Praise for ‘incredible’ new plan to replace ‘deeply-flawed’ PIP

An “exciting” and “incredible” new proposal to scrap the “deeply-flawed” personal independence payment (PIP) and replace it with a new supportive system that meets all of a person’s extra disability-related costs has been welcomed by MPs, disabled people and unions.

The additional costs disability payment (ACDP), developed by those with lived experience of the social security system, would aim to cover disabled people’s “real” additional costs of disability rather than just contributing to them, as PIP does.

The ACDP proposal comes from the independent Commission on Social Security (CSS), which three years ago called for a “transformational” reboot of the social security system to replace the current “inadequate, demeaning, inefficient” structure that “deliberately scapegoats” unemployed and disabled people.

The commission said in 2022 that there was a need for a more effective benefit to replace PIP, which would recognise the additional costs disabled people face.

In January, three years on, the commission put out a draft policy proposal for this PIP replacement for consultation, and more than 5,000 people – 90 per cent of them disabled – responded.

Their response was “overwhelmingly positive”.

On Monday, the commission launched its final proposal for the new ACDP at the House of Commons.

The disabled people who worked on the proposal believe it offers a “constructive, workable alternative” to PIP, which the commission says is “plagued by inaccurate decisions and a culture of mistrust” and “actively undermines” disabled people’s participation in society.

ACDP eligibility would not be tied to a medical diagnosis, and the system would not be points-based, as the PIP assessment system is.

Instead, decisions would be made alongside disabled claimants instead of being imposed upon them, and it would be based on the impact of their health condition or impairment on the extra costs they faced, while all age groups would be able to apply.

A launch meeting in parliament heard that the project to find a replacement for PIP – funded by Trust for London – was “a collaborative piece of work at every stage”.

Every one of the CSS commissioners has been or is on benefits, and most of those involved with the new proposal are disabled people.

The launch meeting heard that ACDP would be set up within a new Department of Social Security, while claimants would be able to provide whatever evidence they chose to support their claim.

An independent national advocacy service, mostly run by disabled people’s organisations, would offer support with claims, and there would be an independent complaints process.

There would also be a national body to research the additional costs of disability, an independent organisation to monitor safety and harm in the social security system, and a co-produced standards charter.

If the department wanted to reject a claim, it would have to set out the reasons “quite clearly”, the launch event heard, and there would be “no more cutting people off and forcing them through long, harmful appeal processes”, although claimants could still appeal a decision to a tribunal.

Ellen Morrison-Smith, one of two ACDP project workers, alongside Dr Rosa Morris, said the commission was not “tinkering with some changes” to PIP, but suggesting an “entirely new approach” which had been “years in the making”.

Although the scheme has not been costed, it will inevitably be more expensive than PIP, but Morrison told the launch meeting: “It’s our view that wealth is available, it just needs to be distributed better.”

Mikey Erhardt, policy lead for Disability Rights UK, said the proposal was “an incredible bit of work” and looks “significantly better than anything I have ever seen the government propose on this” and was “one of the most exciting things I have seen in this space”.

He said he hoped it could bring the disability movement together “around something that is positive and exciting and important”.

Martin Cavanagh, president of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), which represents thousands of DWP frontline workers, said: “This isn’t just about the DWP being a failed organization.

“This is about successive governments deliberately underfunding a government department to make the benefit system as hostile as it possibly can be, and to reduce the benefit bill.

“That has to be the start of our narrative; it has to be the start of our understanding about why we need to fix the benefit system.”

There was a strong turnout of MPs, with the event hosted by suspended Labour MP John McDonnell, and attended by disabled MP Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson; benefit cuts rebel Neil Duncan-Jordan, and Labour’s Euan Stainbank and Steve Witherden; while disabled Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft, a former shadow disability minister and government whip, and Labour MP Richard Burgon, both sent their apologies.

McDonnell said the proposal was an “excellent piece of work” and that it was now a good time to try to influence the government by using the report “at every opportunity” in parliament, and to have a “dialogue” with MPs about it, as there was now much more of a “willingness and desire” to look at alternatives to the government’s previous plans for PIP cuts.

He said: “The prime minister said there would be a reset, and we have to take him at face value and say maybe in the last year some lessons have been learned. I certainly hope so.”

Duncan-Jordan, currently suspended by Labour after he rebelled over proposed cuts to disability benefits this summer, told the meeting that the ACDP proposal “gives us a way forward” and “takes us a step closer” towards “redesigning the benefits system to make it truly supportive” where “no-one falls through any of the gaps”.

He said he believed the Timms Review of PIP had “massive limitations” and that it was rumoured that DWP ministers would be “coming back for more” when it comes to cuts “for the things they were not able to get through the first time”.

Darling said that, since he was elected as an MP for the first time last year, he has become more aware and more worried about the harm caused by DWP, and he had concluded that the department was “clearly not fit for purpose” and that the benefits system needed a more person-centred approach.

He said he was looking forward to discussing the report with fellow Liberal Democrat MPs.

La Toyah Grant, a Deaf activist and member of the commission’s steering group, said the five principles behind ACDP were that “everyone has enough money to live on”; that people should be treated with dignity and respect; that the service should have “rights and entitlements”; that ACDP should be user-friendly and accessible; and that there must be free advice and support for claimants.

Osmond James, another member of the commission’s steering group, spoke of his own distressing experience with his PIP application, which left him in a mental health crisis and admitted to an intensive care unit in 2023.

He told the event: “When I came out, I received a letter saying I had been awarded PIP, this time without an assessment.

“It felt like to be seen as deserving of getting PIP, I had to be at such a crisis point and in such distress and lost in the maze.

“Although I felt an initial sense of relief at getting PIP, fear and insecurity soon returned as you remain worried that you will have to go through the whole process all over again, and that even if nothing has changed, or even if things have got worse, you could lose your PIP.

“Our proposals attempt to give people choice and autonomy in the process, and the process from beginning to end aims to treat people with kindness and dignity.

“What’s especially important is the security our proposals offer, so people like me don’t have to live with the fear that is always in the background about what’s around the corner.”

Dorothy Gould, founder of the user-led, rights-based organisation Liberation, which is run by people with mental health diagnoses, and a member of the working group that developed the ACDP proposal, said the current PIP assessment system does not address the “sheer impact that mental distress has on people’s lives nor the huge amount of additional distress the system causes those of us who go through it”.

Rick Burgess, another member of the ACDP working group and co-chair of DPO Forum England, said ACDP would be a system “that people can begin to trust and not be afraid of” and would understand “how disabled people live their lives”.

It would, he said, rebalance power “back towards the citizen and away from an overwhelming state department”.

He said it had been designed by disabled people who have had to “deal with a very abusive system, a very harmful system”.

He said: “What we need to move from is a punitive, policing system to a supporting system that wants to and does invest in people’s wellbeing because, long term, that will actually be a greater boon to society, to the wider economy, and to our overall societal wellbeing.”

Andy Mitchell, a member of the union Unite and also a member of the ACDP working group, said: “Designing policies with disabled people from the very start is crucial.

“That’s why this proposal offers some hope.

“We’ve got some answers about what could make things better, but now it’s up to the government and the MPs who represent us to make sure we’re allowed to be part of taking them forward.”

Picture: (From left to right) Osmond James, La Toyah Grant and Mikey Erhardt

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…