Labour’s cruel “severe conditions criteria” (SCC) plan is not designed to protect seriously ill claimants as the government claims, it is intended to save money at their expense.  Because tens of thousands of claimants too ill to ever work again will be forced to live for years on half the additional payment that current claimants receive.

The SCC are part of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill and are intended to be a concession to Labour MPs concerned about the effect of the cuts on disabled claimants.

From April 2026, new claimants who meet the SCC will not have to face future reassessments for health element of universal credit, though they will still be reassessed for personal independence payment (PIP).

At the same time, Labour is almost halving the limited capability for work-related activity (LCWRA) element payable to new claimants, but claimants with LCWRA who also meet the SCC will get the full amount.

The SCC qualifying conditions

The current qualifying conditions for LCWRA require one of a number of descriptors to apply to the claimant “for the majority of the time”.  For example: 

  • Cannot pick up and move a 0.5 litre carton full of liquid.
  • Cannot press a button(such as a telephone keypad) with either hand or; cannot turn the pages of a book with either hand.
  • Cannot cope with any change, due to cognitive impairment or mental disorder, to the extent that day-to-day life cannot be managed.

The severe conditions criteria require claimants to meet the same criteria “constantly”.

Constantly is defined in the Bill as “at all times” or “on all occasions on which the claimant undertakes or attempts to undertake the activity”.

However, many degenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis and muscular dystrophy follow a slow path of decreasing ability, with periods of remission.  So, most days you may be unable to turn the pages of a book, but you may have occasional good days when you can do so.

Or your manual dexterity may be better first thing in the morning but get rapidly worse as fatigue sets in.

At the moment, a claimant in these circumstances would get the full LCWRA amount, which from April 2026 will be £423.27 a month, because they meet the descriptor for the majority of the time.

However from April 2026, new LCWRA claimants in the same position will only get around half this amount, £217.26, because they do not meet the descriptor constantly.

But the same claimant will never improve, their condition will only get worse.  So, if they are already unable to work because of a degenerative disease, they will never be able to work again in the future. 

Under Labour’s new rules, however, they will have to exist on half the LCWRA element, possibly for years after there is no chance of their ever being able to work again, until they can show that they are constantly unable to carry out an activity, rather than just for the majority of the time.

So, far from guaranteeing  that people who will never work again are supported, the SCC guarantees that they will live  on a severely reduced income for years, until their degenerative disease enters its most debilitating stage.

For some conditions, including some severe mental illnesses, there may never be a time when the claimant is certain not to have periods of remission, so they may never get the full LCWRA award.

Substantial risk

The SCC do not apply to “non-functional descriptors”. 

Most importantly, if a claimant has been found to have LCWRA because “there would be a substantial risk to the mental or physical health of any person if you were found not to have limited capability for work-related activity” then they cannot be considered to meet the SCC.  

In 2022 14.6% of new awards for LCWRA were on the basis of substantial risk. 

The substantial risk could be because, for example you have a heart or lung condition and the exertion involved attending work, or appointments at the Jobcentre, might lead to a serious deterioration in your health.  Or you might have severe seizures without warning and travelling to work or being in a workplace would put you at substantial risk.

Or the substantial risk could be due to severe mental illness which means that the anxiety caused by travelling to or attending work would be likely to lead you to harm yourself.

Whatever, the cause, if your have LCWRA because of the substantial risk rules, you cannot be considered for the SCC.

How long will protection last?

The SCC are claimed to protect claimants from ever being assessed again. But, as noted above, people who meet the SCC can still be reassessed for PIP.

From 2028, Labour are planning to abolish the work capability assessment (WCA) and make receipt of PIP daily living the gateway for the UC health element.  But they have repeatedly failed to explain what will happen to someone who meets the SCC if they lose their PIP daily living award on review.

Will they still be able to claim UC health even though they no longer meet the basic qualifying conditions?  If not, then the SCC guarantee may only last a few years, rather than a lifetime as Labour claims.

As of May 2024, just 32.1% of claimants who received the UC LCWRA element also had a PIP daily living award which included a score of at least 4 points for one activity

Peace of mind

In unveiling the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, Liz Kendall claimed that it “represents a new social contract and marks the moment we take the road of compassion, opportunity and dignity.  This will give people peace of mind, while also fixing our broken social security system so it supports those who can work to do so while protecting those who cannot. . .”

In reality, the Bill simply seeks every opportunity to take more money from disabled claimants, whilst telling them it really is in their own best interests.

