Liz Kendall Faces Challenges Over Controversial Disability Benefits Reduction
Disability advocacy groups are expressing outrage as the welfare secretary, Liz Kendall, unveils significant cuts to disability benefits, hidden beneath promises of reform. The announcement of a £5 billion reduction in disability benefits seems to echo the austerity measures of the past, raising questions about how Labour's approach differs from that of the Conservatives.
Kendall emphasized Labour's commitment to overhauling the flawed social security system inherited from the Tories. Plans include eliminating harmful benefit incentives and problematic fit-for-work assessments, while introducing more protections for vulnerable individuals. Additionally, there will be an increase in the basic rate of universal credit.
Unlike previous Conservative proposals, Kendall avoided blaming societal issues or stigmatizing those on benefits. However, the confirmation of a £5 billion annual cut by the end of the decade overshadowed her speech, despite her assurances of rescuing disabled claimants from the benefits trap. This reduction is expected to have significant financial and political consequences.
Almost immediately, campaigners and Labour backbenchers criticized the proposal. Scope described it as the most severe disability benefit cut on record, surpassing even the austerity measures of former Tory chancellor George Osborne. Kendall's task was to balance Labour's goals of social justice and poverty reduction with fiscal discipline, but the outcome left many unconvinced.
Disability organizations labeled the plans as "immoral and devastating," with Mind warning of worsening mental health issues. The Child Poverty Action Group argued the reforms would undermine Labour's child poverty strategy, while food banks claimed it contradicted Labour's promises to reduce their usage.
Politically, the situation mirrors previous internal Labour conflicts over issues like the two-child benefit cap and winter fuel payment cuts. While campaigners had previously been cautious in their criticism, hoping Labour would offer a better alternative, this agreement now seems to be unraveling.
For many of the UK's most vulnerable citizens, these cuts represent the kind of income reductions Labour has long opposed. Although current claimants will receive some protection, between 800,000 and 1.2 million people on personal independence payments stand to lose between £4,200 and £6,300 annually by 2029-30, according to the Resolution Foundation.
The modest £3-a-week increase in universal credit was welcomed but seen as insufficient, especially compared to the £20-a-week pandemic uplift. This increase acknowledges the rise in disability claims due to inadequate general benefits.
However, these increases will be offset by a £47-a-week reduction in the incapacity element of universal credit for new claimants starting in 2026. Young disabled individuals under 22 will be unable to claim incapacity benefits at all. Louise Murphy from the Resolution Foundation noted that the primary beneficiaries of these plans are those without health issues or disabilities.
Despite the negative aspects, some system reforms aim to improve the benefit process, such as the "right to try" guarantee, which allows claimants to explore work opportunities without risking their benefits. This shows an understanding that poor benefit design is a problem to be solved.
In contrast to the Conservatives, Labour's approach is seen as less severe, with shadow welfare secretary Helen Whately pointing out that the £5 billion cut is relatively modest. While the situation is challenging, it could be much worse under previous administrations.