on supporting disabled people to participate in society.
Where Pip is failing, and where it works
The thinktank's assessment is not a defence of the status quo. It warned that Pip is "failing on several fronts" and called for a major overhaul to contain costs and restore public trust. But it also urged caution, pointing to the success of Pip in ensuring high numbers of disabled and ill people are able to participate in economically valuable activities such as work, caring, training or volunteering.
According to the foundation, better targeting could still save billions:
- About £4.4bn a year could be saved if Pip support was better targeted.
- Cash support could be removed from an estimated 670,000 working-age claimants - roughly one in six - who report having no extra costs from their disability.
- Judge argued a system better attuned to people's needs would mean those one in six recipients who do not face significant limitations or additional costs would no longer qualify for cash support.
- Because people often have multiple and fluctuating conditions, she said support should target greater help and engagement where it is needed and avoid waste where it is not.
The spending pressure behind the debate
Concern over Pip has grown because of rapidly rising claimant numbers, particularly among young people, with much of that sharp increase linked to mental health, ADHD and autism claims. Pip spending in England and Wales has risen in real terms by 183% since the benefit was introduced in 2014.
Official forecasts put the scale of the bill at:
- £28bn this year.
- £34bn by the end of the decade.
Where reform goes next
Attempts by the previous Labour administration under Keir Starmer to push through £5bn of savings to Pip collapsed last year amid a rebellion of backbench MPs. Starmer's successor, Andy Burnham, has said renewed attempts to reform benefits would not involve "crude cuts". The Tory leader, Kemi Badenoch, has argued Pip should not be paid to claimants with so-called "mild" conditions that do not incur higher daily living costs.
Welfare officials are awaiting an official review of Pip by welfare minister Stephen Timms and the Milburn review of the youth jobs crisis. Officials are also understood to be considering proposals to exclude under-25s from the Pip system.
A Department for Work and Pensions spokesperson said Pip is awarded based on a functional assessment that determines how a condition impacts a person's day-to-day needs. The spokesperson said the Timms Review made clear that "Pip is no longer fit for purpose" and that the recommendations from its final report will lay the foundation for sustainable reform.