[Edit: information on substantial risk added]

Latest news on PIP/UC changes

What’s changing, when

What you can do

New PIP test

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 hours ago
    Gonna take a moment to thank all those that post links to new news articles, much better than having to go search them out 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 hours ago
    Why don’t Labour just come clean and say they redefining the SCC as follows -



  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 hours ago
    It makes for grim reading. As the article mentions, it's not unusual for most people's chronic health conditions to fluctuate even within a single day, let alone over longer periods. It's rarely a constant, 24/7. So this will see many genuinely ill people stripped off significant financial support that they rely on to survive with dignity, so that Stamer's Labour can balance the books, avoid adding a small tax rise on the wealthiest & fund yet more costly overseas military escapades in future. I fear that with Tory backing, most of these measures will be passed (as much as I dearly hope I'll be proven wrong). But while 2029's GE seems a long way off, one will never forget the damage being done to the vulnerable & chronically ill. I'll never vote Labour again (the last time I did was when Corby was leader). Ditto Tories or Reform, as they'll be no better. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 hours ago
    Shabana Mahmood, offered a curt explanation of why the government was set on its plan: “This is the Labour party. The clue is in the name. We believe in work.”
    Such banal obstinacy gets in the way of any deep understanding of the issues swirling around this story.
    ...
    These, needless to say, are all complex stories that demand careful answers; what the government is proposing, by contrast, amounts to the insane idea that you can immiserate people out of their problems.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/22/labour-disability-benefit-cuts-keir-starmer
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 hours ago
    I will be in the ESA CB group and I therefore I assume won't get any job coach assistance either, as I will not qualify for universal credit, not a great outlook.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 3 hours ago
    Schedule 7 LCWRA descriptors does not appear to include those who qualify Schedule 9 for LCWRA.

    Those covered by schedule 9 not 7 so ineligible for the severe group. 

    The claimant is suffering from a specific illness, disease or disablement by reason of which there would be a substantial risk to the physical or mental health of any person were the claimant found not to have limited capability for work and work-related activity.

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 4 hours ago
    I’m emotionally drained and exhausted and this has had an impact on my health, not only mental but physical as well.
    I dread any news and I check here daily, but despite few glimmers of hope there’s more doom and gloom.
    Labour are trying their hardest to strip us dignity and respect, without any concerns about severe consequences and implications on our lives, be it wellbeing or financial (which lets be honest is dire as it is).
    The way I see it they’re hell bend on punishing the disabled people and are trying their hardest to get as much as they can in order to balance the books. This I doubt it will work, the hole is far too deep to fill it up, but they haven’t thought the strain and additional costs this cuts will put on NHS, local organisations etc.
    Instead of trying to find other ways to raise money, first thing that comes to mind is tax the rich (they have the means of avoiding paying the taxes) they spent these past few months on declaring a war against the disabled people! 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Lost and helpless Don't give up. When Labour first published the green paper it looked like no hope at all that the bill would be defeated or even amended. Now it's looking more likely that it won't get through without AT LEAST amendments, and we even have some hope it will be defeated. I know how draining this is on every level. Just hang on to a glimmer of hope (and maybe take a break from here and any news of the welfare cuts for a bit. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 4 hours ago
    Sheesh, that's the only criteria? I mean, at least point 3 covers people not being able to eat or go to the toilet or anything that prevents them from committing to the unpredictability of a working life away from familiar surroundings.

    But it's still an incredibly vague and barren criteria and is no doubt going to leave work coaches and the like with a ton of room to discount a claimant's disabilities and the difficulties that come with them and insist they can work anyway when it comes to reassessments. Which is obviously the intent. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 hours ago
      @gingin Oh, my mistake, you two! I’ve just heard so much about them narrowing down the criteria that of course I automatically assumed they wrote off the old descriptors entirely and narrowed it down to just those three but that’s absolutely on me for not reading properly!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Dez Those were 'for example'. There are other criteria as well, if you click on 'list of criteria' above.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 3 hours ago
      @Dez No that is just the 3 the article writer chose to use as examples.
      It is all 16 schedule 7 descriptors that grant LCWRA status.
      Notably I think substantial risk if found fit for work or work related activity is not part of schedule 7.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 4 hours ago
    I think it is just due to the incompetence of the government in writing the legislation and they just need to clarify the legislation. The government has said it is for those who currently meet the LCWRA sub group severely disabled do not reassess criteria. The legislation needs amending to instead give the criteria currently used to define that group. Instead of someone who is not fully knowledgeable of the WCA system rewriting and abbreviating it which could lead to a different interpretation to that intended. As I do not think the intent is to in effect introduce different descriptors to those currently used with a higher threshold of constantly all the time rather than most of the time.

    The current criteria for LCWRA Severely disabled for life do not reassess, who are according to the government supposed to be the group the legislation covers is:

    The level of function will always meet LCWRA.
    Lifelong condition, once diagnosed. The condition will always be present. Some lifelong conditions
    are present from birth, but others will develop or be acquired later in life.
    No realistic prospect of recovery of function. Advice on this should be based on currently available
    treatment and not on the prospect of scientists discovering a cure in the future.
    Unambiguous condition. They have been through relevant clinical examinations with their health
    practitioner and full investigations have been completed. There should be no doubt that the person is significantly and substantially impaired. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 43 minutes ago
      @Secret squirrel The current WCA severe group criteria. Who are currently exempt from WCA reassessment. And if awarded the claimant told they will not be reassessed. Is defined in this link.
      https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2022-0860/137._Severe_Conditions_V3.0.pdf

      The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill currently as written has a different definition. Despite the government previously stating those currently in the WCA severe disability group would be protected, and previously making no mention of changing the criteria currently used.

      The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill makes no reference to ongoing/indefinite PIP awards that are not reassessed just light touch reviewed every 10 years. The government has stated it intends to honour ongoing PIP awards and not reassess them, so if no change of circumstance is reported they are not subject to the planned 4pt PIP rule. But no such protection is stated in the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Bill legislation as currently written.

      I expect future legislation coming later this year will detail who will qualify for the severe group UC health element once the WCA is abolished and receiving PIP daily living component becomes the UC health eligibility criteria. Who gets to be in the severe group is not just important to new claimants due to other new claimants getting a reduced UC health element. It is also important to existing claimants as it is likely to determine the conditionality and sanctions regime people are subjected to going forward. I would hope those with ongoing/indefinite enhanced rate daily living PIP awards would be automatically placed in this group. Otherwise the government would have to renege on its previous assurances that they will not be reassessed. As without reassessment how can it be determined what if any conditionality should apply to them. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @john I think this is their way of removing the 10 year light touch with severe criteria which few can achieve. Who can have a particular symptom 24:7 ? 
       I just migrated over to lcwra from esa support group so I don’t know what lcwra severely disabled group is . But the new scc reads as you need to fulfill the descriptor 100% of the time 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @john Also the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill as written only covers those eligible for LCWRA in schedule 7 as potentially eligible for severe group if they meet severe group criteria. It does not cover those eligible for LCWRA in schedule 9 so they would not be eligible for the severe group. While the currently used criteria for LCWRA severe group do not reassess covers all those who qualify for LCWRA including those qualifying in schedule 9 if they meet the current severe group criteria.

      Schedule 9 covers.
      Risk to self or others
      The claimant is suffering from a specific illness, disease or disablement by reason of which there would be a substantial risk to the physical or mental health of any person were the claimant found not to have limited capability for work and work-related activity.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @john Hi ,  
      I just migrated over from esa support group so I don’t know what lcwra severely disabled for life is .  I read the new scc as the descriptor needs to be fit you 100% of the time instead of 50% ( most of the time) for lcwra .  So where’s for lcwra and pip you can have goods days to be placed in the severe conditions criteria you can’t 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 5 hours ago
    Sorry if I sound stupid guys but I can't make sense of things very easily. 
    To be in the  severe conditions criteria, are the conditions still the same conditions as what they are in the lcwra group ? But have to affect you all of the time ?   
     Thank you.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @T I think that's it 'T'
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 5 hours ago
    I believe this is the sort of wording that will be ammended in parliament before becoming law or defined as meaning something akin to "the majority of the time" in early test cases. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 5 hours ago
    Does this apply to claimants of contribution-based ESA?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 hours ago
      @Mick read up on contribution based esa on google it explains if it helps the change is for new claims 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @MariW I was wondering this, as I’m in the support group and get ESA contributions 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @MariW No announcements have been made about contribution based ESA MariW. It's the income based provision that's being migrated to UC. The rest of us are in limbo.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 3 hours ago
      @MariW I think the contribution based ESA will be time limit to 12 months and after that period you would migrate to universal credit, if you meet the criteria 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 5 hours ago
    it should be called will never work just for the next 2 years rather than will never work again what’s the point in that?and in 2029 labour will be out anyway and probably a reform government and they will have their own ideas 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 5 hours ago
    Corbyn and others have put forward an amendment, but it includes the words "this bill is expected to be certified as a money bill."
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 3 hours ago
      @MariW I don't.  It was on Facebook as an image.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 4 hours ago
      @Slb
      SLB, And in that Bloomberg article you posted, rebels also have been plotting:

      ‘One Labour MP told Bloomberg that concerned lawmakers plan to put forward a procedural challenge to the bill. While they don’t expect the speaker to select that amendment for debate, the aim is to force further changes from the government, and organize would-be Labour rebels into a coherent group which could eventually vote down the bill‘

      https://archive.ph/gaPRc
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 5 hours ago
      @Slb Do you have a link? 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.